8 women accuse Charlie Rose

[Arkteia]

I read the article in the Washington Post that brought the Charlie Rose allegations, which apparently were known for years and years, to light. https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/eight-women-say-charlie-rose-sexually-harassed-them--with-nudity-groping-and-lewd-calls/2017/11/20/9b168de8-caec-11e7-8321-481fd63f174d_story.html?utm_term=.a6e7a41ffeaa

Make no mistake, I think he's an absolute creep. However, based on some of the behaviors by the women interviewed for the article, I can fathom how he thought his advances were, if not welcome, not minded.

Reah Bravo was an unpaid intern in her late 20s racking up debt in order to be part of Rose's organization. He offers her $2500 plus expenses to go out to his LI home for a 5 day work-week and to organize his stuff. She goes and Rose isn't there much of the time. She gets a call from a male staffer advising her that if Rose does anything sketchy she can call the company car service and ask to be taken home. Well, Rose then does do something sketchy - he insists they have wine by moonlight and puts his arm around her. Here is how the interaction is described in the interview:

she felt a mix of apprehension and confusion. “It reflected his poor judgment. How could a man of his stature and his power be doing something so inappropriate? . . . It seemed reckless.” Caught off guard, she said she did not know how to respond and endured his embrace.
​

Did she call the car service? Did she tell anyone else in the organization that she was uncomfortable? No, the opposite! She spends more time with him and, my interpretation anyway, is that he continues to "groom" her much like a pedophile grooms a child. She claims that Rose needed to hear how much she valued going out to his LI home so she obliged, in writing.

“Have I told you how much I absolutely enjoy it out there?” she wrote him on Sept 1, 2007. “The company, the conversation, the comfort...that said I’m happy to go out there for both the remainder of this weekend AND parts of the next in an effort to finish the books faster.”
​

She also wrote to a female executive producer:

“On a personal note, I know working for Charlie requires one to embrace his uniqueness and develop a professional relationship that can account for it. It’s taken a couple straight forward conversations between the two of us, but I feel I’m in a better place than previously. And that’s not to say that I was previously in a really bad place! It all might sound cryptic, but you seem to play somewhat of a motherly role for staff members and I just wanted you to know that I’m okay : )”
​

Yes, he's a disgusting creep. Yes, people shouldn't have to call out harassers because they shouldn't be harassed in the first place. However, I do believe that Rose is being honest when he says he thought feelings were consensual. This would be the same way a priest in a scene from the movie "Spotlight" thought the children he was abusing enjoyed his company. While we certainly can't expect children to expose their abusers, I hope a lesson learned from all this "outing" of crap that everyone knew about for years is that harassment/abuse must be exposed immediately.

Thank you for the account. This is what i exactly wanted - names and situations. I can not cast a stone unless there is certain proof, but it seems that smart, handsome and mysterious Rose is, sadly, an exhibitionist with a nasty temper. What a weird world. Well, exhibitionism is never consential, the whole goal is to catch the person off guard.

It is interested that the studio, obviously, knew.

 

[Arkteia]

I wonder how it changes relationships between men and women in general.

A "No" is a "No", but what about the situations when there is no "No", but the person would rather not go through it? (But goes anyhow because of other considerations)? If it is a "yes" but the woman feels it is forced?

I think that Anita Hill vs Clarence Thomas case was the first that highlighted the dilemma.

(I totally believe Hill, btw, because she passed a polygraph test that Thomas refused to take).

But here is what I paid attention to.

"Hill said in the October 1991 televised hearings that Thomas had sexually harassed her while he was her supervisor at the Department of Education and the EEOC. When questioned on why she followed Thomas to the second job after he had already allegedly harassed her, she said working in a reputable position within the civil rights field had been her ambition." (From Wikipedia).

What about the situation with Charlie Rose, a bachelor, and a woman seeking employment, not an employee, who spends the night with Rose but does not get the job?

Do we understand their dilemmas? Creeps who are in a position of power and ambitious women for whom these are dream jobs?

What if they refused and left? We'd never hear about them.

And much as women are not aggressive in their sexual pursuits (and too burdened with real-life things, kids and careers, i presume) - as more women gain power, sooner or later there might be a case against a woman, too.

So how should the current situation change the whole relationship between sexes? The whole sexual scene?

My question is, if an unattached person of power is seeking a relationship, should he/she ask first if it is consential?

Should people sign a consent before any sexual encounter?

Could that VP of ours, Pence, be right when he advises for a man never to dine with a woman alone? I always thought it was a strange thing to say, but the climate has definitely changed.

I am asking very seriously. We are leaving this world to our kids, boys, too. We need to teach them the rules of this new world. I wish all men could say, like my father, "don't cheat, then you won't need to look a person in the eyes and lie", and live by this principle, but this is not what would work for most guys.

