Quote: Stylee TingTing @ October 14 2012, 1:03 AM BSTSo.. if anything good can come from this whole Savile/BBC/male sex pest débâcle, it is that, in the future, women may feel more empowered to come forward and make a stand against this horrendous treatment to which they are habitually subjected. I, for one, really hope that this will be the case.
Habitually subjected? I'm all for sweeping generalisations but suggesting that all women are habitually subjected to horrendous treatment from all men all the time is a stinking lie.
It also raises the point of what 'horrendous treatment' constitutes - someone groping your boobies when you are trying to do your job is pretty clear cut as a big no-no. But what happens when an attractive young woman wears a short skirt to work and a male colleagues says 'Nice legs'? To some people, that is beyond the pale, to others it's a compliment.
The workplace is a sexually charged environment - apparently 40% of workers have dated a co-worker - and I've lost count of the number of boss / secretary affairs I've witnessed. (Often through night vision binoculars)
I don't think the Jimmy Savile enquiry will empower women to come forward, partly because we live in very scary economic times where jobs are extremely thin on the ground and partly because women can sometimes be complicit in their own treatment.
The Entertainment Industry and even the BBC itself is rife with women who've used their sexuality to get ahead. Whether it's Katie Price shagging a succession of footballers or a Researcher at the Beeb throwing herself at a Producer, it's all much of a muchness.
I'm not denying that there are cases of horrendous treatment, but I'm also not painting every woman as an innocent Victorian virgin either.
You couldn't write it.
