The Front Page Cover
~ Featuring ~
Low-cut tops, sexual harassment
and Bill O'Reilly
by Minister Michael Brown
.
Top Headlines
House GOP unveils bill extending government shutdown deadline a week. (CBS News)
Trump tells Mexico, Canada he won't terminate NAFTA "at this time." (The Hill)
FCC begins process to rollback net neutrality rules. (NPR)
ESPN layoffs should be a wake-up call about politicizing sports. (National Review)
ESPN publishes poetry tribute to fugitive cop killer. (The Federalist)
Ann Coulter cancels Berkeley speech after losing conservative groups' support. (USA Today)
University of California President Janet Napolitano hid $175 million while raising tuition, paying excessive salaries. (Hot Air)
New CMP video: Planned Parenthood executive haggles over compensation for organ sales ... again. (Hot Air)
Senators told North Korea nuclear threat is urgent. (The Washington Free Beacon)
U.S. military begins installation of missile defenses in South Korea. (ABC News)
Policy: House health care bill is moving in the right direction. (The Daily Signal)
Policy: Energy revolutions hidden in plain sight: shale crushes solar. (Real Clear Energy) ~The Patriot Post
.
.
Sharia, Arkansas Style
by Bruce Bawer
{frontpagemag.com} ~ On April 13-15, the King Fahd Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Arkansas held a symposium on so-called “honor violence,” as exemplified by honor killings, forced marriage, and other such delightful acts... I'll get back to this – but first of all, am I the only person who still finds it jarring to see words like “King Fahd Center for Middle East Studies” in the same sentence as words like “University of Arkansas”? The Center, as its website informs us, “was founded with a $20 million endowment from the Saudi government in the mid-1990s. An initial endowment of $2 million, dedicated toward language, literary translation and publication was followed by a much larger $18 million gift designed to spark the foundation of a comprehensive Middle East Studies program at the undergraduate and graduate levels.” Of course, this isn't the only so-called “Middle East Studies” shebang based at a Western university, named for a Saudi royal, and funded by Saudi cash...
.
Former liar-nObama
DHS Secretary Napolitano Busted...
by Rick Wells
{rickwells.us} ~ liar-nObama’s former Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, provided some insight into the corruption that permeates her management style at the University of California... and which was surely covered up by the her equally corrupt comrades within the liar-nObama regime. An audit of the University of California reveals that Napolitano had a hidden “rainy day fund” stashed that nobody was supposed to find out about, to the tune of $175 million. The secret fund existed at the same time that the University system was claiming to be in dire financial straits and requesting a funding increase. The means by which the surplus was accumulated was deceptive as well, with Napolitano overestimating the amount of money needed to run the school system...
.
Sean Spicer: Sanctuary Cities "Have the Blood of Dead Americans on Their Hands"VIDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFXVu_qE-PI
TUCKER: Spars With Democrat Over Iran Deal - "You Were Hoodwinked"
VIDEO: http://video.insider.foxnews.com/v/5411259999001
VIDEO: http://video.insider.foxnews.com/v/5411259999001
.
RUSH: Federal Judge Had To "INVENT A VIOLATION" To Make Trump Look Like A Tyrannical Dictator (Sanctuary Cities)
VIDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgwFxq2uB0w
VIDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgwFxq2uB0w
.
Ann Coulter: Colleges Like Berkeley Want to "Squelch" Conservative Speech
VIDEO: http://video.insider.foxnews.com/v/5412805532001
VIDEO: http://video.insider.foxnews.com/v/5412805532001
The Most Anti-Trump Anchor on TV News
.
European Union Regulation of Internet
Speech Demonstrates Its Secular Trend
by Steve Byas
{thenewamerican.com} ~ The European Parliament (EP) voted earlier this week to increase regulation of speech on the Internet, specifically targeting Google’s YouTube and Vimeo — platforms in which average citizens can share videos... The EP, the legislative body of the European Union (EU), has decided that some videos do not meet their standards. The EP said it wants to protect its citizens from videos that use so-called hate speech and incitement to violence. While one can certainly understand a desire to curb incitement to violence, it is important to define what this actually means in practice. Perhaps of even greater concern is the prohibition against “hate speech,” which some in America have sarcastically defined as “speech that someone hates.” Opponents of “hate speech” usually define it as any speech that denigrates members of certain groups, based on subjects such as race or religion, or even "sexual orientation.”...
.
.
by Minister Michael Brown
Low-cut tops, sexual harassment
and Bill O'Reilly
by Minister Michael Brown
{wnd.com} ~ I’m not defending or accusing Bill O’Reilly, and I don’t know if his antagonists are telling the truth. I’m simply asking a question: If a woman wears a low-cut top to work and a male colleague or employer looks at her cleavage, is that sexual harassment?
