I’m thinking about it.
Harvey Weinstein, you recall, announced that he would devote himself to crushing the NRA. Analysis: Desperate deflection and virtue-signalling.
Kevin Spacey decided to finally announce that he was gay. Analysis: Appeal for support and sympathy from a minority group he had spurned for decades
Bill O’Reilly continues to insist that he never did anything wrong, and that it was all a partisan hit job. Analysis: Deny, deny, deny.
Louis C.K. explained that he misread signals—as if there is any signal from a woman that says, “I want to see a chubby, homely, middles aged guy masturbate nude.” Analysis: Ridiculous and pathetic.
George H.W. Bush sought sympathy—he’s old and in a wheelchair—and anyway, it was all in good fun. Analysis: Generational ignorance
Al Franken gave an apology that said that female accusers should be believed, though he didn’t agree with his female accusers account, and that there was no excuse for his conduct, though he was just joking and jokes sometimes look bad in retrospect. Analysis: Cynical double-talk
One common thread that cannot be missed is that all of these men are assholes. Their words brand them as such. This figures, since only assholes harass women in the workplace, or anywhere else. I think this is why Charlie Rose’s statement angers me so much, specifically when he said,
“I have learned a great deal as a result of these events, and I hope others will too. All of us, including me, are coming to a newer and deeper recognition of the pain caused by conduct in the past, and have come to a profound new respect for women and their lives.”
Don’t drag me into this, Rose, or any of the millions of men who always treat women as equals, respectfully, and fairly, both socially and professionally. I don’t need any “newer and deeper” recognition, you fecal creep, that putting hands on women’s upper thighs uninvited, parading naked, groping butts, making lewd phone calls to co-workers and making young interns watch sexually explicit films are all unambiguously wrong and intolerable. I didn’t need it 40 years ago, and I don’t now.
You knew it was wrong too; you just thought you were such a big shot that you could do it and get away with it. You have “new respect” for what the consequences of sexual harassment can be when employers stop using The King’s Pass and are forced to be responsible. That’s what you learned. You have no more respect for women than you ever did, and your miserable statement insults the intelligence of everyone who reads it. Yet you dare to impugn all men with this slimy “We’re all in this together, guys” lie. No, we’re not with you, and have never been with you, or men like you.
__________________________
Let me add here the full statement of Rep. John Conyers regarding the news that he had paid a settlement to a staff member who claimed the he had harassed her (a second staffer apparently made a claim earlier this year.
“I have long been and continue to be a fierce advocate for equality in the workplace and I fully support the rights of employees who believe they have been harassed or discriminated against to assert claims against their employers. That said, it is important to recognize that the mere making of an allegation does not mean it is true. The process must be fair to both the employee and the accused. The current media environment is bringing a much-needed focus to the important issue of preventing harassment in workplaces across the country. However, equally important to keep in mind in this particular moment is the principle of due process and that those accused of wrongdoing are presumed innocent unless and until an investigation establishes otherwise. In our country, we strive to honor this fundamental principle that all are entitled to due process. In this case, I expressly and vehemently denied the allegations made against me, and continue to do so. My office resolved the allegations – with an express denial of liability – in order to save all involved from the rigors of protracted litigation. That should not be lost in the narrative. The resolution was not for millions of dollars, but rather for an amount that equated to a reasonable severance payment. There are statutory requirements of confidentiality that apply to both the employee and me regarding this matter. To the extent the House determines to look further at these issues, I will fully cooperate with an investigation.”
Two observations:
1 The amount of the settlement says nothing about the seriousness or truth of the allegations.
2. The payment was still undisclosed, and paid for out of taxpayer funds. Wrong, and wrong.
Ethics Alarms 
What about Roy Moore? What about Trump?
Della:
There have been several posts made in this forum regarding both Moore and Trumps lapse of sexual ethics already. Use of the “search’ function above would help elucidate those articles.
In the meantime, your question is irrelevant to the issues discussed in this article regarding the sexual misconduct of Rose and Conyers.
Can you imagine the response to a conservative making the same opening that Rep. Conyers makes!!!!!
‘That said, it is important to recognize that the mere making of an allegation does not mean it is true. The process must be fair to both the employee and the accused. The current media environment is bringing a much-needed focus to the important issue of preventing harassment in workplaces across the country. However, equally important to keep in mind in this particular moment is the principle of due process and that those accused of wrongdoing are presumed innocent unless and until an investigation establishes otherwise. In our country, we strive to honor this fundamental principle that all are entitled to due process.’
