Positive Thoughts and Prayer Requests
- Antigone - May 18, 2024 - 3:56pm
Music library
- nightdrive - May 18, 2024 - 1:28pm
Trump
- Red_Dragon - May 18, 2024 - 1:21pm
Radio Paradise Comments
- GeneP59 - May 18, 2024 - 12:04pm
NYTimes Connections
- Bill_J - May 18, 2024 - 11:50am
Israel
- R_P - May 18, 2024 - 11:35am
NY Times Strands
- geoff_morphini - May 18, 2024 - 10:46am
Wordle - daily game
- geoff_morphini - May 18, 2024 - 10:40am
What Makes You Laugh?
- Beaker - May 18, 2024 - 10:32am
Mixtape Culture Club
- miamizsun - May 18, 2024 - 9:01am
Baseball, anyone?
- rgio - May 18, 2024 - 8:28am
Today in History
- Red_Dragon - May 18, 2024 - 7:08am
The Obituary Page
- DaveInSaoMiguel - May 18, 2024 - 4:18am
Paul McCartney
- miamizsun - May 18, 2024 - 4:06am
Virginia News
- Steely_D - May 18, 2024 - 2:51am
Gnomad here. Who farking deleted my thread?
- Red_Dragon - May 17, 2024 - 5:59pm
The Dragons' Roost
- triskele - May 17, 2024 - 4:04pm
Name My Band
- jim.stimeck - May 17, 2024 - 3:18pm
Upcoming concerts or shows you can't wait to see
- ScottFromWyoming - May 17, 2024 - 1:43pm
USA! USA! USA!
- Beaker - May 17, 2024 - 1:28pm
DIY
- black321 - May 17, 2024 - 9:16am
May 2024 Photo Theme - Peaceful
- Isabeau - May 17, 2024 - 9:02am
Other Medical Stuff
- Isabeau - May 17, 2024 - 9:00am
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos
- Isabeau - May 17, 2024 - 8:44am
TV shows you watch
- Steely_D - May 17, 2024 - 3:14am
Dialing 1-800-Manbird
- ScottN - May 16, 2024 - 7:00pm
Bug Reports & Feature Requests
- RPnate1 - May 16, 2024 - 3:33pm
Your Local News
- Proclivities - May 16, 2024 - 12:51pm
Alexa Show
- thisbody - May 16, 2024 - 12:15pm
What can you hear right now?
- thisbody - May 16, 2024 - 11:00am
Things You Thought Today
- thisbody - May 16, 2024 - 10:25am
Joe Biden
- Steely_D - May 16, 2024 - 1:02am
Climate Change
- R_P - May 15, 2024 - 9:38pm
Strange signs, marquees, billboards, etc.
- KurtfromLaQuinta - May 15, 2024 - 4:13pm
how do you feel right now?
- KurtfromLaQuinta - May 15, 2024 - 4:10pm
China
- R_P - May 15, 2024 - 1:40pm
What the hell OV?
- oldviolin - May 15, 2024 - 12:38pm
Song of the Day
- oldviolin - May 15, 2024 - 11:50am
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •
- oldviolin - May 15, 2024 - 11:48am
Science is bullsh*t
- oldviolin - May 15, 2024 - 11:44am
NASA & other news from space
- Beaker - May 15, 2024 - 9:29am
Artificial Intelligence
- thisbody - May 15, 2024 - 8:25am
Human Rights (Can Science Point The Way)
- miamizsun - May 15, 2024 - 5:50am
Play the Blues
- Steely_D - May 15, 2024 - 1:50am
Animal Resistance
- R_P - May 14, 2024 - 6:37pm
2024 Elections!
- R_P - May 14, 2024 - 6:00pm
Fascism In America
- Red_Dragon - May 14, 2024 - 4:27pm
punk? hip-hop? metal? noise? garage?
- thisbody - May 14, 2024 - 1:27pm
Social Media Are Changing Everything
- Red_Dragon - May 14, 2024 - 8:08am
Internet connection
- ai63 - May 14, 2024 - 7:53am
Congress
- Red_Dragon - May 13, 2024 - 8:22pm
Ukraine
- R_P - May 13, 2024 - 5:50pm
What The Hell Buddy?
- oldviolin - May 13, 2024 - 1:25pm
Surfing!
- KurtfromLaQuinta - May 13, 2024 - 1:21pm
Bad Poetry
- oldviolin - May 13, 2024 - 11:38am
What Did You See Today?
