She Was Asking For It

So the other day I was reading a blog written by women. The bloggers were discussing a woman who had experienced quite a bit of on-the-job harassment - from men and women alike - much of which was sexual in nature. I suppose some folks would call that sexual harassment. I assumed that these women would line up with support for the harassed woman, but that wasn't necessarily the case. One of the bloggers was understandably disquieted by the behavior toward this woman. However, another blogger's response was somewhat unsettling. Response has been edited for "clarity."

I think that when you've used your sexuality as a tool as much as she has, you're fair game for that kind of behavior. When I think of that woman, I kept coming back to the interview and her behavior. For days after that, I kept thinking that if she had been meeting with another woman who wasn't using the same tactics of using sex appeal, she would have looked ridiculous. As it was, she was meeting with a man, and even if you don't agree with the tactic (since it sends the message that sexuality is one of the tools that women need to use to get ahead), it's her prerogative to use it, and I'm sure it does work for some people. I just think once you go down that road in front of everybody, you're fair game to how people react. Heck, when your own friend describes you—proudly—as a "direct counterpoint to the stodgy women of old" do you really even want the protection that other women seem willing to afford you from being ogled? Whether women should extend it is another question. I think she pretty well set herself up for the ogling—and the "harassment" that ensued.

Basically, regardless of how vile the harassment may have been, it's her own fault because her behavior was tinged with sex appeal. In other words, she was asking for it. I suppose one could argue with the blogger's description of the situation - contend that there is a fine line between sex appeal and charm - but I'm not sure that is really the point. Even given the premise that sex appeal was the modus operandi for this woman, are ogling and harassment really considered acceptable responses? Are women, in particular, are okay with this kind of harassment? It would seem so.




Here is the orignal posting. See if your reaction changes when reading it in the original context.

To Protect and Serve...and Put Your Grandma In Jail

When I first saw the headline stating, 89-year-old charged with keeping kids' ball, I thought Yahoo accidentally posted an Onion article. As best I can tell, it is not a phony story.

BLUE ASH, Ohio – Police in Ohio say an 89-year-old woman is facing a charge of petty theft because neighborhood children accuse her of refusing to give back their football.

Edna Jester was arrested last week in the Cincinnati suburb of Blue Ash.

Police say one child's father complained that Jester kept the youngsters' ball after it landed in her yard. Police Capt. James Schaffer says there has been an ongoing dispute in the neighborhood over kids' balls landing in the woman's yard.

Jester said Monday she has received many calls and didn't have time to discuss the matter any more.

Jester is to appear in court next month. The maximum penalty for a petty theft conviction in Ohio is six months in jail and a fine of up to $1,000.

~Yahoo

I think we can all relate to being kids whose ball was lost over the fence, but I can't say it happened to me very often. Regardless, I don't recall whining to my parents if the ball wasn't returned. If anything, one kid would just have to be brave enough to try and get it back without being caught. However, this was risky as it increased the likelihood that your parents would find out and get on to you for being irresponsible. Still, kids today are whiners so I guess it's not unforeseeable that they'd go crying to their parents when the old lady kept the ball. Kids being whiny isn't all that terrible, but there are some pretty bothersome things about this story.

First of all, the woman was 89 years old and the cops arrested her. 89! This lady is clearly hardcore. How many 89-year-olds do you know that live at home, as opposed to a nursing home or assisted living center? (I'm pretty sure those things are the same and they just say assisted living so kids won't feel as bad about putting their parents in a nursing home.) When she was a kid there was a little thing going on called the Great Depression so throwing the ball into her neighbor's yard probably isn't something she got to experience very often. I don't think a little time in the pokey is going to bother her much, but you can't tell me there wasn't a better way for the po-po to handle the matter.

And secondofly, what kind of lesson is the parent teaching his kids by calling the cops on the old lady? Instead of telling the kids to, you know, stop throwing the ball into the old lady's yard, the dad calls the police? I think the dad was just ashamed that his kids were such bad athletes that their balls routinely landed in unintended locations. He must have known that telling them to stop throwing the ball into the yard would be a futile endeavor. So in order for the kids to keep feeling like beautiful and unique snowflakes he called the cops on the old lady. Now the kids can act as retarded as they want without having to worry about the consequences. I expect this will serve them well in 30 years when they're members of Congress.

Personally, I hope the old lady pops all the balls she's collected from the kids and then drops them in a heap on their lawns. Or better yet, she should stand on the sidewalk and rifle a couple balls at the windows of the kids' houses. As far as I'm concerned, they've got it coming.

White People are Being Defamed!

Evidently some people are upset about a recent episode of South Park (warning: foul language). Why? It depicts people they relate to in a negative light. In an attempt to poke fun at the most recent Indiana Jones movie for basically being terrible (at least according to the show; I haven't seen the movie), South Park depicts Director Steven Speilberg and Executive Producer/"Story Creator" George Lucas actually raping Harrison Ford. They also show Lucas go after a storm trooper (Episodes I, II, and III were quite bad), but there's no mention of that. A graphic, unnecessary metaphor for making a bad movie? Yeah, I'd say so. An affront to Jewish people? Wait, what?

