Drama at the Weather Channel

[moribundman]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Many work environments are hostile and/or "not comfortable". So?

I do not expect others to compensate for my inability to cope with the surrounding environment that I ASKED TO ENTER INTO.


According to you, people must accept and endure abuse which they may encounter in their respective field? Abuse in the workplace as occupational hazard. You take the cake.

 

[mikeg5]

i dont know something about "swizzle stick" just does not seem manly.. "hey baby, wanna go back with me to the hizzle and ride the swizzle??" nahhh couldnt see him saying that. unless he is just a dork.

 

[javacontour]

I didn't read that at all.

If one is abused and does nothing about it, the next time, they are a volunteer.

They can gather proof, get their ducks in order and make a cogent case, they can ignore it, or they can leave.

Really, the first one is what they should do. If there is a social requirement for a workplace to be abuse free, then there is an equal requirement for victims of such abuse to gather the proof and report the abuse.

The social contract works both ways. It's not just about victims rights, but also victims responsibilities. The case has to be presented with credible evidence.

Failing to do so, in my opinion, is just as bad as the acts of those perpetrating the abuse.

 

[Oilgal]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

The assumption here is that just because you're female, the environment must be "female friendly" regardless of what alterations are needed. What you frequently miss is that the environment is just "unfriendly" and everyone has to live with it.


No it isn't. The assumption is that coworkers will behave professionally and treat each with respect.

You wouldn't put up with an aggressive gay supervisor, hitting on you day in and day out at work, refusing to take no for an answer, who then begins sabotaging your career, because you wont give him what he wants.

And if your complaints to your, unbeknown to you, gay boss, were callously rebuffed with, "do not expect others to compensate for your inability to cope with the surrounding environment", now deal or quit beyahtch?

What then Gary? Say also your aggressive gay supervisor, is also a sadistic, seven foot five bully, with a 4th Dan in Shotokahn? So, big as you are Gary, you can't "take it to him". So what do you do now?

This isn't about sex or gender nor "favoritism". It's about professionalism, basic human decency, fair treatment and justice.

All the gender baiting khrap clipped.

 

[Oilgal]

Originally Posted By: moribundman
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Many work environments are hostile and/or "not comfortable". So?

I do not expect others to compensate for my inability to cope with the surrounding environment that I ASKED TO ENTER INTO.


According to you, people must accept and endure abuse which they may encounter in their respective field? Abuse in the workplace as occupational hazard. You take the cake.


I think he is just playing devil's advocate. At least I hope he is.

 

[javacontour]

If it's ignored the first time, you gather your proof, put it in writing and cc: his supervisor, HR, the owner, whomever you have to inform.

It may not be comfortable, but doing the right thing is not about being safe and comfortable.

Originally Posted By: Oilgal
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

The assumption here is that just because you're female, the environment must be "female friendly" regardless of what alterations are needed. What you frequently miss is that the environment is just "unfriendly" and everyone has to live with it.


No it isn't. The assumption is that coworkers will behave professionally and treat each with respect.

You wouldn't put up with an aggressive gay supervisor, hitting on you day in and day out at work, refusing to take no for an answer, who then begins sabotaging your career, because you wont give him what he wants.

And if your complaints to your, unbeknown to you, gay boss, were callously rebuffed with, "do not expect others to compensate for your inability to cope with the surrounding environment", now deal or quit beyahtch?

What then Gary? Say also your aggressive gay supervisor, is also a sadistic, seven foot five bully, with a 4th Dan in Shotokahn? So, big as you are Gary, you can't "take it to him". So what do you do now?

This isn't about sex or gender nor "favoritism". It's about professionalism, basic human decency, fair treatment and justice.

All the gender baiting khrap clipped.

 

[Oilgal]

Originally Posted By: mikeg5
i dont know something about "swizzle stick" just does not seem manly.. "hey baby, wanna go back with me to the hizzle and ride the swizzle??" nahhh couldnt see him saying that. unless he is just a dork.


Well, obviously, dorkhood is something this boner has even yet to attain to.

The shytehead sexually harasses any halfway attractive female he works with. Guys like that usually live with their mothers.

 

[Oilgal]

Originally Posted By: javacontour
If it's ignored the first time, you gather your proof, put it in writing and cc: his supervisor, HR, the owner, whomever you have to inform.

It may not be comfortable, but doing the right thing is not about being safe and comfortable.



That doesn't always work dear, and it clearly didn't work in this case, because she tried that. Upper management ignored the situation, and her lawyer proved, that she was not the first women to go through this, ... with them.

I would not be at all surprised, if upper management laughed about, "old swizzle stick" going after "another one". Such acts don't occur in a vacuum. They probably cajoled him and patted him on the back, until they fired him, because 'their actions' cost them so much dough.

 

[Gary Allan]

Quote:
The assumption is that coworkers will behave professionally and treat each with respect.


