Navy Sexual Harrasment
Q: I read an article that mentioned that the reason that it was not
possible to charge President Clinton with Sexual harrassment as there
was no direct threat of ramifications to her job.
I seem to recall a couple of years ago the Navy tailhook scandal were
it was charged that a large group of naval aviators were charged with
sexual harrasment for improper conduct to other aviators and a few
cocktail waitresses. Surely these pilots did not control the jobs of
the other avaitors, or the cocktail waitresses.
Surely this is a double standard, stating clearly that you will not be
charged with sexual harrasment unless it suits the judge. Clearly a
bad legal decision, as well as bad legislation.
A: you really should familiarize yourself with the facts before you embarrass yourself with public comments on affairs about which you clearly know nothing. In the "Tailhook" incident, a bunch of drunk navy guys forced a number of women to run a gauntlet down a hotel corridor lined with men who groped, felt, and generally assaulted them. I don't know if any of the men were charged with "sexual harassment" (I doubt it) but the difference between that incident and the allegations against Bill Clinton are so vast as to make any attempted comparison absurd in the extreme. Amazing how far some people will stretch reality in their desperate effort to try to make a point. . . .