"SHAKEN, NOT STIRRED"

Ever since the Paula Corbin Jones charges were made public, the right wing-nuts have been unable to contain their glee as they criticized women's groups.  We were called hypocrites for not supporting P.C.J. like we did Anita Hill.

They also were in full cry over the terrible words and ideas that were going out over the media.  "It is so destructive for children to be hearing about such things," they moaned.  "This is all the President's fault."

Of course, as they lamented, they used those same "terrible words and ideas" themselves -- over and over savoring every salacious bite.

Then came the right decision to deep six the case by Judge Wright and all hell broke loose. They were devastated.

But their ry-chus leaders constructed a new spin.  It was quickly faxed to hate-radio hosts all over the country.  

Bleeding from every orifice, hate-radio now expresses pious concern for women's welfare:

"According to that woman (judge) who has thrown out the case, this means that men can just whip it out and shake it in women's faces -- just as long as they do it only once per woman."

"Those women-libbers brought it onto themselves when they didn't support poor Paula.  Now they, and all the other women, are going to pay for it by having to endure this disgusting behavior!"

"Sexual harassment will rise to massive levels and women will be powerless since condoning this behavior has established a precedent."

Spin on, ry-chus ones.  No matter how much of this stuff you shovel and no matter how high the pile gets, we women are not fooled one bit.  We've been there, seen that.

We've all been harassed or known someone that had.  We learned first hand how the law defines sexual harassment and how it must be proven. We cut our legal teeth on quid pro quo; what it meant and why it had to be proven.

Back when the P.C.J. charges were first made, we were suspicious when her backers consisted of far right Republican money sources.  We're suspicious now of what may happen if her right wing lawyers appeal -- to three Republican judges.

When we read her own description of what took place in that hotel room, we knew from experience that this was not sexual harassment.

After what many women have been through over the years, we seriously doubt that Judge Wright's decision will induce any additional terror in our workplace.

However, it has stimulated more discussion on what constitutes harassment and already, we are getting through to the media (and hopefully to the law makers) that the problem is not so much a sexual thing as a power thing.

We have long protested the obscenity of a hostile workplace.  A place where we were not allowed to show our competence but were continually harassed by juvenile delinquents in men's clothing.

Yes, some of it was and is sexual in nature and we have to cope with that crap constantly. Also, harassment may be fairly low key which is both annoying and tedious, but it does not rise to the legal threshold of sexual harassment, so we live with it or leave.

We are reminded constantly of our "place" and our status -- not equal to, but inferior to men.  Protests on our part are met with cries of, "Paranoid!"

We have mostly endured being mankind, chairman, mailman, selectman, congressman etc., because our requests for gender-neutral language has been largely ridiculed and ignored.

But what a hue and cry arises when the shoe is on the other foot, proving once again that we are not para- noid.  We are considered inferior -- something no man wants to be.

As Dr. Estelle Ramey observed: THE MOST DEVASTATING INSULT FOR A MALE (of any age) IS TO BE CALLED A FEMALE. This is why military drill instructors and coaches call their troups/teams, "girls."  It shames males into making a greater effort.

The following was reported by The Associated Press and picked up by countless newspapers and other media outlets:

Working Woman magazine listed 500 of the largest woman owned companies.  There were two errors in their list because they made assumptions on the basis of the first names of two of those listed -- Lynn Johnson and Gale Burkett -- both male.

Burkett bitterly complained, "I've been called a lot of things, but never chairwoman."

Enraged from so many phone calls and "titters." Johnson declined to discuss the matter with a reporter.

John Hendren, Associated Press, scolded the magazine for embarrassing these two men.

Aw, gee.  Two men were listed as women and they make a federal case out of it.  How many times have the same sort of "errors" been made toward and about women?

And weren't we ALWAYS told, "Don't be so sensitive" or "Get over it?"  

Come on, GIRLS, quitcherbellyaching.  Don't be so sensitive!  Get over it!

TWANDA@ConnRiver.net

1998-016

Copyright 1998 Renee T. Louise and Ruth M. Sprague, Ph.D. These articles may be republished for noncommercial use only, provided that they are copied intact, and that this copyright notice is attached. Address all queries to: TWANDA@ConnRiver.net.

G e n d e r G a p p e r s   ^{T M}