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.

Insert "Cheney Shoots People" Joke Here

Instead of talking about how Dick Cheney accidently shot someone while hunting, couldn't we find a more important topic? I'm thinking, I dunno, maybe we could talk about people that are purposely shooting other people. Last I checked there was still quite a bit of that stuff going on. Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't that more important than an hunting accident on some ranch?

United in Division

Okay, I'm gonna try something different here. Well, it's not really different, as I've seen plenty of other places that do it. However, this is the first time I've done it so it's different for me. Here's an excerpt from the Washington Post.

The party-line vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee to confirm Judge Samuel Alito for the Supreme Court, presaging a similar outcome in the full Senate, certifies the depth of the division between Republicans and Democrats on basic national policy.

That reality shadows the start of this session of Congress and raises doubt about the government's ability to address any of the major challenges facing the country.

David S. Broder

Broder lays it out pretty well. Democrats and Republicans have spent the past year bitterly disagreeing on one matter after another. Yet they almost universally state agreement with those in their own party. A good amount of agreement is to be expected, of course. I mean, politicians aren't randomly assigned to political parties. They choose their affiliation and people vote for them. I think they probably choose their positions too, perhaps too often.

However, there's a reason members of the House and Senate are referred to as representatives. They're supposed to represent their constituents. CNN is saying that only 30 percent of Americans oppose the Senate confirming Samuel Alito. However, the Senate vote is shaping up to fall right down party lines. Sounds like poor representation to me. On the other hand, if one took a sampling of the country and asked their opinions on The Patriot Act or the Iraq War, you're likely to find a big divide. So on some issues it seems the representatives are doing a good job of representing their constituents.

Still, if no one agrees, then what purpose are our representatives serving? Our representatives are supposed to stand up for our interests, but what happens when we all disagree? What should our representatives do now? Maybe they should be working to bring those with differing opinions to a common accord. I mean, if they're just going to be bitterly divided, we could pretty well just scrap the whole thing and do it ourselves.