I feel like my comment about resigning positions of power applies ESPECIALLY in this case.
3 Likes
Political beliefs aside he is living, breathing proof you can handle an entire staff, complete with women and not have an issue. No EEOC suits, no lawsuits, zip, zero, nada.
I’d suggest that “Nobody got sued.” is not the best measure of equality.
1 Like
I think it is quite obvious the staff there is not being handled…
Also - I think it is a quite valid question to wonder what part he has played in the presidents sexual assault allegations and cover up.
I think we can take pence as evidence that this stance does NOT work in the workplace.
2 Likes
So you obviously prefer the way female staffers were handled during the Clinton years? Using Pences way you would never have an young female staffer violated by a superior.
Does the VP even have an FTP? 
OK, political side of this is not necessary and is off-topic and will severely derail this thread.
Please refocus.
4 Likes
I’ve actually been thinking more about this. I think in many instances, people like Pence use this billy Graham no women in the room thing intentionally as a tool to discriminate against women and further marginalize them, while being able to maintain the thinnest of covers for their actions.
Also let’s refrain from whataboutism here. The actions of someone 30 years ago have zero bearing on the morality or sexism of someone in office right now.
Edit for above…just noticed this. Fair enough…I’ll drop it.
2 Likes
Except that it’s exceptionally difficult for people to change their ways once it’s baked in. Change requires a tremendous amount of force/energy and most, regardless of what position they hold, are unwilling/incapable of such efforts. There will be no substantial difference between now and thirty years ago. Especially if it’s been only Z1/rest day training.
1 Like
Oh no doubt…past actions are a pretty strong indicator of future behavior.
I was just making the point that holding up the actions of a different person to try and use as a measuring stick of morality is a fallacy.
Something is either moral or is not. The actions of a different person decades previous have no bearing on the morality of a current action.
1 Like
Using what measuring stick? 
Apart from that, does the Velominati say anything about TWOP?
Well ok, now that is a fair question.
But, I think we can conclusively say that the bar to judge people by should NOT be “this one guy 30 years ago.” That’s just silly.
damn. this whole thread is as entertaining, as it is depressing
That is a logical fallacy…“whataboutism” only serves to deflect attention.
In addition, one can be equally critical of the predatory nature of both a previous and current occupant in the WH (and his enablers). It is called Intellectual Consistency.
ETA - just saw chad’s post. I will refrain from further comments. My apologies.