Please keep calling your reps

[Matata]

Love Urban Dictionary -- there ain't nothin' you can't find on there! I think I have to get the mug on this on though 'cuz I'm full up on T-shirts right now.[/QUOTE]

Your garage sales must be very interesting

 

[Dee*Jay]

I can't figure it out though, after a big crowd at the first one now only the liberals come and buy stuff?

 

[Matata]

I can't figure it out though, after a big crowd at the first one now only the liberals come and buy stuff?

Haaaahaaaa. I've this scenario in my head of families running screaming from your place, hands placed firmly over the eyes of innocent children as you sit in your lawn chair wearing a teenie weenie yellow bikini and nursing a bucket sized cocktail.

 

[ruby59]

Here are the laws in MD (which is where this case occurred). Looks like 14 and 17 is no crime (if consensual), but 14 and 18 is 4th degree sexual offense. So in the case of the 18 year old in question, it doesn't matter if it was consensual, it is still against the law.

What is 4th degree sexual assault. Is it a slap on the wrist.

IMO it should be statutory rape.

 

[Dee*Jay]

Haaaahaaaa. I've this scenario in my head of families running screaming from your place, hands placed firmly over the eyes of innocent children as you sit in your lawn chair wearing a teenie weenie yellow bikini and nursing a bucket sized cocktail.

You must have been peeking over the neighbor's hedges because that is EXACTLY what happens! Except I don't bother with a bucket sized cocktail, I just fill the kiddie pool with prosecco and suck it up through a garden hose.

 

[lelser]

Callie it is not about having friendships because we have plenty of those. There are times and places we interact with those friends and other situations that TO US would seem inappropriate. Why is this a problem for people? You do you and I'll do me - respectfully meant to you Callie.

All the years I traveled for business, as an senior technical person, should I have had room service? There weren't other women on most of the teams. All the mentoring I got - much of it after hours over a meal - helped my career enormously. Now I travel for business and spent a lot of my time alone with men nose down over rocks and drinking tea/eating cookies. Should I just give up?

A powerful man saying "I will not interact with women in important contexts" is basically saying "don't bother working here. You're not part of the team."

And I agree that if Keith Ellison had said this and claimed it was a religious issue for him the same people praising Pence would be rabid.

 

[lovedogs]

What is 4th degree sexual assault. Is it a slap on the wrist.

IMO it should be statutory rape.

No, it's a sex crime. It just covers more than statutory rape (e.g. it includes unwanted touching, statutory rape, student teacher relationships, etc).

 

[ruby59]

No, it's a sex crime. It just covers more than statutory rape (e.g. it includes unwanted touching, statutory rape, student teacher relationships, etc).

I just wish they did not rake this poor girl over the coals in the meantime.

At least the police are backing her up and the judge would not release him.

 

[cmd2014]

cmd2014 I totally understand and empathize that women can be worse. It is very sad.

I should have clarified that rather than my seeing it as women being deliberately awful to each other (although I will totally acknowledge that we can be), I see it as a side effect of casual sexism. We are all raised and socialized in a culture that still values and respects men (particularly white, wealthy, powerful, or famous men) more. Because of this, women often unconsciously value and respect men more, and can be the most aggressive defenders of the status quo, particularly if they have accepted a traditional gender role within that status quo. I have way less issues with other women who are also in male dominated professions, because I think we all know the challenges associated with it. Women who aren't in it often haven't reflected on it much and/or are invested in justifying their choices by championing the status quo.

I see that with the Pence dinner issue a bit. Those of us in it are saying, "hey...don't make it EVEN HARDER for us to get the same opportunities as our male colleagues just because of some misguided idea of avoiding temptation and/or the appearance of impropriety," while women not in it are saying "isn't that nice that he's being respectful to the relationship to his wife" without necessarily seeing the other side.

https://www.vox.com/conversations/2017/3/31/15136548/congress-sexism-mike-pence-vp-billy-graham

 

[redwood66]

All the years I traveled for business, as an senior technical person, should I have had room service? There weren't other women on most of the teams. All the mentoring I got - much of it after hours over a meal - helped my career enormously. Now I travel for business and spent a lot of my time alone with men nose down over rocks and drinking tea/eating cookies. Should I just give up?

A powerful man saying "I will not interact with women in important contexts" is basically saying "don't bother working here. You're not part of the team."

And I agree that if Keith Ellison had said this and claimed it was a religious issue for him the same people praising Pence would be rabid.

