Subject: Mail digest
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 23:55:01 +0200 (METDST)
----------------Message-boundary
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Mandy & SJ
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 17:47:28 EDT
In a message dated 8/28/99 12:04:46 PM Pacific Daylight Time,=20
[email protected] writes:
<< On the other hand even if he did make an off color remark that is NOT=20
sexual harassment and the whole thing was a circus and a joke. All because=20
the man was pro life. To me that is pretty sad. >>
Yes, it was a circus.
Yes, it was a joke.
IMHO, however, for different reasons.
What is truly sad is that so many people still don't understand what=20
constitutes "harassment" under the law (basically, and to put it into an=20
easily understandable form, it's anything that results in a hostile work=20
environment). And according to *that* definition, based on testimony we=20
actually heard and saw and based on anectodal evidence from other women who,=20
for whatever reason, didn't come forward with their own similar tales, Thoma=
s=20
was guilty of harassment. And it had *nothing* to do with his pro-life or=20
pro-choice stance.
****************************
The following is an excerpt from website located at:
http://www.feminist.org/911/harasswhatdo.html
Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination when it would not have=20
occurred but for the person=92s gender. It is covered under Title VII of the=20
1964 Civil Rights Act . Some of the most recognized forms of sexual=20
harassment are:
1. Direct sexual advances or propositions, including higher-ranked=20
employees asking for sexual favors.
2. Intimidating or excluding women employees to jeopardize their=20
employment status.
3. Creating a hostile workplace for women by using sexist jokes,=20
remarks, or pinning up sexually explicit or pornographic photos.
Sexual harassment is not mutual and is unwelcome. It is rude, demeaning=20
behavior and is usually about the abuse of power. In fact, sexual harassment=20
psychologically hurts the women involved and the work atmosphere. There may=20
be serious economic consequences as a result of sexual harassment. A woman=
=92s=20
job status may be jeopardized and and she may lose wages if she is fired or=20
takes extended leave to avoid the harasser. Offensive and demeaning behavior=20
does not have to be tangibly detrimental (ex. wage loss, passed promotion) t=
o=20
the job to be considered sexual harassment.=20
*******************
And the absolute saddest thing of all is that racism still colors everything=
.=20
Had Thomas been a white man, his nomination would've been pulled faster than=20
anyone can blank. But since he was a black conservative male, his nomination=20
was virtually guaranteed, regardless of what lengths TPTB decided were=20
necessary.
Bev
----------------Message-boundary
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Mandy & SJ
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 17:53:15 EDT
In a message dated 8/28/99 2:24:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:
<< OK now just explain to me EVEN if it were true, how saying off color
remarks makes him a "predator"? >>
People who continue to behave in an unacceptable manner after they've been
asked not to do so *are* predators -- predators on our minds, our emotions
and our security.
>> Did he ever make advances toward her NO did he ever threaten her NO did
he ever seek her out? NO. <<
Do we, in fact, *know* this? Professor Hill wasn't permitted to testify
directly on these points; in fact, a majority of her testimony was held up to
ridicule right there in the Senate.
>> She on the other hand followed him, called him kept in contact with HIM.
If anyone was the predator it was her, media, money and my theory is that she
did it all in the name of pro choice. Just my * intuition * nothing more. No
proof like we have said before. Just that she was odd and things didn't add
up on her end of the stick. She also reminded me very much of someone I knew
first hand that got up and lied under oath, a very bright woman, in law, same
kinda facial expressions and look of education as well. Its not out of the
question. <<
I can't even form a proper response to this. Perhaps we should all bone up on
our reading and refresh our memories as to what can happen to a woman who has
been the target of repeated harassment.
And that's the end of my rant on the topic (indeed, I wouldn't have replied
to this at all had it not been for the fact that I felt personally attacked).
Let's get back to discussing MP. Anybody wants to take this on in private
e-mail, that's fine. But I'm not gonna bring it up again on the MP list.
Bev
----------------Message-boundary
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Mandy & SJ
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 17:40:06 EDT
In a message dated 8/28/99 9:30:50 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:
<< It seems almost *funny* (not in the comical sense) that an inappropriate
joke could get the liberals so ignited but oral sex in the Oval Office and
phone sex at night was *private* and nobody's business. >>
I guess the difference is that the joke was unsolicited and unappreciated,
whereas the "other" was mutual.