 

[House Cat]

Coercion is not consent. If the yes feels forced, that is coercion. Rape by coercion does exist.

 

[Arkteia]

Here.

I would like if people read it. What I am asking is that we, as the community, as the Russian proverb says, do not splash out the baby with water. Basically, it sums up my feelings.

https://medium.com/@SIIPCampaigns/a-survivors-defense-of-al-franken-ea994c5bbc9a

Here. She gives a perfect definition of why it is not an assault.

"Al Franken’s tasteless joke didn’t make her fear for her life. It didn’t make her burn the clothes she was wearing that night. It didn’t make her scrub herself clean in the shower until her skin tore off. This joke didn’t keep her up shaking and puking and sobbing on the floor of a shower as she bled down a drainpipe. It didn’t send her to the clinic for STD tests.

Al Franken’s joke didn’t crush her notion of who she was or how she could walk in this world. This joke didn’t give her PTSD or depression or any of the lasting forms of struggle that true rape and assault victims must face minute by minute. It hasn’t informed every relationship she’s had since. And it wasn’t in any way what so ever a form of rape, assault or even harassment."

 

[Maria D]

This is one woman. Does this lead you to believe that the other seven felt the same way?

It is my belief that men who chronically harass women have an issue with empathy, so much so that they see nothing but what is inside of their own heads. In their mind, the women are objects. Their feelings aren’t even a consideration. I would bet my last dollar that there wasn’t a single one of these men that was thinking how these women felt. They were only thinking about their own feelings.

I’m beginning to feel like a broken record when it comes to talking about the timing of reporting these incidents/attacks. If you feel that it is important for the attacks to be reported immediately, then you must make our environment safe to do so. Defending a person who has sexually assaulted 8 women isn’t going to create that environment.

I read an article (I believe it was the original article that broke the story) and wrote my reactions to it, backed up with quotes from the article. You appear to reacting to things other than what I've written.

I didn't write anything about what this one woman "felt," I quoted what she said she did. I do feel it's important for harassment to be reported immediately. In a perfect world, every victim would be as confident as Taylor Swift. Maybe you feel it's better for people to wait? Doesn't that let the perpetrator get away with it longer and with more people? In the case of Bravo, a staffer tried to make it safe for her to report by telling her that the company car service would come pick her up immediately if Rose tried anything sketchy. She did not report at the time. I can understand why not. She was an unpaid intern and he was in a position of power. She was incurring credit card debt in order to survive and he was offering her $500/day plus expenses to do some busy work. She was trying to enter a highly competitive field with few openings and he was the key to her success. I don't think that's at all accidental! This is how Charlie Rose groomed this victim. Finally, I did not defend Rose. I did offer my opinion on what Rose might have felt. Based on what was reported in the article, it is not hard to fathom how he could convince himself that his overtures were not unwelcome. He no longer can - because he was finally exposed.

 

[monarch64]

Oh. So since it didn't almost kill a person it's no big deal. Right. Carry on. :roll

https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/sexual_harassment.cfm

So, it wasn't sexual harassment when a male employee was caught looking up a female employee's skirt while she was on a ladder pulling down signage? Was it not harassment when he strolled by my work station one day and said, as I was trying on a necklace, "Where are you going to wear that? In your cleavage?" Was it not harassment when a co-worker jokingly asked me if I liked to watch pornography with fisting as the subject matter? I mean, none of those made us bleed or made us afraid to leave our homes. But they sure as hell made us uncomfortable. But you know, boys will be boys, and they can say whatever they want, really, because who is going to listen to women and do anything about silly jokes, anyway?

 

[rainwood]

@Arkteia There are so many things wrong (both legally and morally) with what you quoted. If you can't see that, I'm not going to try to change your mind because .

@Maria D Here are some of the reasons I'm unwilling to agree that Charlie Rose might reasonably have believed the feelings were mutual.
1. He wasn't trying to pick up some young things at a club. All these young women worked for him which means they had something to lose if they didn't go along.
2. He knew a young woman was going broke being an unpaid intern. He decides to pay her to organize his house. Why not just pay her a salary or a stipend for the work she'd been hired to do? Instead, he pays her to organize something personal because that's how he gets her to his house. If she was really interested in him, he wouldn't have had to pay her to get her there.
3. This was systematic and often enough that his employees had come up with an exit strategy for the women for when he was "creepy."
4. His statement that he thought it was mutual was: a) the only defense he had without denying what had happened; 2) the only way to avoid admitting to himself and to the world that he is a predator.

Because that's what he is. I wish that weren't true, but Charlie Rose preyed on young women who worked for him. And he did it a lot. He deserved to lose every job he had.