No one is asking you to do any of those things. So don't demand someone else to act in a way that does not fit with their idea of marriage. I don't care what Keith Ellison did in his previous marriage and Mike Pence probably doesn't either. When it comes to marriage/kids people should mind their own business. Or is that asking too much? I don't make negative comments on the divorce/marital discussions because it is none of my business and rude to judge someone else's marital woes. I would hope others would feel the same. I don't know why public figures cannot be afforded that courtesy also.

 

[OreoRosies86]

All the years I traveled for business, as an senior technical person, should I have had room service? There weren't other women on most of the teams. All the mentoring I got - much of it after hours over a meal - helped my career enormously. Now I travel for business and spent a lot of my time alone with men nose down over rocks and drinking tea/eating cookies. Should I just give up?

A powerful man saying "I will not interact with women in important contexts" is basically saying "don't bother working here. You're not part of the team."

And I agree that if Keith Ellison had said this and claimed it was a religious issue for him the same people praising Pence would be rabid.

Apart from being a bit star struck at seeing you comment here, I agree with and very much value your perspective on this. Women should always have a place at the table, professionally speaking.

 

[cmd2014]

Elliott,

Sorry, I realized that we have all threadjacked your original post. I think public health policies that deny care to the most vulnerable members of society are immoral. To my secular eye they also strike me as bring fundamentally against the teachings of Christianity. But I'm Canadian and a health care provider and I obviously believe that everyone (especially the most vulnerable as well as those likely to create a public health crisis via poorly managed communicable diseases) deserves access to appropriate health care.

As for this: "As Governor of Indiana, Pence blocked the expansion of HIV services until it could be proved that “federal dollars were no longer being given to organizations that celebrate and encourage the types of behaviors that facilitate the spreading of the HIV virus.” I take it he wasn't talking about heterosexual sex (where male to female transmission of the disease is 2:1) or IV drug use, which are now the most common vectors of HIV in the world?

 

[OreoRosies86]

If only Pence himself had such a firm stance on staying out of people's relationships!

 

[redwood66]

If only Pence himself had such a firm stance on staying out of people's relationships!

Yes I agree the application of extreme religious values in the political arena is inappropriate if it is not the will of the masses.

 

[lelser]

No one is asking you to do any of those things. So don't demand someone else to act in a way that does not fit with their idea of marriage. I don't care what Keith Ellison did in his previous marriage and Mike Pence probably doesn't either. When it comes to marriage/kids people should mind their own business. Or is that asking too much? I don't make negative comments on the divorce/marital discussions because it is none of my business and rude to judge someone else's marital woes. I would hope others would feel the same. I don't know why public figures cannot be afforded that courtesy also.

You're missing the point. I don't care how people conduct their marriages. I care that no one is excluded from important parts of their business life because someone in a position of power has 'issues.' I routinely work with men who will not touch a women for religious reasons. But they offer me the same opportunities. I'm not told I can't participate. We seal deals in ways that don't involve shaking hands.


I think you truly underestimate the critical importance of the after hours time in business.
In my former DayJob, I was expected to take clients out for meals. A person who refused to take women clients out because he was uncomfortable dining with women not his wife would be rapidly out of a job.
This kind of exclusion is no different than scheduling meetings on Yom Kippur. Oh gee? You can't attend? Too bad. Golfing on a 'whites only' course, or a gathering in a private men's club? Not OK.

If someone is unwilling to give women (or men, or LGBT folks, or Jews, or Muslims....) equal opportunity then I'm going out on a limb here and saying they are a bad person.

 

[Elizabeth35]

I guess I am perplexed that anyone IRL has the option to exclude themselves from work life. Women are 50% of the world (roughly).
Seems exclusionary to say you can't break bread with half the world and half your co-workers.
Are you eating naked?!?!

 

[redwood66]

I am not missing the point. People make decisions and choices based on what they are willing to do. No one is excluded from anything - they make their own choice. If one's convictions are similar to the VP's and are more important to him than taking meetings after hours then they find careers that support that or make exceptions. It is about choices and one's convictions to their priorities. If I were Jewish and not having meetings on Yom Kippur was important to me that is a choice I have to make.

Maybe I do underestimate the critical importance of doing business after hours. I can accept that. If that is a part of doing business there are plenty of people willing to do it. Great for them. But saying that people would not have opportunity because a person of power would not meet after hours alone seems a bit of a stretch to me.

 

[Matata]

You're missing the point. I don't care how people conduct their marriages. I care that no one is excluded from important parts of their business life because someone in a position of power has 'issues.' I routinely work with men who will not touch a women for religious reasons. But they offer me the same opportunities. I'm not told I can't participate. We seal deals in ways that don't involve shaking hands.