----------------Message-boundary
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: CH articles
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 17:27:22 -0700
> > Didnt we hear she
> > >was to play Phillip's love interest? Looks like she paid off the script
> > >writers to me! Laurie
> >
> > That was what was reported a couple of years ago in the press--when Geiger
> > was not on the show.
> >
> >It may have been reported in the press then, but I read it on someone's post to the list this spring or summer regarding this upcoming season- Laurie
----------------Message-boundary
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: CH Articles
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 17:21:26 -0700 (PDT)
Alicia was not abandoned. She was given up for adoption by a mother who
knew that the man adopting her would provide a loving and secure home
with all the advantages that would ensure that her child was happy and
nurtured. That is an act of love and courage, not abandonment. I
definately agree with everything else you said.
Renee- getting off my soapbox now
--- [email protected] wrote:
> Laurie, thanks for posting these two articles.
>
> I love how the whole supposed point of bringing
> Geiger back is to return the
> focus of Hope to the hospital and away from personal
> concerns and then we get
> the preinfo:
>
>
> < a pediatrician-neurosurgeon who will save Dr.
> Geiger's adopted daughter
> Alicia from a brain tumor. >>
>
> Hum, sounds personal to me. I'm not complaining
> mind you. Ok, maybe I am.
> I mean, how much does this little girl have to go
> through? She's six. Had
> major heart surgery. Abandoned by mother. Adopted
> father blown to bits by
> bad guys. Now a brain tumor. How about just a few
> scenes of her and Jeffrey
> playing with trains or rolling around in the park or
> something ... maybe a
> nice scene at the beach in swim suits...?
>
> < surgeon
> (played by Barbara Hershey) joins the hospital
> staff.>>
>
> Hum, again sounds personal. Definitely works for me
> ;) Are we all writing
> the love scenes in our minds at this moment?
>
> Wendy
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
----------------Message-boundary
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Mandy & SJ
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 17:31:27 -0700 (PDT)
I read your other posts and I certainly didn't mean to attack anyone.
But I am curious why there has been silence from the liberals on the
women who have come forward to charge Clinton with various harrassments
including rape. Some of them have been very credible, and yet there is
virtual silence from the very people who were so vocal during the AH/CT
debacle. And yes CT should have been withdrawen, on that we can agree.
Renee- just trying to clarify what I meant
--- [email protected] wrote:
> In a message dated 8/28/99 9:30:50 AM Pacific
> Daylight Time,
> [email protected] writes:
>
> << It seems almost *funny* (not in the comical
> sense) that an inappropriate
> joke could get the liberals so ignited but oral sex
> in the Oval Office and
> phone sex at night was *private* and nobody's
> business. >>
>
> I guess the difference is that the joke was
> unsolicited and unappreciated,
> whereas the "other" was mutual.
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
----------------Message-boundary
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: CH Articles
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 20:34:32 EDT
In a message dated 99-08-31 20:21:18 EDT, [email protected] writes:
> Alicia was not abandoned. She was given up for adoption by a mother who
> knew that the man adopting her would provide a loving and secure home
> with all the advantages that would ensure that her child was happy and
> nurtured. That is an act of love and courage, not abandonment.
That's a soapbox I'll join you on any day of the week! Far too many people
view adoption as abandonment, when in many (even most) instances it is a
rational act of supreme love for the child.
Carol P.
----------------Message-boundary
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Strange Justice thoughts
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 20:53:08 EDT
In a message dated 99-08-30 21:05:04 EDT, [email protected] writes:
> In a message dated 8/30/99 4:01:11 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> [email protected] writes:
>
>
> >> Last, but not least, where can I sign up for one of those foot massages
> like he gave his wife in the film? ;) >>
>
> *DOUBLEPERK*
>
> Foot massage?
>
> ::::::THUD::::::
>
> Bev <---- who believes a good foot massage is really *foreplay*
>
>
Glad to see that I'm not the only one here who should have married a foot
fetishist! (assuming of course that he would go into normal follow up
mode...if not...then I guess I'd just need a spare...oh, heck...anybody know
a foot fetishist who is ONLY interested in massaging feet? I'm sure I could
get my husband to agree to that sort of an arrangement!)
Carol P.
