"Youre here because youre eye candy".
Good one Bill. This older looking gentleman, while unassuming in appearance, is constantly making comments, on-air, to his co-host Lis Wiehl regarding her good looks, or the fact she should protest CNN while wearing a bikini.
While most of the young male readers may be thinking, or even saying, "good job old man", or "way to go", their reactions would be a perfect example of being part of the problem. When having this pointed out to them, they might react exactly how Allan Johnson from our book Privilege, Power, and Difference, (Pg 114) predicts: by backtracking from their gut-response, by saying they didn't mean it. Hence they are not responsible for the message
they are conveying, or the social problem they are simply perpetuating.
The other problem brought to the surface in Johnson's book, is that by not thinking or knowing you are part of the problem, and by not doing anything about changing the privilege you are inadvertently taking advantage of, you are only adding to the problem, and cannot claim innocence or action.
I witnessed this problem re-enact itself just yesterday, once again, at my place of employment, and, once again, it involves the same co-worker I have mentioned in previous blogs. The situation played out like this:
T.J. was asked by Nicole, (our un-official assistant manager) to please ask the employees the questions we are required to ask them every week. He had simply not done it the last two weeks, and Julie compromised and said he only had to ask 1/2 as many questions this week, but would he please just get it done. A few days passed, and I took it upon myself (a woman) to remind T.J. he had better ask those questions. When he balked at me for reminding him, I tried to explain that she is our superior, even if it isn't official. This set T.J. off. He started swearing and cursing, muttering that she wasn't his superior, and to hell with her stupid questions.
Nicole and I ruminated on this today, and both came to the conclusion that if she were a man, T.J. would have had no problem accomplishing the assignment from the beginning, and he would even be more apt to ask for Nicole's help when he came to problems he might need help with. But, because she was a woman, and knew more than he (or I) about our jobs, one she has been doing 10 more years than our measly 2 years, he could not bring himself to admit his naivety to her because she is a woman. To T.J. this would be the ultimate embarrassment; the act of admitting a woman's higher ability over his- a man.
As disgusting to both Nicole and I, as the whole situation is, I am looking forward to our Manager dealing with T.J. and T.J.'s ease over following our male manager’s orders; which he has never had problems following.
The act of a news anchorman, or at least a man of distinguished age, with a certain degree of success, who is constantly in the publics view, and continues to make risqué or slightly provocative comments to his highly accomplished and intelligent co-host, demeans women and promotes that exact same kind of behavior in other men. It is unacceptable when racial slurs like Imus's leads to his termination, and yet this kind of constant denigration of women in the workplace goes on in the professional world of television and news, only to be broadcast to young and males alike across the country, it only reaffirms their own seemingly innocent behavior towards their own female co-workers and does not promote change towards a more equal work environment. (616)
While most of the young male readers may be thinking, or even saying, "good job old man", or "way to go", their reactions would be a perfect example of being part of the problem. When having this pointed out to them, they might react exactly how Allan Johnson from our book Privilege, Power, and Difference, (Pg 114) predicts: by backtracking from their gut-response, by saying they didn't mean it. Hence they are not responsible for the message
they are conveying, or the social problem they are simply perpetuating.
The other problem brought to the surface in Johnson's book, is that by not thinking or knowing you are part of the problem, and by not doing anything about changing the privilege you are inadvertently taking advantage of, you are only adding to the problem, and cannot claim innocence or action.
I witnessed this problem re-enact itself just yesterday, once again, at my place of employment, and, once again, it involves the same co-worker I have mentioned in previous blogs. The situation played out like this:
T.J. was asked by Nicole, (our un-official assistant manager) to please ask the employees the questions we are required to ask them every week. He had simply not done it the last two weeks, and Julie compromised and said he only had to ask 1/2 as many questions this week, but would he please just get it done. A few days passed, and I took it upon myself (a woman) to remind T.J. he had better ask those questions. When he balked at me for reminding him, I tried to explain that she is our superior, even if it isn't official. This set T.J. off. He started swearing and cursing, muttering that she wasn't his superior, and to hell with her stupid questions.
Nicole and I ruminated on this today, and both came to the conclusion that if she were a man, T.J. would have had no problem accomplishing the assignment from the beginning, and he would even be more apt to ask for Nicole's help when he came to problems he might need help with. But, because she was a woman, and knew more than he (or I) about our jobs, one she has been doing 10 more years than our measly 2 years, he could not bring himself to admit his naivety to her because she is a woman. To T.J. this would be the ultimate embarrassment; the act of admitting a woman's higher ability over his- a man.
As disgusting to both Nicole and I, as the whole situation is, I am looking forward to our Manager dealing with T.J. and T.J.'s ease over following our male manager’s orders; which he has never had problems following.
The act of a news anchorman, or at least a man of distinguished age, with a certain degree of success, who is constantly in the publics view, and continues to make risqué or slightly provocative comments to his highly accomplished and intelligent co-host, demeans women and promotes that exact same kind of behavior in other men. It is unacceptable when racial slurs like Imus's leads to his termination, and yet this kind of constant denigration of women in the workplace goes on in the professional world of television and news, only to be broadcast to young and males alike across the country, it only reaffirms their own seemingly innocent behavior towards their own female co-workers and does not promote change towards a more equal work environment. (616)
4 comments:
GAAAA!!!! I can't believe in this day and age that this kind of crap still goes on...but then I also can't believe the number of pigs who don't wash their hands after they use the restroom, either, so guess I'm kind of naive.
I guess it's not surprising that this guy is allowed to get away with it, and if she complained SHE's probably the one who would find herself out of a job. I think that some of this comes from the attitude of the gang that's running the country, with the rulings from the Supreme Court against women's rights, and legislation that doesn't get passed that could help women. I don't hold out much hope for the spineless other party, either...eep!!
Oops...word count was (123)
There are many things about Bill O'Riely that are very, offensive to put it lightly. Be it his blatant sexism, racism, and conservativism. Ok that last one was just opinion but i honestly dont know any so called journalist that would tell his interviewees to "shut up." The example I'm getting this from is a response Bill gave to the Reverend All Sharpton when he contradicted this statement of Bill's, "Barrack Obama has never done anything to help black people!" Fox News, in my opinion, is the TV version of the National Inquirer. (94)
This is an excellent example of how derogatory comments can be conveyed under the mask or 'guise' of "oh I was just kidding." If it offends, it should not be said in a public setting, period.
This is important to address because it is a vessel for racism and discrimination when these comments would never be said otherwise. The true intentions of people are easily revealed by what they say, be it jokingly or intentional outright negative comments. (78)
Post a Comment