The Wash Rag Issue 6.3 September, 1998 THE PRESIDENT’S PROBLEMS Although I have attempted to avoid this subject because I do not believe that sexual harassment is or ever was a pertinent issue in this case, it seems to be impossible because of the immense amount of coverage, and even more important, the ramifications of the present situation for President Clinton. I personally am not interested in the president’s sex life. I’m not only not interested in his sex life with Monica, but also not with Jennifer or Hillary. It is his business and certainly not mine. Whatever his relations with his wife are is their business, and I’ll not get involved. No matter how hard Kenneth Starr tries, that is just the way it is. My experience is that men in general have very loose morals and will sleep with almost anything that comes along. If an attractive woman comes along and throws herself at him, there is nothing anyone can do to stop it from happening. In that respect, the President is a perfect representative for American men. I am distressed by the implications of what I have heard about Linda Tripp, first of all, encouraging Monica Lewinski to get involved with the president, and second of all, by tape recording conversations with her secretly. To me, this suggests entrapment and a vendetta as well. I am puzzled about Linda Tripp having tape recorded conversations with Monica Lewinski secretly, which I thought was illegal, and them then being used in a legal action. I am troubled by Ken Starr starting out to investigate Whitewater, then changing to the White House Travel Office, and ending up with allegations of sexual harassment which were never proven because they were not true, and the evidence turned up in those investigations turning into accusations of perjury. It seems to me that it was the path of a snake bent on finding something, anything, with which the president could be ousted from office. Because the president has been such a formidable and effective defender of women’s rights, I feel that he was targeted by those trying to keep women from moving into areas that have been denied them in the past. As far as I am concerned, the President’s worst crime has been that he is obviously attracted to bimbos. Whatever his sexual habits are is no business of mine or Kenneth Starr’s, either. I think that the President’s high approval ratings probably reflect the public’s dislike for government’s intrusions into the individual’s private lives. Apparently Kenneth Starr has not delved into the mysterious area of sexual arousal and gratification, and perhaps he should attend some lectures by Dr. Ruth or some of her colleagues. I don’t particularly like some of his habits, but I don’t think they are all that perverse. The president did nothing illegal. He did not have sex with a child, he did not rape anyone, he did not sexually harass anyone. He had an adulterous affair with a consenting adult. In our society, that is about as unusual as having soup for lunch. I will start to take this matter seriously when Oliver North and President Reagan are punished for selling drugs to children to finance a clandestine war against a legally elected foreign government, and not one minute before. I don’t doubt North was pardoned because he saved Reagan’s ass. By comparison, Clinton’s sins are insignificant. He’s just not as capable of a liar. WASH INITIATES THE ANITA AWARD On the recommendation of WASH’s Colorado Representative, Mary Henderson, we have given an Anita Award to the Debourgh Manufacturing Company of La Junta, Colorado, for the excellence of their training in and administration of sexual harassment policies. It is easy to emphasize the negative aspects of sexual harassment, and to forget that many companies have a zero tolerance of sexual harassment. We would like to say that most do, but in our experience, that is not true. If you know of a company that has exceptionally good policies with regard to sexual harassment, let us know about them and how they handled the problem. We would be happy to give awards to other companies with sound practices in this area. In this case, when charges were made, they took immediate action and held informational meetings to inform all of the employees what company policies were and how complaints were handled. It is gratifying to know that some companies take the issue seriously and act promptly to protect the women working for them. NEW BOOK ADDRESSES THEORETICAL, PHILOSOPHICAL AND CATEGORICAL UNDERPINNINGS OF THE EVOLUTION OF SEXUALITY THROUGH HISTORY. New Sexual Agendas, Lynne Segal, editor New York University Press 256 pages, $17.95 ISBN 0-8147-8075-X This book attempts to draw together diverse treatments on a single, not simple, subject: sexuality. In trying to capture the likely high energy of the conference at which it was first conceptualized, the book substitutes scholarly documentation for fiery interchange and the careful reiteration of ideas for the Eureka! excitement of creating something new, albeit tenuous, in the moment of discussion and debate. Much of the argument was not new to a serious but unthorough reader of sex-focused literature, and with the lack of such pursuits as queer-versus-gay, lesbigay, transgendered, and other subjects which are cutting-edge, one might be let down. But in the preface the reader might identify the cause of the disappointment in the phrase “normative heterosexual beliefs and practices.” One need neither look nor say any more. Laura Post The past months have reminded me of what I already knew 30 years ago: In order to get a man to be honest with his wife, it takes two years, 14 million dollars, and an independent prosecutor. EMPLOYEE LOYALTY ON THE WANE On June 15, the PBS morning news carried a story about employers being concerned because employee loyalty is on the wane. To me, this statement is nothing short of amazing. I never felt my employers were even slightly concerned about my loyalty. Why else would they promote complete idiots just because they had balls, and women they were sleeping with who had no job skills, over me? Why else would they intentionally expose me to toxic fumes? That most people interviewed would change jobs for a 10% pay raise goes without saying. That was the only way I could increase my salary, and exactly why I changed jobs as often as I did. None of my employers deserved or got any loyalty from me. AND IN THE MEDIA . . . On March 24, 1998, Public Eye had a sequence about nurses in Vietnam being raped. Connie Conley, whose father was Chief of Naval Operations, a very high position in the