----------------Message-boundary
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: CH Articles
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 21:06:19 -0400
The storyline on Alicia and the brain tumor sure sounds like November sweeps
to me and provides Geiger with a good excuse to be absent for several weeks
thereafter taking care of his recuperating daughter. Although I like
Barbara Hershey I would love to have seen Jeri Infante back (even though I
know that Diane Venora has a flourishing film career going). Oh well. Mary
----- Original Message -----
From: Renee Jorgensen
To:
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 1999 8:21 PM
Subject: Re: CH Articles
>
> Alicia was not abandoned. She was given up for adoption by a mother who
> knew that the man adopting her would provide a loving and secure home
> with all the advantages that would ensure that her child was happy and
> nurtured. That is an act of love and courage, not abandonment. I
> definately agree with everything else you said.
> Renee- getting off my soapbox now
> --- [email protected] wrote:
> > Laurie, thanks for posting these two articles.
> >
> > I love how the whole supposed point of bringing
> > Geiger back is to return the
> > focus of Hope to the hospital and away from personal
> > concerns and then we get
> > the preinfo:
> >
> >
> > < > a pediatrician-neurosurgeon who will save Dr.
> > Geiger's adopted daughter
> > Alicia from a brain tumor. >>
> >
> > Hum, sounds personal to me. I'm not complaining
> > mind you. Ok, maybe I am.
> > I mean, how much does this little girl have to go
> > through? She's six. Had
> > major heart surgery. Abandoned by mother. Adopted
> > father blown to bits by
> > bad guys. Now a brain tumor. How about just a few
> > scenes of her and Jeffrey
> > playing with trains or rolling around in the park or
> > something ... maybe a
> > nice scene at the beach in swim suits...?
> >
> > < > surgeon
> > (played by Barbara Hershey) joins the hospital
> > staff.>>
> >
> > Hum, again sounds personal. Definitely works for me
> > ;) Are we all writing
> > the love scenes in our minds at this moment?
> >
> > Wendy
> >
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
>
>
----------------Message-boundary
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: CH Articles
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 18:22:40 -0700 (PDT)
You know Mary, I liked Infante too. They seemed to have good chemistry
but after she testified against him how could he ever trust her again?
Does anyone know how old Barbara Hershey is? I thought she was in her
50's and that she would be better for Phillip than Geiger. I expect a
little start/stop with the relationship but I hope that the writers
don't make him *lose it* like last time. That episode just broke my
heart. :o(
Renee
--- haroldf wrote:
> The storyline on Alicia and the brain tumor sure
> sounds like November sweeps
> to me and provides Geiger with a good excuse to be
> absent for several weeks
> thereafter taking care of his recuperating daughter.
> Although I like
> Barbara Hershey I would love to have seen Jeri
> Infante back (even though I
> know that Diane Venora has a flourishing film career
> going). Oh well. Mary
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Renee Jorgensen
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 1999 8:21 PM
> Subject: Re: CH Articles
>
>
> >
> > Alicia was not abandoned. She was given up for
> adoption by a mother who
> > knew that the man adopting her would provide a
> loving and secure home
> > with all the advantages that would ensure that her
> child was happy and
> > nurtured. That is an act of love and courage, not
> abandonment. I
> > definately agree with everything else you said.
> > Renee- getting off my soapbox now
> > --- [email protected] wrote:
> > > Laurie, thanks for posting these two articles.
> > >
> > > I love how the whole supposed point of bringing
> > > Geiger back is to return the
> > > focus of Hope to the hospital and away from
> personal
> > > concerns and then we get
> > > the preinfo:
> > >
> > >
> > > < > > a pediatrician-neurosurgeon who will save Dr.
> > > Geiger's adopted daughter
> > > Alicia from a brain tumor. >>
> > >
> > > Hum, sounds personal to me. I'm not complaining
> > > mind you. Ok, maybe I am.
> > > I mean, how much does this little girl have to
> go
> > > through? She's six. Had
> > > major heart surgery. Abandoned by mother.
> Adopted
> > > father blown to bits by
> > > bad guys. Now a brain tumor. How about just a
> few
> > > scenes of her and Jeffrey
> > > playing with trains or rolling around in the
> park or
> > > something ... maybe a
> > > nice scene at the beach in swim suits...?
> > >
> > > < thoracic
> > > surgeon
> > > (played by Barbara Hershey) joins the hospital
> > > staff.>>
> > >
> > > Hum, again sounds personal. Definitely works
> for me
> > > ;) Are we all writing
> > > the love scenes in our minds at this moment?
> > >
> > > Wendy
> > >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
> >
> >
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
----------------Message-boundary
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Mandy on Hope Set
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 22:20:12 EDT
Per eyewitness account, Mandy was on the Hope set today. My source reported
him sweating away on an exercycle while singing his lines to himself. Rocky
Carroll was filming a scene at the time.
