Celebrity Sexual Harassment Charge Sheet

[Brian Peacock]

The former Welsh government minister Carl Sargeant has been found dead days after it emerged that a number of women had made allegations of improper personal conduct against him.

Sargeant was sacked on Friday from his post as Wales’s cabinet secretary for communities and children, after the allegations came to light, which the Welsh first minister later confirmed were in relation to a number of incidents with women.

Sargeant, a married father-of-two, is understood to have killed himself. North Wales police said on Tuesday that the death is not being treated as suspicious...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... t-has-died

[Forty Two]

I googled and clicked on a bunch of articles, but I could not find any details on the allegations.

Allegations of improper conduct - he was referred to the party, which sacked him based on the allegations - now the guy's dead. Everyone seems to have liked the guy, and his family published kind words about him.

So, what was he alleged to have done? Is there sort of a journalistic rule or ethic over there that prohibits the details from being laid out?

[Brian Peacock]

I don't know. He was the party's spokesperson for women and child services.

[Forty Two]

Odd, though, that he was fired for misconduct, but reporters did not report on what the misconduct was.

[Forty Two]

Run, Jesse, Run! https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/J ... 79813.html

[Brian Peacock]

I think he can only manage a waddle these days.

[Hermit]

Whether "women" as a sex face a power imbalance and consider harassment a bigger issue doesn't change the definition of sexual harassment

Actually, it does. Grabbing her by the pussy is more harassing than grabbing him by the dick precisely because while women are formally afforded the same legal rights and freedoms in recent decades, it is men who tend to be bosses. Weinstein is just a more blatantly obvious example of the imbalance.

[pErvinalia]

He doesn't get that concept. I don't get how people can't get that concept.

[Forty Two]

No, Hermit, the harassing nature of any conduct depends on the individual being harassed. It's whether a person consented to or welcomed the conduct. A woman who wants her pussy grabbed and a man who wants his dick grabbed is not being harassed at all. It's an individualized analysis, not a group analysis based on generalizations of who is bothered by what type of conduct as a sex or gender.

A person who does not welcome the pussy or dick grabbing may or may not be harassed by it, under the law. It's definitely "assault and battery" and possibly "sexual assault" under various laws depending on the jurisdiction. But, whether it becomes "harassment" is dependent on whether the conduct of the offender on the whole is severe, pervasive and repeated. A single instance is rarely, if ever, considered sexual harassment under the law.

So, the actual definition of harassment does not differ between men and women. It's only that judges and juries don't accept the fact that a complaining man really did not "welcome" it, and they do not ascribe to it the same level of injury resulting from the inappropriate touching. That's because people are still sexist in favor of women in that regard -- you can't say that TO A WOMAN - you can't do that TO A WOMAN. That's not a difference in the legal definition - because the law is not that - the law is neutral - the application of the law is sexist to some degree.

Now, I'll add the caveat that I do believe that women tend, as a group, to not welcome random touching as much as men as a group, and men tend not to be bothered by, say, a touch on the leg, or a pat on the shoulder. But, that's not the law - the law is, if a man WAS bothered by such things, and if a touch WAS not welcomed by a man, then under the same facts and circumstances as if he were a woman, then he, individually, was sexually harassed.

In other words, sexual harassment is not a function of class membership. Sexual harassment is individualized. What are the facts and circumstances of the particular case - who did what to whom - and did the complaining person consent or welcome the conduct at the time.

Example - a woman in the workplace being told dirty jokes every day may be, but is not necessarily, a victim of sexual harassment. There is no law that says a workplace may not involve the telling of dirty jokes every day. HOWEVER, if the conduct is unwelcome to the person complaining about the conduct, AND the conduct is so severe and pervasive as to effectively change the terms and conditions of employment and create a hostile and offensive work environment as a whole, then the woman was sexually harassed. That's why there is a defense to sexual harassment that an employer has that if they have a policy against sexual harassment and the complaining person does not notify the company of the conduct that bothers them and afford the employer the opportunity to take prompt and appropriate remedial measures, then they don't have a cause of action against the company for the conduct of the offending employee.

[pErvinalia]

The reason why we are less bothered by it is at least in part due to the fact that we are less threatened by it due to our greater size and strength (on average).

[Forty Two]

[pErvinalia]

That guy is a twat, but I really love his pedobear character and his voice and delivery. Is he Australian?

[Forty Two]

Sugartits is a she, and yes, she has a good voice and delivery, and is Australian.

[Brian Peacock]

I call POE.

[Forty Two]

Not Poe. Check out her youtube channel. She's quite good. She's Bearing's wife or girlfriend. That's why they use the same cartoon character, with Sugartits having a little bow to misogynistically designate her self as a female.