"It's racist," said Chaim Noiman, 22. He added that show creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone should "go to hell."

"I'm not Jewish, but I think it's offensive. Raping someone is anti-religion. It's anti-anything," said Berkeley student Ekansh Arora, 21.

"This episode is not necessarily anti-Jewish," conceded Myrna Shinbaum of the Anti-Defamation League. "If anything, it's more about Chinese-American stereotypes...[but]'South Park' has been offensive and has had very anti-Jewish pieces in the past," she said. "We understand that the show is trying to satirize, but it may get lost on those who are haters."

New York Daily News

Ekansh Arora seems to be the only one who is focusing on a real issue (rape is being used as a comedic device). The others? Not so much. Apparently vengeance belongs not to the Lord, but to Chaim Noiman. Good to know.

Let's ignore that the statement issued by the Anti-Defamation League referred to "haters" (this is a professional organization?) and just focus on the merits.

Not once in the entire episode is there any mention of any of the characters being Jewish. Steven Spielberg is Jewish, but George Lucas is not. However, both men are White. But the episode aired on Yom Kippur. Shinbaum seems to basically be saying that people who hate Jews won't understand it's satire, but part of the offense comes from the timing of the show. Does she think people who hate Jews will hate them more because a "defamatory" show aires on a Jewish holiday? How many Non-Jews were aware that October 9 was Yom Kippur? I suppose hard-core anti-Semites would be aware of the holiday, but they're already haters, so it seems unlikely that South Park's depiction of a Jewish director would influence them. This offense seems tenuous at best.

The ADL's mission statement is "to stop the defamation of the Jewish people, to secure justice and fair treatment to all citizens alike." Yet, the depiction of Chinese as plotting to take over America receives only a passing mention. Her argument basically comes down to, "It's really offensive to Chinese, but South Park normally hates Jews so let's not forget that." I'm sure South Park co-creator Matt Stone, a Jew himself, will keep that in mind next time he depicts someone in a negative light.

This whole thing reminds me of a news blurb I read this summer.

NBC Olympics President Gary Zenkel has apologized to Australian gold-medal winner Matthew Mitcham for not profiling the openly gay diver during the network's coverage or showing his partner in the stands at the time of his victory. "We regret that we missed the opportunity to tell Matthew Mitcham's story. We apologize for this unintentional omission," Zenkel said.
imdb.com

I have no idea how many hours of programming there were during the Olympics, but I'm pretty sure at least half of those were devoted to Michael Phelps. The other half seemed to be divided between discussion of whether or not Chinese Gymnasts were really pre-schoolers and trying to figure out how fast Usain Bolt would be if he wasn't such a show-boat. And the ratings were pretty big. Sounds like NBC made sound programming decisions. Well, except for failing tape-delaying events. Now, that warrants an apology.

There were over 10,000 Olympians competing in China, but Mr. Zenkel chooses to apologize for not profiling an Australian diver, that no one has ever heard of, who likes dudes. Seriously? Was there a clamoring for this story? If so, I certainly missed it. They regret that they unintentionally omitted telling a story? How many stories did NBC unintentionally omit to tell? Where are the apologies for the 10,000 other athletes whose stories NBC unintentionally omitted to tell? Sounds like Zenkel has a lot of work to do. Basically the dude got upset so NBC tried to cover itself because one person was upset and they feared making more people angry. What a joke.

Let's see if we can stop being offended by every little thing that doesn't happen to line up with our point of view. It's a wonder this country survives its elections (although this year is still up in the air). I realize that refusing to take offense would likely result in folks like Myrna Shinbaum needing to find a new place to work, but I'm okay with that. Surely the ADL can stand to trim some of it's $50 million budget or at least use it more efficiently. In conclusion, if you do happen to see something that upsets you, my advice is, as always, "Butch up, cupcake!"


p.s. I regret that I missed the opportunity to say nice things about White people during this post. It was an unintentional omission.

The following is based on true events. Some of the names have been changed/edited to protect the innocent. The names that have not been changed are those of the guilty.

Dear Dr. Burks,

In light of recent events we feel it necessary to submit a letter of apology and to explain the situation to you and to Harding University. We would like to express our sincerest apologies and regrets over the incidents that have occurred over the past few days. The actions we took regarding the function, including the sponsors and the printing of senior wills, were irresponsible and were not intended to bring any harm to the individuals present, to Harding University, or the student body therein.

As graduating seniors we have made every effort to be Christian examples to our fellow students. The senior wills were written in jest, were not an admission of past events, and were not meant to be an affront to Harding or its values.

As far as the accusations regarding the use of inappropriate behavior during and following our function, we want to say that those accusations are completely unfounded and untrue. We realize our actions were thoughtless and we wish to take any possible action to rectify the situation at hand. As of now, we have collected and turned in to Dean C all of the wills in our possession. We have spoken to Dean C at length about the matter and have expressed our sincerest apologies. If necessary we would be more than willing to make a public and/or written apology to whomever it is deemed necessary.

We want to address the accusations in any way we can to clear up this matter. We would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you at your earliest convenience to discuss these matters.

Sincerely,


Jiz, Braintard , Phildo, Hadoken!