- kurtster - May 13, 2024 - 10:35am
See This Film
- Red_Dragon - May 13, 2024 - 8:35am
Podcast recommendations???
- ColdMiser - May 13, 2024 - 7:50am
News of the Weird
- Red_Dragon - May 13, 2024 - 5:05am
Those Lovable Policemen
- R_P - May 12, 2024 - 11:31am
Vinyl Only Spin List
- kurtster - May 12, 2024 - 9:16am
The All-Things Beatles Forum
- Steely_D - May 12, 2024 - 9:04am
Poetry Forum
- ScottN - May 12, 2024 - 6:32am
Beer
- ScottFromWyoming - May 10, 2024 - 8:58pm
It's the economy stupid.
- thisbody - May 10, 2024 - 3:21pm
Oh dear god, BEES!
- R_P - May 10, 2024 - 3:11pm
Tornado!
- miamizsun - May 10, 2024 - 2:49pm
The 1960s
- kcar - May 10, 2024 - 2:49pm
Marko Haavisto & Poutahaukat
- thisbody - May 10, 2024 - 7:57am
Living in America
- Proclivities - May 10, 2024 - 6:45am
Outstanding Covers
- Steely_D - May 10, 2024 - 12:56am
Democratic Party
- R_P - May 9, 2024 - 3:06pm
RP on HomePod mini
- RPnate1 - May 9, 2024 - 10:52am
Interesting Words
- Proclivities - May 9, 2024 - 10:22am
Breaking News
- maryte - May 9, 2024 - 7:17am
|
Index »
Regional/Local »
USA/Canada »
"Him Too"
|
Page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next |
meower
Location: i believe, i believe, it's silly, but I believe Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 13, 2017 - 8:58am |
|
sirdroseph wrote: maryte wrote: Not everybody. But most everyone wants to be obeyed.
I don't know about most everyone, there is what I would like to think a healthy contingent of us that just "vant to be left alone" I want everyone to just get along and think about other people instead of themselves all the damn time not all that interested in either being obeyed, in control or alone.
|
|
sirdroseph
Location: Not here, I tell you wat Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 13, 2017 - 7:36am |
|
 maryte wrote: Not everybody. But most everyone wants to be obeyed.
Â
I don't know about most everyone, there is what I would like to think a healthy contingent of us that just "vant to be left alone"
|
|
maryte
Location: Blinding You With Library Science! Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 13, 2017 - 7:27am |
|
miamizsun wrote: everybody wants to be in charge
Not everybody. But most everyone wants to be obeyed.
|
|
oldviolin
Location: esse quam videri Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 13, 2017 - 7:21am |
|
miamizsun wrote: everybody wants to be in charge
There's a room where the light won't find youHolding hands whileThe walls come tumbling downWhen they do, I'll be right behind you...
|
|
miamizsun
Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP) Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 13, 2017 - 7:17am |
|
maryte wrote: It's all about power.
everybody wants to be in charge
|
|
miamizsun
Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP) Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 13, 2017 - 6:19am |
|
ScottFromWyoming wrote:Of course. I doubt many women in rock were unaffected. There have already been so many tell-all books tho, and quite a few from avowed groupies, it's really part of the fabric in that industry. This story on Kim Fowley from a few years ago is pretty bad; I don't expect it's an outlier. sports as well
|
|
maryte
Location: Blinding You With Library Science! Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 13, 2017 - 6:08am |
|
meower wrote: oh, and nothing in the article that I posted was about "romance" to be clear.
It's all about power.
|
|
maryte
Location: Blinding You With Library Science! Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 13, 2017 - 6:07am |
|
meower wrote: Appreciate your comments, but I'm not clear how they have to do with the article. I have the sense that in the 50's and 60's women who were allowed to work were sexually harassed as well
Exactly.
|
|
meower
Location: i believe, i believe, it's silly, but I believe Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 13, 2017 - 6:03am |
|
kurtster wrote: I've been wanting to make a point about the workplace for awhile but haven't had any way to bring it up until now. Back in the day growing up (sorry about this phrase but ...) I was taught by my father and it seems by society at the time (50's and 60's) that ... work was for work and office romances had absolutely no place in the workplace and should be avoided, period end of story. Work and play should not mix. You went to work to earn a paycheck, not to find a spouse or a playmate. Those were to be found elsewhere. Workplace romances almost always ended in disaster with one or both parties leaving because they could no longer work together when the relationship went south as they usually did. And the company also lost when good employees left or could no longer work with each other.
oh, and nothing in the article that I posted was about "romance" to be clear.
