From: madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann)
Subject: Re: Gays, the military and "privacy"
Organization: Society for Putting Things on Top of Other Things
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 21:05:51 GMT

phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone) writes: >
>phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone) writes: >
>
>>But the point I want to make is the workings of freedom (and capitalism) in
>    >>No charges have been filed, yet Michels has stepped down. As
>    >>SCO wishes to go public, it is not good for an IPO to have
>    >>such shit going on. He was most likely forced out.
>    >>
>    >Wrong again. Charges have been filed with the State EEO
>    >office by two of the five. Civil lawsuits have also been
>    >filed. So what are you talking about?
>
>As I said, no charges have been filed. A complaint is not a charge,
>nor is a lawsuit. When the District Attorney and a Grand Jury indict
>Michels for rape, now THAT's a charge. As in "an indictment charging ...".
>
>Now, care to publicly admit you're wrong?

Since such incidents are RARELY charged as criminal behavior,
it is misleading of you to imply that since no CRIMINAL charges
have been filed, that therefore nothing is going on.  A CIVIL
lawsuit is still damaging to the company, which is why Michels
stepped down.  Michels is not accused of rape, yet you imply a
lack of a rape charge as proof that there is no proof of
wrongdoing.  Very misleading, Phil.  The question you raised
was that "No charges were filed, yet Michels has stepped down."
This implies that he stepped down due to gossip.  The reality
is that the State office will be investigating, and there are
civil lawsuits against him and SCO.  So how does this interefere
with capitalism and FOA?  Would you want to be a shareholder in
a company whose CEO who was a lightening rod for trouble like
this?

>    >>What kind of an explanation is that? And what does it make
>    >>that lawyer?
>    >>
>    >It's called reality. Said woman (don't know if she was a
>    >lawyer or a secretary, since the articles I read only
>    >mentioned secretaries) needed her job, just like she said.
>
>It mentioned her as being a lawyer, and presumably not a stereotyped
>scared entry level clerk.

Stop stereotyping.  All sorts of people put up with all sorts of
shit because they need the job.  Including lawyers.

>What kind of person tolerates sexual conduct that they don't like in
>retrun for money?

A lot of them.  Probably the sort of woman who was taught not
to complain or make waves.  I am not that sort of woman, and if
a man pulled that kind of crap with me, I'd probably gouge his
eyes out and brag about it.  But I know I am more atypical than
the woman who puts up with it.  Women are socialized to not
complain about crap like this.  Just because you wouldn't put
up with it does not mean that they put up with it because they
liked it, or didn't mind it too much.  You are remarkably
unable to understand different viewpoints than you own.

[stories of Phil quitting jobs with immoral goings-on deleted]

Great.  Most people don't have as much courage in their convictions.
This does not make them bad people, nor does it diminish the
immorality of what they put up with.

>If the first women that Michels had bothered had (assume he physically
>touched her), slapped him, kneed him in the groin, and called the police,
>I would rather imagine that about zero further indicdents would have happened.

It's what I would have done, but I assure you, this is not what
most women do in that situation.  I also do not agree it would
have stopped Michels.  Remember, he's the CEO.  It's real 
difficult to get a charge to stick without a witness, and he
was never accused of rape.  It is possible the police would not
investigate a charge of "unwanted touching."  They'd probably
tell her to take it to EEO since that's their jurisdiction.

Right now, another co-worker told me that his wife works for
a place where the CFO goes around snapping bra-straps whenever
he feels like it.  They either put up with it, or they quit.
Since the Valley has a 6.9% unemployment rate, not many quit.
Going to EEO could get a woman blacklisted as a troublemaker.
That's reality.



-- 
Maddi Hausmann                madhaus@netcom.com
Humorist, Satirist, Tech Writer.  Take your pick.

Centigram Communications Corp, San Jose California  408/428-3553