Re: Torchwood--So do they not have ***ual harrassment laws across

Anim8rFSK wrote:

> In article <Oo7Pj.7436$aq4.6807@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>  peachy a****e passion <exquisitepeach@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> 
> 
>>Ken from Chicago wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"peachy a****e passion" <exquisitepeach@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>>>news:SzROj.1752$nb4.1577@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>>
>>>>Ken from Chicago wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"peachy a****e passion" <exquisitepeach@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>>>>>news:NZPOj.1532$Ks1.279@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Ken from Chicago wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"peachy a****e passion" <exquisitepeach@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
message 
>>>>>>>news:pqJOj.1687$nb4.934@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Ken from Chicago wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>The current status of ***ual harrassment in the US is largely a
result 
>>>>>>>>>of the fallout of the Clarence Thomas / Anita Hill affair nearly
2 
>>>>>>>>>decades ago (when the fiscal liberals split from the social
liberals 
>>>>>>>>>in long-running censor****p vs free speech debate and ceded the
free 
>>>>>>>>>speech argument and opted for their own censor****p based on what
has 
>>>>>>>>>become known as "political correctness", as opposed to the social

>>>>>>>>>conservatives' "moral correctness"), resulting changes in public
mores 
>>>>>>>>>and laws in school, the government and at work.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Is there no similar event to trigger a similar stance in the
public or 
>>>>>>>>>the laws in the UK? Cuz they are ... ahem ... rather ... 
>>>>>>>>>"touchy-feely" ... at the Torchwood Institute in Cardiff. And
their 
>>>>>>>>>personal feelings have endangered the team, their mission and the

>>>>>>>>>Earth, countless number of times in the past 2 seasons--and
there's 
>>>>>>>>>just a handful of them. Imagine what a fully-staffed TI London
was 
>>>>>>>>>like.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I've thought about this for days and days, and frankly I don't
know 
>>>>>>>>what situation in Torchwood would be at issue in the US either.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Where do you see any ***ual harassment happening?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Personal (romantic) feelings are affecting professional
performance.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do not know what part of that is ***ual harrassment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It is sort of an inevitable part of being human, though.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>That's the entire POINT of ***ual harrassment laws: To STOP having
your 
>>>>>job be affected because someone else is in love or lust with you--or
with 
>>>>>someone else--so that the job and your career should be affected only
by 
>>>>>merit.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To win that lawsuit you'd have to prove that the ***ual component 
>>>>changed behavior in a way beyond that of ordinary friend****p.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think you can do that with Torchwood.
>>>
>>>
>>>Hello, Ianto stored his cybergirlfriend in the basement that threatened
the 
>>>team, the city, possibly the world.
>>
>>
>>    Perhaps, but I don't think she wants to sue him for harrassment.
>>
>>  Certainly there was misconduct, but there is no harrassment.
>>
>>
>>>Tosh was dating a cryofrozen WWI soldier and nearly blew the mission to

>>>send 
>>>him back in time to restitch the spacetime continuum.
>>
>>   Only Tosh dating the frozen soldier allowed her to complete the 
>>mission, so your entire premise is bogus.  However, even if your 
>>statement were true, two consensual adults engaged in a relation****p.
>>
>>  There is no harrassment here.
>>
>>
>>>Plus there overall personal feelings keep precluding them from a)
locking 
>>>up 
>>>alien devices, b) having backup access in case a single team member is 
>>>incapacitated, c) having personal lives so as to vent all this pent up 
>>>emotion OUTSIDE of work.
>>
>>    Again, you might be able to make a case for inappropriate behavior 
>>or misconduct.
>>
>>   There is no ***ual harrassment.
>>
>>
>>>They are a frelling ticking time bomb--sitting on a spacetime rift, pun

>>>intended.
>>
>>
>>    Yes, they are.  There is a lot going on.
>>
>>  None of it is ***ual harrassment.  ***ual harrassment isn't actually 
>>just a catch-all phrase that outlaws a worker from having ***ual or 
>>romantic feelings.  It requires an actual harrassment component.
> 
> 
> The definition of ***ual harrassment is "it's harrassment if the woman 
> claims it is, no matter what happened, even if it occurs to her 
> retroactively"
> 
> That's the only actual harrassment component there is.
> 
> If either of the Torchwood girls decide it was harrassment, it was.
> 


    Oh bull.

   Sorry, but I'm not buying into this revisionist version of how things 
are.

   Terribly sorry that the new laws make some folks uncomfortable, but 
women voting isn't the end of the world, gay marriage doesn't make it 
okay to marry your dog, and laws against actual inappropriate ***ual 
harrassment doesn't mean that anything anyone ever says or does is 
illegal just if a woman decides so on a whim.



-- 
Without discipline, there's no life at all.

~Katherine Hepburn