Robert Ailes Drama

[Cheerful Charlie]

Anybody else paying attention to the Roger Ailes - Gretchen Carson scandal? It's rather amusing in a grim way. Like the Cosby scandal, now many women are stepping forward to tell their seamy little tales of Roger Ailes' ugly sexual advances. I suspect Ailes will soon be history at Faux. But one wonders, what happens next? I don't see Faux getting better even without the Big Pig running things. But it gives me great schadenfreude to see these chickens coming home to roost. It all makes for a great break from the daily flood of disasters in the news.

 

[Derec]

Anybody else paying attention to the Roger Ailes - Gretchen Carson scandal? It's rather amusing in a grim way. Like the Cosby scandal, now many women are stepping forward to tell their seamy little tales of Roger Ailes' ugly sexual advances. I suspect Ailes will soon be history at Faux. But one wonders, what happens next? I don't see Faux getting better even without the Big Pig running things. But it gives me great schadenfreude to see these chickens coming home to roost. It all makes for a great break from the daily flood of disasters in the news.

So-called "sexual harassment" is the most destructive, ridiculous and subjective thing ever concocted by radical feminists. Even a woman overhearing two men sharing a rather mild joke is enough to get a man fired these days (see Donglegate)

It's just a way to destroy male careers and give women multi-million dollar payouts.

 

[Bronzeage]

If Gretchen's story is real, it will be like Cosby's downfall. A dozen or more women will emerge with similar stories. That's the nature of this kind of thing. Men who abuse their power to obtain sex never stop at one.

If her story is a fabrication, all Ailes has do is say, "I'm 76 years old. What am I going to do with that?" and it all goes away.

 

[laughing dog]

So-called "sexual harassment" is the most destructive, ridiculous and subjective thing ever concocted by radical feminists. Even a woman overhearing two men sharing a rather mild joke is enough to get a man fired these days (see Donglegate)

Sexual harassment is destructive to the victims. Just ask the women of Eveleth Mines (https://www.nwhm.org/blog/background-on-class-action-suit/).

BTW, in Donglegate, the complainer (a woman) also got fired. That omission is more telling than your dismissal of the idea of sexual harassment.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/07/6-m...assment-including-one-who-was-16-at-the-time/

A former model, identified as 66-year-old Susan, says she was only sixteen when Ailes propositioned her when she attempted to land a spot on the Mike Douglas Show.

“Ailes took me into this big office and locked the door with a key. He reclined on a couch in a seating area under a map that had flags of all the cities they were syndicated in. He proceeded to pull down his pants and very gingerly pull out his genitals and said, ‘Kiss them.’ And they were red like raw hamburger,” she explained, stating Ailes grew angry when she refused, before she added, “I think he knew I was sixteen.”

----------------

Yeah Derec, just a harmless lil ol' joke.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Anybody else paying attention to the Roger Ailes - Gretchen Carson scandal? It's rather amusing in a grim way. Like the Cosby scandal, now many women are stepping forward to tell their seamy little tales of Roger Ailes' ugly sexual advances. I suspect Ailes will soon be history at Faux. But one wonders, what happens next? I don't see Faux getting better even without the Big Pig running things. But it gives me great schadenfreude to see these chickens coming home to roost. It all makes for a great break from the daily flood of disasters in the news.

Sorry, but he's a staunch conservative. This controversy isn't going anywhere......

 

[Derec]

A former model, identified as 66-year-old Susan, says she was only sixteen when Ailes propositioned her when she attempted to land a spot on the Mike Douglas Show.

Why should we take claims from 50 years old seriously?

 

[Derec]

Sexual harassment is destructive to the victims.

Some can be. And it should be applied gender neutrally. But what radical feminists have wrought is ability for any woman to claim "sexual harassment" if she feels offended.

BTW, in Donglegate, the complainer (a woman) also got fired. That omission is more telling than your dismissal of the idea of sexual harassment.

She was only fired after her employer was subjected to DDoS attacks. She should have been fired because her actions were antithetical to her job (a so-called evangelist who is not supposed to antagonize developers). The guy should not have been fired because he did absolutely nothing wrong. But in modern, post Anita Hill workplace climate, men have to walk on eggshells. That is not a good development.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

A former model, identified as 66-year-old Susan, says she was only sixteen when Ailes propositioned her when she attempted to land a spot on the Mike Douglas Show.