I asked my Twitter followers this question, and the responses were somewhat surprising. But before I share what they had to say, let me start with the appropriate caveats.
I'm not denying the reality of sexual harassment in the workplace.
I’m not denying that some men feel they have the right to treat women as sexual objects.
I’m not denying that many women feel constant pressure to dress sensually.
I’m not denying that some judges have outrageously implied that rape victims got what they deserved because of their scanty attire.
I’m not questioning or minimizing or excusing any of this. Not a chance.
What I’m questioning is whether it’s sexual harassment if a woman wears suggestive attire and a man checks her out. Is she getting the desired results – namely, male attention – or is this a form of sexual harassment?
Again, I’m not justifying the man’s behavior or the woman’s attire. As a follower of Jesus, I do my best to look away from temptation, not toward it. And my wife and I taught our daughters never to dress in such a way as to appeal to male lusts.
But if a woman comes to work in a very tight, very short mini-skirt and some male coworker checks out her legs, is he guilty of sexual harassment? Or, more generally, if he says to her, “That’s a nice outfit!” has he sexually harassed her?
Perquita Burgess, one of O’Reilly’s accusers, claimed he “would come by her desk and would leer at her up and down. She felt like he was looking at her cleavage, and it made her feel uncomfortable.”
If true, was this harassment? Perhaps it’s one thing to glance and another thing to leer? Or was she displaying her cleavage for all to see? I’m simply asking questions.
She also claimed that “O’Reilly told her ‘lookin’ good there girl’ one time when she was getting off the elevator.”
What about this behavior? Can a friendly compliment be construed as sexual harassment unless it was part of a larger complex of inappropriate comments? Or is this just one more exaggerated reaction from our hyper-PC culture in which almost everything is construed to be sexist or racist?
Remember that one campus listed complimentary comments to women such as, “I love your shoes!” as gender microagressions, since it would suggest that females had nothing to offer other than nice attire.
Getting back to my Twitter poll, I asked, “If a woman wears a low-cut top to work, is it sexual harassment if a man checks her out?”
The four possible responses were: Yes (I’m female); No (I’m female); Yes (I’m male); No (I’m male).
My Twitter followers seem to be about two-thirds male in contrast with my Facebook followers, who are about 55 percent female, especially in the older age groups. So the responses to my poll were in keeping with the demographics, with men representing 68 percent of the responders and women 32 percent.
Interestingly, 81 percent of those responding answered with No. And check this out: The percentage of women answering No was virtually identical to that of men who answered No. How striking! To be exact, of the 32 percent of women responding, 6 percent answered Yes, and 26 percent No; of the 68 percent of men responding, 13 percent answered Yes, and 55 percent No.
So, not only did the vast majority of my respondents believe that this was not sexual harassment, but the women and men agreed.
One woman tweeted back to me: “That’s why women wear revealing stuff, whether they admit or not … so men will look at them.”
Another woman tweeted: Totally agree. Females who say otherwise are dishonest. A person w/positive self-concept won’t dress immodestly to get attention. Conversely, a female doesn’t accidentally put a top on so her action hangs out. … It’s on PURPOSE! I see it on campus. Shorts so one literally sees the you know what. I find it repulsive not to mention unsanitary. Totally unnecessary!”
Yet another woman added: “Women should respect themselves more if they want to be respected!!!”
And another: “Touching is obviously a no no. But why not dress modestly at work? I don’t mean up to the chin, but not so low. Or tight. Show respect.”
And one more: “If a woman displays herself are men expected to NOT look?”
(Remember: These were all women expressing these views.)
One man did feel that to check the woman out was harassment. But, he added, “do women have a responsibility of addressing themselves properly? Men are visual. Let’s be real.”
Not all, however, agreed.
One woman wrote: “Next step: ‘Please wear a burka because it’s your responsibility if I find you attractive and can’t rule myself.'”
Interestingly, when I clicked on the bio of this tweeter, her description was short and to the point: “Liberal and atheist.” Perhaps her response is not so surprising.
From the totally opposite perspective, one man asked: “I’d also like to know how many men feel uncomfortable when a woman wears a ‘low-cut top’ to work? Isn’t that sexual harassment?”
Who wants to open that can of worms?
All this being said, I trust we agree that: 1) making a woman feel uncomfortable because of her looks is inappropriate; 2) our airbrushed, super-model culture puts women under extra pressure to present themselves a certain way; 3) and men can sometimes act like male animals chasing a female dog in heat.
But is it sexual harassment if a man compliments a female coworker’s attire in non-lewd terms? Or is it sexual harassment if a man’s eyes are drawn to a female coworker’s highly accentuated areas? I think not.