I think you truly underestimate the critical importance of the after hours time in business.
In my former DayJob, I was expected to take clients out for meals. A person who refused to take women clients out because he was uncomfortable dining with women not his wife would be rapidly out of a job.
This kind of exclusion is no different than scheduling meetings on Yom Kippur. Oh gee? You can't attend? Too bad. Golfing on a 'whites only' course, or a gathering in a private men's club? Not OK.

If someone is unwilling to give women (or men, or LGBT folks, or Jews, or Muslims....) equal opportunity then I'm going out on a limb here and saying they are a bad person.

This has always been a dilemma for me. I acknowledge the right to practice religious and cultural differences yet it is the foundation of some of those differences that I find unacceptable. Some religions/cultures claim the prohibition against touching a member of the opposite set is seated in the belief that one shows respect for that individual yet it applies to the touching only of women by men. Too often these cultural/religious differences are seated in the belief that women are unclean (sometimes only at specific times, such as menstruation, but that differs among religions also), dangerous to men's honor, temptresses. So for me, it's just one more way for men to perpetuate the inferiority of women. Sure you may have the same opportunities (perhaps only because you are not a member of the culture/religion) but you are not completely accepted as an equal (in my opinion) until they are able to touch you (by "you" I mean the collect you -- all women).

 

[Elizabeth35]

Not everyone works 9-5. In the real world-global corporate world-people work all hours. I frequently had conference calls off hours with China, Finland, etc. Most of my co-workers and I travelled domestically and internationally, typically in groups. And yes, there were married women in these groups. Impossible to avoid eating together.
I guess I can't fathom a life or job that does not involve interaction with the opposite sex.
And I am very traditional in my marriage and so is my husband.
But neither of us are so insecure that we don't realize that eating with co-workers is a fact of life.

 

[redwood66]

I don't think anyone said anything like you describe Elizabeth. I surely didn't and it is not what was being discussed about the VP's actions. I am sure that he has worked alongside many women in his career.

 

[monarch64]

Not everyone works 9-5. In the real world-global corporate world-people work all hours. I frequently had conference calls off hours with China, Finland, etc. Most of my co-workers and I travelled domestically and internationally, typically in groups. And yes, there were married women in these groups. Impossible to avoid eating together.
I guess I can't fathom a life or job that does not involve interaction with the opposite sex.
And I am very traditional in my marriage and so is my husband.
But neither of us are so insecure that we don't realize that eating with co-workers is a fact of life.

WORD. Mother effing WORD.

 

[lelser]

I think I also judge Pence harshly because he's governed in ways that cause harm to women and LGBT people. If he were at the forefront of protecting women's civil liberties, it would be an amusing anecdote. But he's singlehandedly created an AIDS crisis in Indiana, and he's shut down rights for women and LGBTQ people at every opportunity. So it's NOT benign and amusing. It's a sign that he has no respect for us.

 

[Elizabeth35]

I would hope that, in his elected position representing his voters, Pence is able to eat dinner with a woman (say Angela Merkel) without it being an issue.
That is not disrespecting his marriage--it is doing what he was elected to do.
His marriage is 100% separate from his elected duties. At least in my opinion.
If he chooses socially to not eat with other women without his wife--his choice. Weird--but his choice.

 

[Elizabeth35]

But obviously the bigger issue( and topic of the thread) is Pence's position and votes on HIV related issues.
For that-I condemn him.

He is not an example of Christianity as I know it and practice it, and is instead an embarrassment. All the Christians that I know are appalled by him and his beliefs about conversion therapy. Shameful.

 

[cmd2014]

I am not missing the point. People make decisions and choices based on what they are willing to do. No one is excluded from anything - they make their own choice. If one's convictions are similar to the VP's and are more important to him than taking meetings after hours then they find careers that support that or make exceptions. It is about choices and one's convictions to their priorities. If I were Jewish and not having meetings on Yom Kippur was important to me that is a choice I have to make.

Maybe I do underestimate the critical importance of doing business after hours. I can accept that. If that is a part of doing business there are plenty of people willing to do it. Great for them. But saying that people would not have opportunity because a person of power would not meet after hours alone seems a bit of a stretch to me.

Here's why it's important. They ARE being excluded, and it's hurting their careers. Pence isn't a private citizen here. He's an elected official and an employer in the second most powerful job in the US government executive branch. We aren't talking about what he does in his private life. We're talking about what he does as an employer. There's a big difference.

This article describes why this is important:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...ss-wont-be-alone-with-female-staffers/449367/

And here are some excerpts from the previous article that I posted:

I talked to some staffers who worked in offices where women weren't allowed to drive around with their boss or interact with them at evening events where drinks were being served. I also talked to male staffers who felt that they benefited from this policy because they were able to spend more time with their boss at evening events when a more senior staffer, who was female, was barred from attending.