|
|
sirdroseph
Location: Not here, I tell you wat Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 13, 2017 - 4:38am |
|
 meower wrote: Appreciate your comments, but I'm not clear how they have to do with the article. I have the sense that in the 50's and 60's women who were allowed to work were sexually harassed as wellÂ
Â
Mad Men should be mandatory viewing for men who do not seem to get it, they portray it very well and probably more sanitized than it actually was in those days (late 50s to early 70s). A clear window of how we got here and what has always been. Not to mention it is one of the greatest shows.......evah!!
|
|
meower
Location: i believe, i believe, it's silly, but I believe Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 13, 2017 - 3:26am |
|
kurtster wrote:I've been wanting to make a point about the workplace for awhile but haven't had any way to bring it up until now. Back in the day growing up (sorry about this phrase but ...) I was taught by my father and it seems by society at the time (50's and 60's) that ... work was for work and office romances had absolutely no place in the workplace and should be avoided, period end of story. Work and play should not mix. You went to work to earn a paycheck, not to find a spouse or a playmate. Those were to be found elsewhere. Workplace romances almost always ended in disaster with one or both parties leaving because they could no longer work together when the relationship went south as they usually did. And the company also lost when good employees left or could no longer work with each other. That has since changed towards the end of the 70's or early 80's where for some reason workplace romances became somewhat accepted or at least tolerated. And with it the sexual dynamics changed. Behaviour once clearly out of bounds was now sorta in bounds or ignored to some degree. It also provided better cover for those who used power over their subordinates to impose themselves sexually and get away with it easier than before. I dunno. I still believe that work is for work and a paycheck, not for socializing. But I am clearly out of step with current thinking. The acceptance and even encouragement of social interaction both at work and away from work with coworkers has certainly contributed to a lot of what we are talking about today. Office hanky panky always existed, but until recently, was not tolerated. The relaxation of these protocols while not solely responsible for the harassment issues we are talking about, it has nonetheless allowed some to push the limits of acceptable behaviour much farther than they might have in the past. Compliments are now considered flirting instead of just being a compliment. It had to fall apart eventually and it did. Perhaps the old ways needed to be ditched in order to be appreciated. People put down Pence for refusing to do things like have dinner with another woman without the presence of his wife to make sure that everything is above board and not subject to misinterpretations and misrepresentations for personal gain. In light of things today, I'd call that smart, proper and reasonable. Or I could be totally wrong. I really have no idea anymore about these things other than everything is a mess and things are out of control. 2¢ Appreciate your comments, but I'm not clear how they have to do with the article. I have the sense that in the 50's and 60's women who were allowed to work were sexually harassed as well
|
|
kurtster
Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 12, 2017 - 3:11pm |
|
meower wrote:https://www.thecut.com/2017/12/rebecca-traister-this-moment-isnt-just-about-sex.html This Moment Isn’t (Just) About Sex. It’s Really About Work. It would be easy — a hard kind of easy — to understand the painful news happening all around us to be about sexual assault. After all, for weeks now, each day has brought fresh, lurid tales. And if our typically prurient American interests have led us to focus on the carnal nitty-gritty, the degree of sexual harm sustained, the vital questions of consent, that’s fair enough; there has been, we are really absorbing for the first time, a hell of a lot of sexual damage done. But in the midst of our great national calculus, in which we are determining what punishments fit which sexual crimes, it’s possible that we’re missing the bigger picture altogether: that this is not, at its heart, about sex at all — or at least not wholly. What it’s really about is work, and women’s equality in the workplace, and more broadly, about the rot at the core of our power structures that makes it harder for women to do work because the whole thing is tipped toward men. I've been wanting to make a point about the workplace for awhile but haven't had any way to bring it up until now. Back in the day growing up (sorry about this phrase but ...) I was taught by my father and it seems by society at the time (50's and 60's) that ... work was for work and office romances had absolutely no place in the workplace and should be avoided, period end of story. Work and play should not mix. You went to work to earn a paycheck, not to find a spouse or a playmate. Those were to be found elsewhere. Workplace romances almost always ended in disaster with one or both parties leaving because they could no longer work together when the relationship went south as they usually did. And the company also lost when good employees left or could no longer work with each other. That has since changed towards the end of the 70's or early 80's where for some reason workplace romances became somewhat accepted or at least tolerated. And with it the sexual dynamics changed. Behaviour once clearly out of