What do you think?
I asked my Twitter followers this question, and the responses were somewhat surprising. But before I share what they had to say, let me start with the appropriate caveats.
I'm not denying the reality of sexual harassment in the workplace.
I’m not denying that some men feel they have the right to treat women as sexual objects.
I’m not denying that many women feel constant pressure to dress sensually.
I’m not denying that some judges have outrageously implied that rape victims got what they deserved because of their scanty attire.
I’m not questioning or minimizing or excusing any of this. Not a chance.
What I’m questioning is whether it’s sexual harassment if a woman wears suggestive attire and a man checks her out. Is she getting the desired results – namely, male attention – or is this a form of sexual harassment?
Again, I’m not justifying the man’s behavior or the woman’s attire. As a follower of Jesus, I do my best to look away from temptation, not toward it. And my wife and I taught our daughters never to dress in such a way as to appeal to male lusts.
But if a woman comes to work in a very tight, very short mini-skirt and some male coworker checks out her legs, is he guilty of sexual harassment? Or, more generally, if he says to her, “That’s a nice outfit!” has he sexually harassed her?
Perquita Burgess, one of O’Reilly’s accusers, claimed he “would come by her desk and would leer at her up and down. She felt like he was looking at her cleavage, and it made her feel uncomfortable.”
If true, was this harassment? Perhaps it’s one thing to glance and another thing to leer? Or was she displaying her cleavage for all to see? I’m simply asking questions.
She also claimed that “O’Reilly told her ‘lookin’ good there girl’ one time when she was getting off the elevator.”
What about this behavior? Can a friendly compliment be construed as sexual harassment unless it was part of a larger complex of inappropriate comments? Or is this just one more exaggerated reaction from our hyper-PC culture in which almost everything is construed to be sexist or racist?
Remember that one campus listed complimentary comments to women such as, “I love your shoes!” as gender microagressions, since it would suggest that females had nothing to offer other than nice attire.
Getting back to my Twitter poll, I asked, “If a woman wears a low-cut top to work, is it sexual harassment if a man checks her out?”
The four possible responses were: Yes (I’m female); No (I’m female); Yes (I’m male); No (I’m male).
My Twitter followers seem to be about two-thirds male in contrast with my Facebook followers, who are about 55 percent female, especially in the older age groups. So the responses to my poll were in keeping with the demographics, with men representing 68 percent of the responders and women 32 percent.
Interestingly, 81 percent of those responding answered with No. And check this out: The percentage of women answering No was virtually identical to that of men who answered No. How striking! To be exact, of the 32 percent of women responding, 6 percent answered Yes, and 26 percent No; of the 68 percent of men responding, 13 percent answered Yes, and 55 percent No.
So, not only did the vast majority of my respondents believe that this was not sexual harassment, but the women and men agreed.
One woman tweeted back to me: “That’s why women wear revealing stuff, whether they admit or not … so men will look at them.”
Another woman tweeted: Totally agree. Females who say otherwise are dishonest. A person w/positive self-concept won’t dress immodestly to get attention. Conversely, a female doesn’t accidentally put a top on so her action hangs out. … It’s on PURPOSE! I see it on campus. Shorts so one literally sees the you know what. I find it repulsive not to mention unsanitary. Totally unnecessary!”
Yet another woman added: “Women should respect themselves more if they want to be respected!!!”
And another: “Touching is obviously a no no. But why not dress modestly at work? I don’t mean up to the chin, but not so low. Or tight. Show respect.”
And one more: “If a woman displays herself are men expected to NOT look?”
(Remember: These were all women expressing these views.)
One man did feel that to check the woman out was harassment. But, he added, “do women have a responsibility of addressing themselves properly? Men are visual. Let’s be real.”
Not all, however, agreed.
One woman wrote: “Next step: ‘Please wear a burka because it’s your responsibility if I find you attractive and can’t rule myself.'”
Interestingly, when I clicked on the bio of this tweeter, her description was short and to the point: “Liberal and atheist.” Perhaps her response is not so surprising.
From the totally opposite perspective, one man asked: “I’d also like to know how many men feel uncomfortable when a woman wears a ‘low-cut top’ to work? Isn’t that sexual harassment?”
Who wants to open that can of worms?
All this being said, I trust we agree that: 1) making a woman feel uncomfortable because of her looks is inappropriate; 2) our airbrushed, super-model culture puts women under extra pressure to present themselves a certain way; 3) and men can sometimes act like male animals chasing a female dog in heat.
But is it sexual harassment if a man compliments a female coworker’s attire in non-lewd terms? Or is it sexual harassment if a man’s eyes are drawn to a female coworker’s highly accentuated areas? I think not.
What do you think?
Comments