Based on my reporting, it doesn’t seem like this is a very large problem on Capitol Hill. I didn’t find that a majority of offices do this. But there are certainly some. And for the women in those offices, this is a huge problem in being able to advance in their careers. What generally happens is that they hit a certain level and they realize they’re not gonna get past it. They move either to a new office or off the Hill entirely.

They’re saying, I can’t become chief of staff if I can’t spend one-on-one time with my boss. They were saying, I can’t advance my career if I can’t spend this time with them. Men are being allowed to go to these events at night where, quite frankly, a lot of policy talk happens, and I can’t be there.

Moving up in a congressional office is really about forming a close relationship with that member. It’s really like in any work environment. You get closer to a boss by being able to anticipate their needs, by understanding them on a policy level, by being able to write in their voice. And you can’t get that with limited access.

In some of these cases, I heard about how female staffers couldn’t sit with their boss in his office with the door closed. How are you supposed to have a conversation with your boss about raises, about moving forward in your career, about things you could be doing better, or issues with another office, how are you supposed to be having those conversations when the door is open? You really can’t.

A lot of women were saying to me, I had to leave my job, or I’m going to have to leave my job because I just don't see any other way for me to advance. And they’re saying, I care about my career and that’s why I came to Congress and Capitol Hill, because I wanted to work here and I want to do it at a high level and do it very well. But how can I move forward when men are able to have these interactions and I’m not?

I talked to a discrimination lawyer here in DC and Congress’s Office of Compliance. The lawyer, her name is Debra S. Katz, she said this was pretty cut-and-dried. If this was happening in the private sector, it would be discriminatory. These women would have grounds to sue. It would be a really, really major problem.

 

[redwood66]

I did read that article and I do empathize with the women. I can also understand one of the reasons for it - sexual harassment. It is the reason probably every large company and EVERY government agency has a defined policy with or without training attached. For me personally it was sitting in a class every year for 20 years. Is it right that these women have this roadblock? No it isn't. I would imagine that allegations of sexual harassment, whether legitimate or false, are much more prevalent across the US than the occurrences in the article. Are the congress people acting in an overly cautious manner? Probably, but I see it as self preservation, which stinks for the women who work for them. So I am not excusing their behavior but acknowledging a reason it exists. Do I wish that it were different? Of course I do, but as long as lecherous behavior and false allegations exist this might happen. Its our reality and it won't change until people change their behavior. I won't hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

Thank you for the pleasant exchange cmd. Eliot - sorry this thread got derailed so terribly but it seems this was an important topic too.

 

[Tekate]

Wait until you get a little older and women outnumber men 3 to 1 or more. And she desperately wants another husband, and yours will do nicely.

Surely you jest? I'm 64 and m husband is 66, if I ever was that insecure in this almost 30 year marriage Ruby then I should not be in it. If my husband cheated on me then so be it, it's over, but he can cheat on me at midnight or a 6:00 a.m. call from Israel he needs to do at the office, when he goes to Costco, my husband had employees in the middle east, he traveled with one woman to Israel several times, but I know my husband loves me and our life and love etc is wonderful, and I am CONFIDENT in my self Ruby, if my husband was the cheater type then I wouldn't have married him. If I had low self esteem and felt insecure in my relationship then it's not a good relationship..

If I get to the point were it's 3 to 1 women to men in the adult home then she can have him, he's not worth my time.

 

[Calliecake]

I'm waiting for Ruby to say "Well boys will be boys" and she feels she is protecting her family by not allowing her husband to dine with a woman. Its such backwards thinking in my mind. No where in the Bible does it state that you can't have dinner with a member of the opposite sex. If Pence feels having dinner with a member of the opposite sex is being disrespectful to his wife then maybe he is in the wrong job.

I'm really not trying to be disrespectful to Ruby or Red but I see this as an insult to both men and women. And we wonder why many times we are not seen as equals in business. I'm sure my thinking comes from years of traveling with men in business as my husband has traveled for years with women in business. I can't imagine either of us ever being upset over the other one having business dinner with a member of the opposite sex.

I have a SIL who has the same opinions as Red and Ruby on this topic and I can honestly say we will never agree when it comes to this subject.

Tekate, I view this very much the way you do.

 

[redwood66]

Callie - I do not find it hard to keep from being disrespectful to you for having a different opinion than mine. So why is it so hard for you to do the same?

 

[iLander]

Callie - I do not find it hard to keep from being disrespectful to you for having a different opinion than mine. So why is it so hard for you to do the same?

Because you're a troll and everyone knows it.

Troll