The person who saw him went over and introducted herself because her daughter
is a friend of one of his relatives. She said that he was very gracious.
:-> Wendy
----------------Message-boundary
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Strange Justice thoughts
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 22:57:18 EDT
In a message dated 8/31/99 5:55:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:
<< .anybody know
a foot fetishist who is ONLY interested in massaging feet? >>
there was a character on Sex and The City last week.....
----------------Message-boundary
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Mandy & SJ
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 04:08:12 EDT
In a message dated 8/31/1999 5:54:45 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:
<< And the absolute saddest thing of all is that racism still colors
everything.
Had Thomas been a white man, his nomination would've been pulled faster than
anyone can blank. But since he was a black conservative male, his nomination
was virtually guaranteed, regardless of what lengths TPTB decided were
necessary.
Bev >>
Well said, Bev!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Barbara
----------------Message-boundary
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: SJ congratulate me!
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 16:37:31 -0400 (EDT)
At 07:36 PM 8/27/99 -0700, you wrote:
>>Congratulate me, everybody, on my cleverness. I have no cable access. But
>>we're driving to North Carolina tomorrow, and on Sunday, when SJ airs, I
>>should be in a house with cable! Isn't serendipity wonderful?
>>
>>Brenda
>>
>>Brenda W. Clough, author of HOW LIKE A GOD from Tor Books.
>>http://www.sff.net/people/Brenda
>
>But you do realize this means you'll miss Cher's special :> Carol
>
>
>
Argh, it did not go well. We were at the beach in North Carolina, and
Hurricaine Dennis came through and not only rained out all beach activity,
but trashed the entire island's cable TV network as well. Nobody got no
HBO. I am sooo bummed.
Brenda
Brenda W. Clough, author of HOW LIKE A GOD from Tor Books.
http://www.sff.net/people/Brenda
----------------Message-boundary
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: OFF: More on Clarence (was Re: Mandy & SJ)
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 17:33:45 EDT
In a message dated 8/31/99 5:31:18 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:
<< I read your other posts and I certainly didn't mean to attack anyone. >>
Oh, you didn't attack anyone, Renee! If I implied that it was you, my bad.
>> But I am curious why there has been silence from the liberals on the women
who have come forward to charge Clinton with various harrassments including
rape. Some of them have been very credible, and yet there is virtual silence
from the very people who were so vocal during the AH/CT debacle. <<
I think of myself as a social liberal and fiscal conservative, and while I
don't actually claim to belong to *a* party, I've never voted Republican in a
national election.
Having said that, and as one who voted for Clinton twice (the last time with
somewhat mixed feelings), the only difference I can see is that Clinton was
already in office before the majority of those allegations came to light
(excepting, of course, Ms. Flowers' claims, the validity of which I still
haven't decided). Thomas was at that time being nominated for Supreme Court
Justice -- which, to my mind, is an even more powerful position than
President (lifelong appointment; decisions are based on whatever criteria
suits your purpose without having to explain or excuse it).
And yes, some of the Clinton Women have been credible, at least as credible
as Professor Hill was.
I was full of hope and joy when Clinton was elected, thinking that finally
we'd chosen someone who could truly be an instrument for change, for making
our country better. I have been bitterly disappointed by his personal
behavior, even while the good ol' US of A continues to roll along in an
economic frenzy. So there's that -- I'm sure many other so-called "liberal"
women feel the same way; betrayed. And it's hard to speak out when you've
been betrayed. There are the "I told you so's" to deal with; and the sheer
embarrassment of having been taken in.
None of Clinton's behavior constituted an impeachable offense, IMHO. But had
I known all this before his first Presidential election, I seriously doubt if
I would've voted for him.
But we did know about Thomas.
>> And yes CT should have been withdrawen, on that we can agree. <<
Yes, we do ;-)
>> Renee- just trying to clarify what I meant >>
No problem, Renee. I understood!
----------------Message-boundary
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: CH Articles
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 17:49:43 EDT
In a message dated 8/31/99 6:23:43 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:
<< Does anyone know how old Barbara Hershey is? I thought she was in her
50's and that she would be better for Phillip than Geiger. >>
According to the IMDB, she was born in February of 1948, so she's going on
52. That's only a 4-year age difference between her and MP. Nobody better say
a word about it, either, cuz I'm 6 years older than my hubby ;->
----------------Message-boundary--
-- End --