Alledged Sexual Harrassment complaint on jets, followed by Clinton Portis comments

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by BluPhire

Same thing like that other woman that was on Wall Street.

1) The players should have known better in this day and age.

2) Her station promotes her to dress like this. It is part of their "culture"

3) Hopefully this truly opens the door though that there is still a certain "uniform" professionals should wear if they want to be taken seriously.

There are plenty of good to great looking female reporters that never had this issue. Heck even Erin Andrews never had issues with players in coaches, her's was a stalker that went to her room.

This is the same woman that asked Brady to marry her during the Super Bowl interviews dressed in a wedding dress. So its hard to take her serious...which is sad.

Wrong woman BUT from the same TV station!!! HA!

[BluPhire]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

Wrong woman BUT from the same TV station!!! HA!

Thanks for the correction. I just found out and was gonna edit.

Either way.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by BluPhire

3) Hopefully this truly opens the door though that there is still a certain "uniform" professionals should wear if they want to be taken seriously.

I agree with the quoted. If she tries to pass her style of dress off as "corporate culture," she's going to have to deal with the consequences. She (and others) needs to use some common sense.

My job allows us to come into work in casual attire (as I'm typically not client-facing). Even thought I CAN come into work with a tall tee and a du-rag, I won't do it if I want to be taken seriously.

[BluPhire]

It's Entrapment!!!!!!

[BluPhire]

The problem is, she isn't the shining example that should be rallied behind.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by BluPhire

The problem is, she isn't the shining example that should be rallied behind.

No one is rallying behind her. We are rallying behind the structural dynamic. It does not matter whether it is she or someone else and it doesn't matter whether or not the target of the perceived harassment feels harassed.

To see the larger point using an extreme example:
Similar can be said for Emmitt Till. What the hell was that Black boy from Chicago doing whistling (he probably did it) at a white woman? Even a 14 yo from Chicago knows better than that. Dumbass. Does that mean that he deserved what he received, he shouldn't have been rallied behind, and we have to lose the larger point because of him, specifically?

[BluPhire]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

No one is rallying behind her. We are rallying behind the structural dynamic. It does not matter whether it is she or someone else and it doesn't matter whether or not the target of the perceived harassment feels harassed.

To see the larger point using an extreme example:
Similar can be said for Emmitt Till. What the hell was that Black boy from Chicago doing whistling (he probably did it) at a white woman? Even a 14 yo from Chicago knows better than that. Dumbass. Does that mean that he deserved what he received, he shouldn't have been rallied behind, and we have to lose the larger point because of him, specifically?

Exactly which is why most free thinkers are saying she didn't deserve what happened to her.

The reason why your extreme example doesn't work is because unlike the Emmitt Till situation, violence did not occur. A better comparison would have been if Emmitt Till whistled at a white woman, and he was told shut your **** up."

Or if she went into the locker room dressed as she did and was attacked physically, and somebody claiming she deserved it because she dressed that way.

Yes at the end of the day, they are supposed to have enough maturity to not react to her like that. At the same time though she "knew" what type of reaction she would get dressed that way, her television station knew what type of reaction she would get. They wanted it, and when she got it, after it was pointed out by another reporter, then she has an issue.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by BluPhire

The reason why your extreme example doesn't work is because unlike the Emmitt Till situation, violence did not occur.

LOL. Then you did not grasp my extreme example.

Power is power whether it involves killing, whistling, groping, firing someone, not hiring someone, etc and etc and etc.

[BluPhire]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

LOL. Then you did not grasp my extreme example.

I grasped it and understood what you were saying. I just did not agree.

Power is power is true, but the application of power is where the disagreement comes in.

[DaemonSeid]

good points both of you.

[DaemonSeid]

Coming back around again...and dayum that was an extreme yet good example, I still to a degree think that one has to be aware of their surroundings, even by going on the supposition of what you proposed, one still should know and be responsible for any actions that could work against you.

No he didn't deserve to die.

But, what if he really did put himself in a position to be harmed? How could it had been avoided? These are some of the things that I am thinking about when I look at this situation.

She dresses in clothes to attract attention. She didn't deserve what she got.

However, if she already knew that where she was going would have a high probability of getting undue attention paid to her, then perhaps she either could have prepared better for the situation or not did it at all.

We still have a choice in what we decide to do and we should be forward thinking enough to know what the possible consequences of our choices may be.

This still doesn't excuse the bad behavior from both situations.

However, in this particular case I also wonder if there is a question about whether or not some of this behavior was encouraged.

If you throw meat out in a room of hungry wolves, they are going to eat.

[DrPhil]

LOL. As soon as I finished typing the last post, I saw pest control walking down the hall. I asked them to spray my office.

One of the older gentlemen said "the bugs are always clinging to the good looking women." I laughed and the younger gentleman gave an uneasy chuckle. LOL. We continued to talk about "bug stuff" and before they left my office, the older gentleman said "yeah it's the beautiful ones that they're after." I said "the beautiful bugs?" and laughed. He said "nah, the beautiful women! The bugs will keep coming back for you." Again, the younger gentleman laughed but looked like he was thinking "oooook...uncomfortable...don't push your luck...."

It was a little uncomfortable because it was kinda random bug humor, but it was all in good humor as long as the man understood his boundaries. The shock of seeing a younger woman who he found attractive weighed in on his choice of humor, but he kept it at a level of professionalism because although they have white male privilege, I am technically higher on the social class and bureaucratic hierarchy than they are. That has a way of balancing things out in certain contexts; and it speaks to what I was typing about earlier.

[DaemonSeid]

It applies to the case because:

a minority element was in an area where most people of their position normally would not be.

the dominant majority of the area realized this and acted in accordance to the minority in the area.

the minority element in the area passively (Till's skin color, Saintz revealing clothes) provoked a reaction from the majority

the end result was negative and unwanted attention from the dominant majority given to the minority element.

( I know I missed a few steps but my mind is elsewhere)

[starang21]

she is fine, though.

[DrPhil]

Who calls Pam Oliver ugly? That woman is considered hot by some men, particularly Black men.

Did I miss DaemonSeid's point? LOL.