It's no secret that Congress is dominated by men, but as women work to make inroads in the congressional boys club, some female staffers face a huge impediment to moving up: They're not allowed to spend one-on-one time with their male bosses.What madman who is familiar with a legal system that imprisons men on nothing more than the sole word of a woman is about to let himself be put completely at the mercy of any woman, let alone the ambitious, self-promoting sharks that fill Congressional offices?
In an anonymous survey of female staffers conducted by National Journal in order to gather information on the difficulties they face in a male-dominated industry, several female aides reported that they have been barred from staffing their male bosses at evening events, driving alone with their congressman or senator, or even sitting down one-on-one in his office for fear that others would get the wrong impression.
Follow-up interviews with other Hill aides make clear that these policies, while not prevalent, exist in multiple offices—and they may well run afoul of employment discrimination laws, experts say. Because of the sensitivity of the issue, and the fear of retribution, many of these women and some of their male counterparts spoke with National Journal on the condition of anonymity and declined to publicly name their bosses.
"Even though my boss is like a second dad to me, our office was always worried about any negative assumptions that might be made. This has made and makes my job significantly harder to do," one female staffer told National Journal.
Another reported that in twelve years working for her previous boss, he "never took a closed door meeting with me. … This made sensitive and strategic discussions extremely difficult."
It's abundantly clear that one of the major objectives of feminists is to ensure that no man has the ability to defend himself against women under any circumstances.
36 comments:
So true. The same, of course, applies to Jews and other non-Whites. Why would any sane White Christian man allow these creatures power over him? Absolute madness.
My liberal feminist mother saw the danger of false rape allegation when she asked my father to go into a female parishioner's home to do some repairs. Suddenly, when her husband might be put in a position where a woman might gain from using the courts to screw her husband, the possibility of FRA came up on her radar. The solution was to ask a priest to go along. This is essentially the same thing.
As it turns out, this is an age old technique for prevention of rape.
No one wants a Lewinsky anymore?
My liberal feminist mother saw the danger of false rape allegation when she asked my father to go into a female parishioner's home to do some repairs.
Interesting that the possibility of simply going along with him doesn't appear to have occurred to her. Better to get one man to do it and another to watch the first man so she can watch TV, I suppose.
Reading this reminds me why I'm finding it harder and harder to comprehend why any man any longer takes anything any woman says seriously. Pure cognitive dissonance on an absolutely unprecedented level.
It is very funny.
In some ways feminism creates the same rules that conservatives would promote, but for different reasons.
For example, back in my Evangelical days our pastors would insist that a man (especially a married man) should not spend time alone with a woman. Not because she would accuse you of rape, but to avoid temptation, etc.
Interesting that the possibility of simply going along with him doesn't appear to have occurred to her.
If you were in his shoes, would you want her tagging (and nagging) along?
It was probably the only opportunity he would have had during the week to get away from her and enjoy some relative peace and quiet.
"enjoy some relative peace and quiet." with another woman? Seriously? By being a handy man and taking her orders. Please do this and that. Oh. My bed is creaking. Can you fix?
Billy Graham had a rule that he would not be alone with a woman who was not his wife. There was a story (possibly apocryphal) that he refused a meeting with Hillary Clinton (when she was still First Ladyman) at the White House because she wanted it to be the two of them and wouldn't allow any of his aides in.
How many sex or FRA scandals was Billy Graham involved in?
C'mon, guys.
It has a simple solution that feminists have wanted all along.
Hire the uggos and fatties.
It's not about stopping rape, it's about getting the wildebeats the same access that the trim and pleasant women enjoy by pushing away from the buffet line and staying clear of hatefulness.
@hank.jim said: "Oh. My bed is creaking. Can you fix?"
More likely, her bed isn't creaking enough and wants some help with that.
Shadenfreude
"Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream." - Rush Limbaugh
C'mon, guys.
It has a simple solution that feminists have wanted all along.
Hire the uggos and fatties.
Owen, come on. If anything, uggos and fatties are more likely to make false accusations than hotties.
It's simple reason why you have the doors open and/or aides accompanying....witnesses.
Sensible men will not hire women who are of such poor character that they would ever be caught alone in a room with their male boss.
@ johnnesteutes said... Sensible men will not hire women who are of such poor character that they would ever be caught alone in a room with their male boss.
________
That's an oversimplification of how people actually end up someone's boss.
Its also another example of taking female wrongdoing and shifting it to a problem with male shortcomings (in this case, sensibility).
It says a lot - these men are above the law in most respects, and they still guard themselves in this fashion.
Owen, come on. If anything, uggos and fatties are more likely to make false accusations than hotties.
Too true.
Describing her boss like a second father... that seems problematic to me.
I wonder if there is some sociosexual analysis to be done here. Some Congressmen clearly fear the sexual harassment laws more than the gender discrimination laws. And then there would be a third set (Bill Clinton) that doesn't give a toss about either.