 

[Maria D]

Rainwood, I don't disagree with anything you've written. It's not reasonable for Rose to believe that that feelings were consensual. This man is not reasonable, he's a disgusting creep! When I say that he convinced himself his attention wasn't unwelcome and you say that he "avoid(s) admitting to himself and to the world that he is a predator," aren't we basically saying the same thing?

He definitely preyed on young women. He could have gone to sugardaddy.com and spent less money for a willing young woman to sell him the "dating experience" but instead he went the route he did. Why? I can't claim to know what goes on in his head, but the impression I got from the article was that in addition to getting off on the power dynamic involved, Rose wanted to believe that he was actually attractive to younger women. He was able to convince himself of this lie because no one stopped him, until now.

Why not just pay her a salary or a stipend for the work she'd been hired to do? Instead, he pays her to organize something personal because that's how he gets her to his house. If she was really interested in him, he wouldn't have had to pay her to get her there.

Indeed! That was part of the grooming process. First time she goes out to his LI home, he's barely even there, except for at the end of the week when they have a glass of wine together and he puts his arms around her. How she sees it: inappropriate, reckless. How (I think) he convinces himself it is: maybe she likes me. The next day he drives her back to the train station and tells her how lonely he is and she consoles him. How she sees it: " 'I’ll keep my distance and I feel sorry for him.’ But I didn’t think of him as a predator at that time.” How (I think) he convinces himself it is: maybe she likes me.

Has anyone else read the actual article? I didn't have any good or bad will toward Charlie Rose before these allegations came to light. I've never watched one of his interviews on PBS. I've never seen him on CBS. The article left me with the impression that this is a man who was able to get away with seriously shitty predatory sexual harassment because of his professional status and celebrity. Not only was he not called on it, people fed his sick ego.

 

[rainwood]

@Maria D Based on what you just wrote, where we may (or maybe not) differ is that I don't care what he thought because it doesn't matter. It's not a legal or moral defense unless his belief was reasonable which it wasn't. What would be interesting would be to go back and see if he did any shows on Harvey Weinstein. Although he didn't go as far as Weinstein, the open bathrobe, parading nude, and enticing young women to his home or office on the pretext of work/business should have rung a lot of bells for him!

 

[Dancing Fire]

Another left winger bites the dust...

https://www.naturalnews.com/2017-11...-and-perverts-are-the-champions-of-women.html

 

[monarch64]

Um, old news? DF if you’d ever followed along with liberal stuff you’d know that men on that side are just as shittastic as men on the right.

Hugo Schwyzet
Garrison Keillor
Many more

Go die on some other hill. No one is going to fight you on this one. Men can be total pigs regardless of political standing and a whole bunch of other identities:

 

[ksinger]

Um, old news? DF if you’d ever followed along with liberal stuff you’d know that men on that side are just as shittastic as men on the right.

Hugo Schwyzet
Garrison Keillor
Many more

Go die on some other hill. No one is going to fight you on this one. Men can be total pigs regardless of political standing and a whole bunch of other identities:

Not to mention it's from Naturalnews .com, one of the top online sites for crank health conspiracy theories and just plain crap masquerading as health advice. Who knew they'd branched out into garden-variety yellow rag conspiracy "news".

 

[Dancing Fire]

Um, old news? DF if you’d ever followed along with liberal stuff you’d know that men on that side are just as shittastic as men on the right.

True, but I think left is well ahead of the right on sexual harassment. Will Al Franken be next?

https://www.npr.org/2017/12/05/567160325/conyers-resigning-amid-sexual-harassment-allegations
And I thought the Dem. party was for women's rights?...

 

[monarch64]

True, but I think left is well ahead of the right on sexual harassment. Will Al Franken be next?

https://www.npr.org/2017/12/05/567160325/conyers-resigning-amid-sexual-harassment-allegations
And I thought the Dem. party was for women's rights?...

No political party is immune to misogyny. The only people dumb enough to stick their heads in the sand about it are those who religiously follow Fox News.

 

[Dancing Fire]

No political party is immune to misogyny. The only people dumb enough to stick their heads in the sand about it are those who religiously follow Fox News.

That's the reason why I only watch MSNBC, NBC and ABC news, b/c they are unbiased..

 

[Calliecake]

So @Dancing Fire There is one thing that you have made very clear. You support your party no matter how morally bankrupt they are. They are standing behind a pedophile. It's doesn't get much lower than this and yet here you are saying how great republicans are.

 

[Dancing Fire]

So @Dancing Fire There is one thing that you have made very clear. You support your party no matter how morally bankrupt they are. They are standing behind a pedophile. It's doesn't get much lower than this and yet here you are saying how great republicans are.