Why should we take claims from 50 years old seriously?

Because it demonstrates a decades long habit of bad behavior on Ailes' part. Why shouldn't we take her seriously? 10 women now have said Ailes sexually harassed them.

 

[Ford]

Why should we take claims from 50 years old seriously?

Because it demonstrates a decades long habit of bad behavior on Ailes' part. Why shouldn't we take her seriously? 10 women now have said Ailes sexually harassed them.

Derec doesn't take claims from any woman seriously. As he said above, he thinks sexual harassment isn't real, and is just a way for women to make money.

 

[whichphilosophy]

The problem here is when such cases come forward years later they are hard to prove.
Should we accept an accusation on the basis it was made, or dismiss it where it could possible be true.
There may well be true and untrue accusations. The defence may say that the person made it up to obtain payment. The prosecution would claim that this was a true event.
The court has to burden of determining whether these were true or not.

 

[laughing dog]

Some can be.

So why did you write "So-called "sexual harassment" is the most destructive, ridiculous and subjective thing ever concocted by radical feminists" when you clearly acknowledge it can be a real problem?

 

[Derec]

Some can be.

So why did you write "So-called "sexual harassment" is the most destructive, ridiculous and subjective thing ever concocted by radical feminists" when you clearly acknowledge it can be a real problem?

Because these days it applies to SJWs like Adria Richards eavesdropping and then getting offended and calling security.

- - - Updated - - -

Derec doesn't take claims from any woman seriously. As he said above, he thinks sexual harassment isn't real, and is just a way for women to make money.

Since they can win a lot of money by making these claims they have a vested interest in claiming they were harassed even when they weren't.

 

[Ford]

Since they can win a lot of money by making these claims they have a vested interest in claiming they were harassed even when they weren't.

So in your mind, sexual harassment doesn't exist.

A woman gets pushed up against a car in the parking garage by her boss, and that's just harmless fun.

 

[Derec]

So in your mind, sexual harassment doesn't exist.

No, but we should not take claims at face value without evidence. Especially since there is a vested monetary interest to lie. And especially when the claims are 50 fucking years old.

A woman gets pushed up against a car in the parking garage by her boss, and that's just harmless fun.

Unless there is a camera in the parking garage she could have just as easily made it up. Of course, surveillance cameras weren't prevalent in the 1960s.

 

[laughing dog]

So why did you write "So-called "sexual harassment" is the most destructive, ridiculous and subjective thing ever concocted by radical feminists" when you clearly acknowledge it can be a real problem?

Because these days it applies to SJWs like Adria Richards eavesdropping and then getting offended and calling security.

In your SJW zeal, you made a false claim. And now, in your SJW zeal you claim Ms. Richards eavesdropped. She overheard something. That is not the same thing as eavesdropping which requires intent. If your case is so blatant, there would be no need for you to literally make things up.

 

[Derec]

In your SJW zeal, you made a false claim. And now, in your SJW zeal you claim Ms. Richards eavesdropped. She overheard something. That is not the same thing as eavesdropping which requires intent. If your case is so blatant, there would be no need for you to literally make things up.

They were in the next row, talking among themselves. She was itching for something to get offended about. I say she eavesdropped.

 

[Ford]

No,

Yes.


You're saying - like you do with claims of rape - that women make shit up and any accusations of sexual harassment or rape are all lies.


You start with the premise that women are all liars, and go from there.

 

[Derec]

You're saying - like you do with claims of rape - that women make shit up and any accusations of sexual harassment or rape are all lies.

I am saying that evidence should be required and that if you have a "he said she said" situation you should not presume that the woman in the one telling the truth.

You start with the premise that women are all liars, and go from there.

I am not. However, by always believing the woman you are saying that men are all liars.

 

[Ford]

Just so we're clear:

Derec says all accusations of rape/sexual harassment are false.


He says that women who make such claims must be dismissed, because women in general are liars.

So-called "sexual harassment" is the most destructive, ridiculous and subjective thing ever concocted by radical feminists. Even a woman overhearing two men sharing a rather mild joke is enough to get a man fired these days (see Donglegate)

It's just a way to destroy male careers and give women multi-million dollar payouts.