Why would you assume this? Suppose the job wages millions in the balance of the performance of the principles and it's high stress and high anxiety and those within it are asked ..and IN FACT ASKED to be allowed to operate in it?? Why would you assume that you set standards in at will employment?? Now I'm sure that you'll fall back on contemporary litigious outcomes and the compensatory reactions in labor laws ..but there are lots of jobs that I cannot do, but are qualified for, simply because they ask me to be something against my nature. So?

What most miss here is that many endure miserable conditions to chase a buck. The bigger the bucks, the more they're willing to sacrifice in terms of ideal.

Quote:
You wouldn't put up with an aggressive gay supervisor, hitting on you day in and day out at work, refusing to take no for an answer, who then begins sabotaging your career, because you wont give him what he wants.


Probably not. But I have surely dealt with a Queen Bee who hassled every male that she could in terms of human resource issues. I knew how to handle her. I merely immediately handed her my testicles and it totally disarmed her. Once she felt in control, she bent over backwards to treat me properly.

Sexual harassment is NOT confined to sexual overtures. It can be a guy jingling change in his pocket out of a nervous habit. It can be vulgar language ..essentially anything that is gender offensive is sexual harassment. What it's evolved to is catering to the those with issues ..that expect that their issues take precedence over those without them.

"It offends me."

Tough sheet! Dealing with your whining offends me. Get to work!

 

[javacontour]

Originally Posted By: Oilgal
Originally Posted By: javacontour
If it's ignored the first time, you gather your proof, put it in writing and cc: his supervisor, HR, the owner, whomever you have to inform.

It may not be comfortable, but doing the right thing is not about being safe and comfortable.



That doesn't always work dear, and it clearly didn't work in this case, because she tried that. Upper management ignored the situation, and her lawyer proved, that she was not the first women to go through this, ... with them.

I would not be at all surprised, if upper management laughed about, "old swizzle stick" going after "another one". Such acts don't occur in a vacuum. They probably cajoled him and patted him on the back, until they fired him, because 'their actions' cost them so much dough.


It didn't work, or it didn't work fast enough to suit you.

The perp got fired, that seems to effectively stop that in the workplace.

Working doesn't mean it will stop just because someone asks nicely. That's why there is a system, and she escalated it in the system.

While it took a long time, it appears it finally worked.

My mom's rapist wasn't convicted overnight. But he was finally convicted.

 

[Gary Allan]

Originally Posted By: moribundman
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Many work environments are hostile and/or "not comfortable". So?

I do not expect others to compensate for my inability to cope with the surrounding environment that I ASKED TO ENTER INTO.


According to you, people must accept and endure abuse which they may encounter in their respective field? Abuse in the workplace as occupational hazard. You take the cake.


No, I didn't say that they must accept anything. Suppose it's too hot ..or too cold ..or too wet? Is the employer supposed to make me feel all warm and fuzzy just because the work environment is hostile to my definition of "uncomfortable"? The distinctions aren't restricted to temp or humidity ..cleanliness ..etc..etc. Suppose my boss is one miserable person ..and very politely tells me how much of a POS I am on a daily basis. Suppose the environment is highly pressurized and everyone, routinely, vents displaced anxiety? Am I to punish someone who is within the norm and performs otherwise in an excellent manner ..because some weakling, in their own evidencing of displaced anxiety, decides to take offense?

 

[Benzadmiral]

Originally Posted By: Oilgal
Originally Posted By: Benzadmiral

It's much more likely that she saw a chance for a big payoff. She's getting up there, her career isn't going anyplace, and she saw that the courts hand out favorable judgment$ nowadays for the silliest things.

If women want to be considered equal to men, they have to stop running to Daddy (the courts) every time something doesn't go their way. An adult would have told Stokes to shut his trap, presuming he did any of the things she's alleging, and would have cleaned his clock for him if he kept it up. As it is, she sounds like a little child ("Mommy! Bob keeps looking at me!"), and Daddy (in the person of the judge) gives her a lollipop to shut her up, thus rewarding the bad behavior.

Unfortunately the Weather Channel has to pay for the lollipop.

Benzadmiral,

What if you, as a man, were routinely sexually harassed by the same guy, or any other man, and your complaints to the boss were not believed, because the offender is believed to be straight?

As well, you could not "kick his butt" to make him stop, because you, a relative nobody, would be fired for "attacking" a popular anchorman, and your career would end then and there.

You can't "ask or tell him to stop", or "tell him to shut his trap", because it is your word, a nobody, against a popular senior anchorman's word. Or worse yet. You are a woman, with a boss, ..... who thinks like you do. So yer phuckked. Or you get a lawyer.

You too would get a lawyer, if that was your only recourse, and you know it.

Now shut yer trap.

Oh, come on. Nowadays a woman's word is almost always taken over that of a man in business and academia, and in criminal matters. All she'd have to do is mention that she's getting a lawyer, and they'd cave in. They'd take the nobody's word, all right.