The democrats have spend the last 8 years turning due process on it’s head on college campuses with their Dear Colleague letters. They are actively working against the exact principles Conyers is now using to defend himself, at least when applied to us normal men. Fucking hypocrites. Worse than hypocrites, these people are fucking dangerous.
I am with you in your anger, Jack. Rose is disgusting.
“I’m like wicked sorry and stuff, but we were all doing it” wink, wink, nudge, nudge, “weren’t we guys?”
I think of men like my grandfather; elegant, refined and in every way a gentleman – from the way he raised his daughters, to the way he conducted business, to the consummate hunter and fisherman that he was. My dad, who never once has conducted himself in a way that was improper. My brother; whose word is impeccable. Not to mention the many, many male friendships I have, friendships that mean so much in my life, and in which I have placed my trust.
How dare he?
Exactly. How dare he? And by taking that tact, he gives ammunition to the man-hating bigots like Toni Van Pelt.
What’s the likelihood that the “us” in “all of us” was intended to be “those who are sexual harrasers/assaulters”, and he meant “all of us who have engaged in this conduct”…?
The word “all”, and then the phrase “including me,” would seem to foreclose such an interpretation.
Are these guys not hiring PR firms to help them with their apologies? Or are the PRM firms terrible?
“us” is the key term in this verbal euler diagram…
It would still feel like a “wink, wink, nudge, nudge”.
“We knew it was wrong, but so what? There were so many of us, and we were all getting away with it. No one was complaining…so….uh…. oops?”
And he hasn’t come to any “profound new respect for women and their lives”. All of a sudden, today, women are deserving of a level of respect he didn’t afford them yesterday. Why, because the women have changed? Or, because he’s finally been called out?
It’s definitely a slimy response relying on strength in numbers and hoping to blend in with the crowd regardless of what “us” means. I just wonder if Jack should take offense, if his “us” isn’t “men”, but “sexual harrassers/assaulters”.
If Rose means just “sexual harrassers/assaulters”, that’s even creepier. It makes it sound like some extra-curricular activity club. “Strength in numbers…” is right.
I don’t think Rose sees himself as a “sexual harasser or assaulter.” It would shock me if he had that sort of self-awareness. Just a poor naïve guy who misinterpreted some social cues!
Unlikely, though it never occurred to me. Sexual harassers think everyone thinks like they do. At least, all the ones I was close to did. In college, I once had the most gorgeous young woman latch on to me at a cast party, kissed and fondled the living daylights out of me, got roaring, hopelessly drunk, begged me to take her to her dorm, whereupon I tucked her into bed after making sure that she wasn’t going to swallow her tongue, left her a glass of water, kissed her on the cheek, and left. She told me the next day that she was shocked: “I don’t think any other guy I know would have been such a gentleman,” she said.
Meanwhile, my room mates openly speculated on whether I was gay.
Take heart. You are the ones we remember to this day; with gratefulness.
Jesus Christ, Marshall, you’re one of those Greek Orthodox Icon saints! I salute you.
Rose’s “new learned-ness” comes off sounding like “proactive consequentialism.” (never mind the “inclusionary deflection”)
I guess while I’m here, I should be proactively defensive about my latest choice of gravatar:
(1) It’s easier on the eyes of beholders than my face, and
(2) Despite the revulsion it might provoke to those who pay it any attention, it’s at least as relevant in the current data stream of unethical conduct-exposure as Jack’s…what’s it called? Banner? Page background? Wallpaper? (all that Not My President rage imagery at the margins)
Ugh, sounds like our Constitutional Law Prof in Chief lecturing us in “a teaching moment.” Maybe we should have a God damned “conversation.” Give me a break.
If I can blame it on society, it’s not my responsibility, it’s not my fault. Let’s face, it’s your fault. You made me this way. I am the victim here.
“All of us, including me, are coming to a newer and deeper recognition of the pain caused by conduct in the past…”
So, the old “it was a different time then” canard? When was this time when harassing women was what all the cool people did?
Must have been before the Victorian era, when saucy men flirted by secretly handing a woman a card reading, “May I please escort you home tonight? If yes, keep this card.” I’m not aware of any such cards that said, “Look up! I’m already masturbating in front of you!”
Must have been before 2000 years ago when the Apostle Paul said, “Treat older women as mothers, and younger women as sisters, with absolute purity.”
I think Charlie Rose might be a thawed caveman.