''Describing her boss like a second father... that seems problematic to me.'
That's what happens when women don't marry and/or didn't have their father growing up. Anything resembling a male lead in their life like a boss either becomes a father or a husband figure...without actually being it.
Our daughters don't go anywhere alone. At one time, one of our adult daughters was doing housecleaning for money and she was hired by a neighbor. She told them that if the husband would be home while she was cleaning that she would be bringing her brother along to chaperone. The feminist/retired school teacher wife came over to our house complaining about the policy and said we were acting like her husband was a rapist. This is the same woman who stormed out of an outdoor wedding reception at a farm because my husband and son were open-carrying and there were children present.
This is all proceeding pretty much as I expected. I was managing people in the 90s, and they were so concerned with sexual harassment lawsuits this was company policy - no spending time alone with women subordinates if you were a man. When it was employee review time I reserved the biggest conference room and discussed things quietly in a far corner with the door wide open. This sort of thing really hurts an ambitious woman's career. You can't form more than a surface relationship with someone dangerous to your own career.
It's gotten worse, too - most of the white guys in my office won't discuss anything but work with members of more legally privileged classes. You never know when somebody is going to engage in self-serving offense taking, so if something interesting happened yesterday we pretty much only talk with each other, shutting everyone else out of the grapevine. In the end the SJWs have created an old boy's club where none would have existed otherwise.
Sensible men will not hire women who are of such poor character that they would ever be caught alone in a room with their male boss.
Sensible men will not hire women at all if they can avoid it.
It's gotten worse, too - most of the white guys in my office won't discuss anything but work with members of more legally privileged classes. You never know when somebody is going to engage in self-serving offense taking, so if something interesting happened yesterday we pretty much only talk with each other, shutting everyone else out of the grapevine. In the end the SJWs have created an old boy's club where none would have existed otherwise.
If it hasn't already been done, I really hope someone undertakes a study that tracks workplace productivity over a fifty-year period. I would be willing to make a serious blind wager that such a study will show an inverse relationship between productivity and the presence in the workplace of large numbers of women and minorities.
"Sensible men will not hire women who are of such poor character"
Sensible men will not marry women who are of such poor character...
Either we have a dearth of sensible men or ambitious women are adept at hiding their true character.
"Sensible men will not hire women at all if they can avoid it."
In a traditional enough culture, it's possible for men and women to work together provided boundaries are clear. I was actually going to type what you said, but then I thought of some sensible men I know who hired girls to work at their produce shop.
These girls would never, ever, ever be alone at a one on one night meeting with the boss. And if they were their fathers would exact vengeance against the boss guy.
@The Original Hermit
The MGTOWs are becoming somewhat sensible. Sensible men will avoid being around women of poor character at all. Change jobs if you have to. Trust me, it's worth it.
Ambitious women who can hide their true character aren't as good at it as they think. The Bible lays out ways for a woman to show good character, and they aren't just "cultural". I don't run into many adult women who are able to fake dressing modestly, wearing head coverings, submissiveness to proper male leadership and the (non-churchian) church, and being chaste keepers at home.
Instead, you'll find them busy on blogs blabbing with a bunch of manosphere guys about what great wives they are/could be.
@Eric
Are you sure this is a bad thing?
Has this site been hacked or something? I'm not the most technical when it comes to computers but this site keeps bouncing spontaneously to myspace spam sites and other weird b.s.No other site does this for me. Just wonderingif anyone else has noticed this.
It goes to Go Garden club. This page only. Everytime I open a new window.
I don't think the point is made enough that feminism is a top down philosophy aimed at lower status men from higher status men. If I'm dominant and confident I can use women to stick the boot into other men. Non-masculine politico-economic alphas are sticking women between themselves and the other males. Same with all the identity politics, its a shield. Try getting through all of the lefty middle class female blubber that Cameron has surrounded himself with you sexist pigs!
Empower the freaks!!
Are you sure this is a bad thing?
Not at all. But I am sure all this EEOC legal stuff is a stupid thing if your goal is to put women on equal footing with men in the workplace.
How does not being able to spend time alone with one's boss seriously hold a person back? Unless one of your male colleagues (read competition) can and gets ahead because of it.
Where're the articles complaining that all the hot subordinates get all the managers attention, pay rises and promotions?
@johnnesteutes
"And if they were their fathers would exact vengeance against the boss guy."
Why, because they were in the same room, alone?
Have fun getting the chair for exacting "vengeance" on another man for nothing. That#s if he doesn't shoot the father dead, before the executioner does it. Or mabe the other guys family raids his home when you're absent, and kills everyone inseide, women and children.
Anything else?
Wow, that comment above is a mess. I mean those things are likely to happen to the father.
Post a Comment
NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.