My annoyance with this sort of thing is twofold:

1) That the man is automatically assumed to be guilty the moment the accusation pops out -- no proof required; and

2) though we're not told in this news story that the woman is asking for a big payoff (damages, etc.), you know almost certainly that she will. In which case she's not merely asking to be treated like any other worker, i.e., to be able to pursue her career without harassment. No. She's asking for special treatment!

 

[Benzadmiral]

All right, let's presume he actually did what she's alleging. She could have handled it.

One of my co-workers at the courier company I worked at during the '70s and '80s had a very similar problem. We had a supervisor who continually rode anybody he could, and the word (probably lies, but who knew) was that he was gay. One of our couriers was his personal target for kidding, some of it not pleasant. (No, it wasn't me.) Said courier was always getting kidded, and at least once I saw Supervisor grab Courier's rear and laugh uproariously at his discomfiture.

Suddenly, one day, Supervisor was gone, and Courier went on with his assigned routes. Rumor had it that Courier had gathered a couple of buddies, had caught up with Supervisor one evening, and had thrown a good scare into him. . . .

I can't testify as to the truth of any of this. It might all have been made up by Courier. But if it's true, it's always struck me as a very American way of handling things. The TWC anchorwoman could have collected one or two large male friends, surrounded her harasser someplace free of video cameras, and let him know she wasn't going to take his c*r*a*p* any more. Problem solved. There wouldn't have to be actual kneecapping, just the implied threat.

 

[Oilgal]

I am not going to stay here and merely argue, with those who feel, oh so strongly, that they have to get personal to "win".

There is not point to it at all.

I am not "a feminist", and in fact I despise feminism. I am against quotas and preferential hiring. I am for equal treatment under the law, pay equity, justice and fairness, regardless.

Left and right wing fascists alike, all have one thing in common, and I am not on that team.

 

[Oilgal]

Just in case, some idiot presumes, that I am saying I am leaving BITOG.

No. I mean this stupid thread. The level of debate has sharply degraded, replete with negative personal inferences and asinine assumptions, even regarding what "I probably think" etc., and so I am bailing on this thread is all.

 

[Benzadmiral]

Oilgal wrote,

"What if you, as a man, were routinely sexually harassed by the same guy, or any other man, and your complaints to the boss were not believed, because the offender is believed to be straight?

"As well, you could not 'kick his butt' to make him stop, because you, a relative nobody, would be fired for 'attacking' a popular anchorman, and your career would end then and there.

"You can't 'ask or tell him to stop', or 'tell him to shut his trap', because it is your word, a nobody, against a popular senior anchorman's word. Or worse yet. You are a woman, with a boss, ..... who thinks like you do. So yer phuckked. Or you get a lawyer.

You too would get a lawyer, if that was your only recourse, and you know it."

A man in this situation is handicapped by society's double standard, that if he complains he's considered to be whining and is expected to "suck it up" -- whereas a woman is encouraged, and complaining is labeled "standing up for herself." So our society makes it difficult for a man to complain about harassment.

Understand, nobody is advocating or excusing real harassment. But to hand the complainer a big payoff, especially without proof, is asking for trouble.

Oh, wait, our society is already at that stage, isn't it?

 

[Julian]

The behavior of all matter in existence is selfish; discrete identity is defined solely by matter defining its own via behavior in the context of the environment in which it functions. It's kind of like black holes... or something. Just my opinion of course. Thank you, that is all.

 

[Gary Allan]

So, Julian ..if I take up employment near the Maine border ..with Canadian lumberjacks, would I offend them if I don't hang out in the bars that only close between 4a.m. and 6a.m. to force them to leave before going back to work?? The offending party here is clearly the bar.

 

[Julian]

You'll-they'll have to consult "the song" ...

 

[moribundman]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Originally Posted By: moribundman
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Many work environments are hostile and/or "not comfortable". So?

I do not expect others to compensate for my inability to cope with the surrounding environment that I ASKED TO ENTER INTO.


According to you, people must accept and endure abuse which they may encounter in their respective field? Abuse in the workplace as occupational hazard. You take the cake.


No, I didn't say that they must accept anything. Suppose it's too hot ..or too cold ..or too wet? Is the employer supposed to make me feel all warm and fuzzy just because the work environment is hostile to my definition of "uncomfortable"? The distinctions aren't restricted to temp or humidity ..cleanliness ..etc..etc. Suppose my boss is one miserable person ..and very politely tells me how much of a POS I am on a daily basis. Suppose the environment is highly pressurized and everyone, routinely, vents displaced anxiety? Am I to punish someone who is within the norm and performs otherwise in an excellent manner ..because some weakling, in their own evidencing of displaced anxiety, decides to take offense?


As always you like to stray from the issue -- this time you suddenly refer to temperature, humidity and cleanliness at work. This was about one person harassing a coworker. And yes, I don't care if that person is otherwise possibly a swell dude and just likes to harass what you consider weaklings. Now you are making me ill.