bounds was now sorta in bounds or ignored to some degree. It also provided better cover for those who used power over their subordinates to impose themselves sexually and get away with it easier than before. I dunno. I still believe that work is for work and a paycheck, not for socializing. But I am clearly out of step with current thinking. The acceptance and even encouragement of social interaction both at work and away from work with coworkers has certainly contributed to a lot of what we are talking about today. Office hanky panky always existed, but until recently, was not tolerated. The relaxation of these protocols while not solely responsible for the harassment issues we are talking about, it has nonetheless allowed some to push the limits of acceptable behaviour much farther than they might have in the past. Compliments are now considered flirting instead of just being a compliment. It had to fall apart eventually and it did. Perhaps the old ways needed to be ditched in order to be appreciated. People put down Pence for refusing to do things like have dinner with another woman without the presence of his wife to make sure that everything is above board and not subject to misinterpretations and misrepresentations for personal gain. In light of things today, I'd call that smart, proper and reasonable. Or I could be totally wrong. I really have no idea anymore about these things other than everything is a mess and things are out of control. 2¢
|
|
haresfur
Location: The Golden Triangle Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 12, 2017 - 2:08pm |
|
ScottFromWyoming wrote:Of course. I doubt many women in rock were unaffected. There have already been so many tell-all books tho, and quite a few from avowed groupies, it's really part of the fabric in that industry. This story on Kim Fowley from a few years ago is pretty bad; I don't expect it's an outlier. It was "open", not an "open secret" eta: in a general sense. Specific crimes are different.
|
|
ScottFromWyoming
Location: Powell Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 12, 2017 - 1:48pm |
|
miamizsun wrote:the music industry hasn't been touched...yet
i hear it is coming
Of course. I doubt many women in rock were unaffected. There have already been so many tell-all books tho, and quite a few from avowed groupies, it's really part of the fabric in that industry. This story on Kim Fowley from a few years ago is pretty bad; I don't expect it's an outlier.
|
|
miamizsun
Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP) Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 12, 2017 - 1:12pm |
|
the music industry hasn't been touched...yet
i hear it is coming
|
|
cc_rider
Location: Bastrop Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 12, 2017 - 12:40pm |
|
KurtfromLaQuinta wrote: It writes itself...
|
|
KurtfromLaQuinta
Location: Really deep in the heart of South California Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 12, 2017 - 12:31pm |
|
ScottFromWyoming wrote: You are in big trouble, mister.
|
|
miamizsun
Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP) Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 12, 2017 - 9:17am |
|
lowelltr wrote: Sheryl Sandberg is worried about a backlash affecting the hiring of women. She fears that some men will just not hire women, or covertly discriminate against them during the hiring process....just as litigation prevention. Sad...however, every action has a reaction...even good actions oftentimes have bad reactions...law of unintended consequence, etc...
she's got a legit concern in some cases it could very difficult to go back in time to a he said she said a going forward solution might be a written protocol or process that requires some evidence to prove a violation maybe an arbitration clause in the employment contract that excludes (doesn't shield) physical violence from legal charges right now i'm sure the perceived or real emotional reaction/over-reaction to claims has many employers assessing risk to be sure consultants will take this into consideration
|
|
sirdroseph
Location: Not here, I tell you wat Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 12, 2017 - 5:04am |
|
I see this as a necessary purge. Evidently this aggressive, criminal behavior upon one's person has been deeply ingrained and perpetually barely lying underneath, scratching the surface of unconscious knowledge in mainstream patriarchal society for time in memoriam. Him too is not a fad or scam for monetary value, it is a dam burst that will eventually drain all perpetrators. There will be collateral damage because some people just suck and will take advantage of an environment or circumstance, but it would not have come to this were it not such an ongoing pervasive and all encompassing problem for so long. In the long run we will all be a little better for it as a society and I for one welcome the advancement.
Now as far as jokes go, that sh*t should be off limits. No censorship! Unless you're not funny, then it is off to the "Pit of Misery" for you! dilly dilly
|
|
Steely_D
Location: Biscayne Bay Gender:
|
Posted:
Dec 11, 2017 - 8:27pm |
|
lowelltr wrote: Sheryl Sandberg is worried about a backlash affecting the hiring of women. She fears that some men will just not hire women, or covertly discriminate against them during the hiring process....just as litigation prevention. Sad...however, every action has a reaction...even good actions oftentimes have bad reactions...law of unintended consequence, etc...
Absolutely rational. There are already concerns about hiring women (Can they do the job as well? What if they get pregnant? Raise a family? etc) and this becomes another one.
|
|
|