Nope, Unlike the Dems here who still does not call for a resignation from Conyers and Franken. Please read reply #46 of this thread.
https://www.pricescope.com/communit...tee-halts-raising-for-roy-moore.235377/page-2

 

[partgypsy]

Out of curiosity Dancing Fire, if you feel Al Franken should resign, you certainly feel that Roy Moore should step down from his campaign, correct? There are at least 30 people who report or corroborate what Moore did with under-aged girls. Not to under-estimate any harassment, but wouldn't you agree what Moore has done is orders of magnitude worse than what Franken has been accused off (copping a feel during photo-ops, when he was not in a position of power but an entertainer), versus an assistant district attorney using his power and position to date and assault under aged girls.

 

[monarch64]

Yeah, he made sure to post that in the other thread (which he linked). He’s just doing his usual shit stirring and taunting us by asking why we’re not outraged and calling for Franken and Conyers to resign. I mean, I kind of thought that was a given...didn’t know it needed to be shouted from all threads here in LiberalLand. But what do I know?

 

[Tekate]

I always thought that Charlie Rose looked like a guy who didn't have enough sleep due to just coming down off a heroin high (which is really nodding out) I base on my time in the Bronx NY in the 70s when people I knew were doing smack, they looked just like Rose in the morning, OR he looked like he was off a huge bender of hard liquor. I know that is not PC and sounds mean, but it's the truth. His interviewing skills were subpar in my book, as to the women he accosted, good for them and good Rose is gone, it's hard to get through to older men that their actions BOTHERED women, all your life other guys thought it was okay, then it was okay, women were less, simple as that. I'm glad Conyers is gone he was horrible, just like the others, he saw nothing wrong because society allowed him and supported him and that was that.. I hope these times stay.. I hope my sons NEVER ever act like this.

 

[partgypsy]

I didn't watch Charlie Rose because honestly though he got good people to interview, the interviews were snoozefests. I am surprised, but then not surprised after reading the accounts. Reading him touching an employee and then saying "us southerners are touchers". Yuck. Are southerners flashers as well? The fact that he was the owner of the show, there was no "HR" or person to report the abuse to, other than the producer who seem to brush it under the rug. I don't think guys understand that the reason this kind of thing was not reported, as it was "normal" for decades and it was something women endured and simply minimized as much as possible to work in the workplace. I'm glad that it is coming out, and that there is going to be less tolerance for this kind of behavior.

 

[Arkteia]

Al Franken wants the Senate investigation - I think it is a good idea.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Out of curiosity Dancing Fire, if you feel Al Franken should resign, you certainly feel that Roy Moore should step down from his campaign, correct?

I call for Moore to step down on Nov. 16

 

[Dancing Fire]

Yeah, he made sure to post that in the other thread (which he linked). He’s just doing his usual shit stirring and taunting us by asking why we’re not outraged and calling for Franken and Conyers to resign. I mean, I kind of thought that was a given...didn’t know it needed to be shouted from all threads here in LiberalLand. But what do I know?

Monnie...You don't know diddley...

 

[Arkteia]

OK Al Franken is stepping down. Who profits?

So far things are going the way I predicted - for the five minutes of fame of an unreliable witness, women are losing their staunch supporter in the Senate.

“The allegations against Sen Franken describe behavior that cannot be tolerated. While he’s entitled to an ethics committee hearing, I believe he should step aside to let someone else serve.”

Allegations are not proof.

I also predict that Moore will be elected. I am happy to be wrong. But like Trump's electorate does not care who he grabs, Moore's one does not care who was kissed by whom.

We do, and we seem to lose.

 

[partgypsy]

I am sad and disappointed that Al Franken is stepping down. He agreed to have himself be investigated. Tweeden even backed down when he suggested an investigation. The level of the accusations (even if true, and he does not agree that the photo op grab ass incidents happened) is not enough to have a senator be forced to step down. I am afraid this, and the illegal gerrymanding that have increased the Republican majority is signaling that the two sides of the aisles are playing by different rules.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/17/gop-redmap-memo-gerrymandering_n_2498913.html
https://www.npr.org/2017/07/24/5390...-could-give-dems-congressional-seats-in-texas
http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/01/politics/north-carolina-gerrymander-case/index.html

 

[ksinger]

I am sad and disappointed that Al Franken is stepping down. He agreed to have himself be investigated. Tweeden even backed down when he suggested an investigation. The level of the accusations (even if true, and he does not agree that the photo op grab ass incidents happened) is not enough to have a senator be forced to step down. I am afraid this, and the illegal gerrymanding that have increased the Republican majority is signaling that the two sides of the aisles are playing by different rules.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/17/gop-redmap-memo-gerrymandering_n_2498913.html
https://www.npr.org/2017/07/24/5390...-could-give-dems-congressional-seats-in-texas
http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/01/politics/north-carolina-gerrymander-case/index.html

Oh, count on it.
http://time.com/5049665/republicans-democrats-believe-sexual-assault-accusations-survey/

 

[Arkteia]

And what happens with Franken seat? Are there elections now?