Navy, says she was raped by one of her father’s pilots while serving on the Mekong Delta. Agnes Falk says that she was ordered to go to parties and was raped by a man who came to her barracks. The military says that 15% to 20% of the nurses who served in Vietnam were raped, but the nurses say the number is closer to 50%. They say that they were ordered to go to parties, where they were raped by officers at the parties. They didn’t tell because they were ashamed. Most women who were nurses in Vietnam have left nursing. A June 26th 20/20 brought up an interesting fact, that some men are filing sexual harassment suits, and not against women, but against other men, for sexually explicit touching. A sociologist discussing the situations with 20/20 showed film of a grown male monkey mounting a young male monkey to “show superiority.” And we women are to see sex in some other respect? Feminists have said that what is good for women is good for men as well, but I don’t think that they expected this. I am pleased to see that some men are offended by what is perceived to be masculine behavior. To have behavior as was described on this segment compared to the behavior of monkeys puts sexual harassers right in the place where they should be, along with others of their ilk. The NBC News on July 6 carried a story about Maria Carpino who said that David Hale, a two star general, had improper relationships with wives of subordinates when they were stationed in Turkey. An investigation found that there is a double standard for higher ranking officers. Hale was allowed to retire in the midst of the investigation. Dateline NBC on July 28, 1998 carried a story about the problems of Angela Tofoyu, who had worked in the office of Sheriff Jeff Horvo of Moffat County Colorado between 1987 and 1996. Angela was small in stature, and was the breadwinner for her family. She was touched intimately, put on a file cabinet if they were annoyed with her, she was called a bitch, a whore, and one officer told her to “eat this” while pointing to his crotch. They shot rubber bands at her crotch when she was being held spread eagle. The sheriff asked her about oral sex. He says it was all just horseplay and that she participated. Her attorney says that the activities were so outrageous that no reasonable employer would have allowed it. Since the sheriff is running for office again, there is a lot of opposition. Two other former female employees have settled sexual harassment suits against the sheriff. COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS CONTINUES TO BE TARGET OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT CHARGES Mary Henderson continues to keep us up to date on the charges against her former employer, the Colorado Department of Corrections. In the latest item from the Pueblo Chiefton dated August 27th of this year, the claims of a former DOC employee that she was harassed by fellow employees and retaliated against when she filed a grievance are discussed. Kathy Adams worked in Canon City, which was also mentioned in previous issues of The Wash Rag. She had to work with the same people against whom she had filed grievances, and when she applied for other positions to escape the treatment, she was passed over and less qualified employees got the jobs. Mary also relates that Joe Paulino, against whom she had filed a grievance, had put out a contract on a female employee in 1995. Mary advised the director of DOC of this by certified letter so that if anything happened to the lady, they couldn’t deny knowledge. Louella Watkins, a 20 year veteran of DOC had also filed a complaint against him. Sexual harassers are always repeat offenders. They are sexual predators. It isn’t about sex, it is about power. Mary Henderson THE LIMITS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT: SOME SEEM TOO TRIVIAL I am concerned that some sexual harassment suits seem to be less than outrageous matters. Dateline NBC on June 21 discussed a situation at Burlington Industries where a woman named Elizabeth claims that her supervisor sexually harassed her but she said no. After fifteen months, she was promoted and never filed a sexual harassment complaint before she quit. She never did have sex with him. In another case, which was on the news on June 26th, concerned a situation in which a woman was constantly being threatened although the harasser never carried the threats out. I am somewhat concerned that in some situations, judges are leaning over backwards to accommodate women who have complaints. Certainly, situations like this are disturbing, but nobody ever said working was a bed or roses. I fear that if judges become too lenient, that there will be a backlash against women filing sexual harassment suits. I think that if women with complaints were to stick to the really outrageous treatment that they receive, the consequences would be more permanent. The problem seems to be that there is a lot of discussion as to what sexual harassment is. I think that it would be interesting to hear what various people think harassment is. Send us your definition, and we’ll share it in upcoming issues of The Wash Rag. As Harvard’s Karen L. King has noted, in some early Christian documents, such as the so-called Gospel of Mary, a struggle over women’s leadership and right to prophesy finds expression in accounts of struggle between Mary Magdalene and the apostle Peter. Then as now, King observes, besmirching a woman’s virtue was an effective way of eroding her legitimacy. ( US News & World Repot August, 9) Could it be that because of his support of women’s issues, President Clinton is being exposed to exactly the same treatment as many women experience when they refuse to give in to a sexual harasser? Helen Forelle Women Against Sexual Harassment is looking for representatives to work in different areas of the country. WASH REPRESENTATIVES Colorado Mary Henderson 906 East 10th La Junta, CO South Dakota Janet Leih P. O. Box 164 Canton, SD 57013-0164 Texas Sandra Cook RR #1 Box 1373 Athens, TX 75751 Washington Anne Grimm-Richardson 434 6th Street #206 Raymond, WA 98577-1804 If you have experienced harassment and are interested, contact us for more information. Our mailing address is Women Against Sexual Harassment, P. O. Box 164, Canton, SD 57013-0164. Tesseract Publications P. O. Box 164 Canton, SD 57013 Phone: (605) 987-5070 Fax: (605) 987-5070 Email: ta_shi(bleep)dtgnet.com ©1998 Tesseract Publications Send us your e-mail address for a free subscription. Snail mail subscription $10.00 WE’RE ON THE WEB http://members.tripod.com/~WASHRAG