ShareThis Page

Cal Thomas: Congress, Hollywood, porn, music & sexual harassment

| Saturday, Nov. 4, 2017, 2:30 p.m.
A woman sits as the west front of the U.S. Capitol is seen in the reflecting pool, Wednesday, Oct. 19, 2016 in Washington.
AP Photo/Alex Brandon
A woman sits as the west front of the U.S. Capitol is seen in the reflecting pool, Wednesday, Oct. 19, 2016 in Washington.

It should surprise no one that when it comes to sexual harassment, members of Congress and their staffs are treated differently from the rest of us.

The Washington Post notes a law in place since 1995 under which anyone accusing a lawmaker of sexual harassment can file a lawsuit, but only if they first agree to go through counseling and mediation, possibly lasting several months.

If you think that's a double standard and outrageous, it gets worse.

Should a settlement occur — and many don't, for the same reason that women are fearful of accusing bosses in every profession — the lawmaker doesn't pay. You and I do. The money comes from a special U.S. Treasury fund, and the payments are confidential. In other words, taxpayers are subsidizing boorish, even criminal behavior to protect the reputations of our great leaders, who can't be bothered with the standards they set for the little people they are supposed to serve.

The Post found that while most settlements are small — compared with the tens of millions of dollars paid by Fox News — the amount paid to 235 claimants from 1997 to 2014 still totaled $15.2 million.

Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., had it right when she told the newspaper, “It is not a victim-friendly process. It is an institution-protection process.”

Is there any member of Congress who can defend this? If so, they should be voted out of office. If not, the members should be subject to the same laws as everyone else and forced to pay settlements out of their own pockets, and then voted out of office.

After tolerating sexual predators in its midst for decades, Hollywood is taking the first tentative steps to address the issue. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has announced it will establish a code of conduct for its members. One hopes it will have teeth and that violators “will never work in this town again.”

The entertainment industry needs to go further. While there was much to criticize about the sometimes prudish and hypocritical Motion Picture Production Code that forced actors to keep their clothes on and avoid foul language in films produced from 1930 to 1968, it could be said that films then were mostly not complicit in the lowering of moral standards. That would come later, with television, which began pushing against FCC regulations, and then cable and satellite TV, which have no FCC restrictions. Hollywood responded to its movies' loss of audience by “going low” to lure people back into theaters.

Add to this pornographic films, which have done more not only to objectify women, but also to give men who view them the idea that women are hypersexual and welcome their advances. The social consequences from this filth have been documented. They include marital breakups and establishing a view of women in the minds of some men that no woman can — or should — live down to.

Taylor Swift has become the latest in a long line of female singers and entertainers to trade an initially wholesome image for trash. (Miley Cyrus and Charlotte Church are two other examples.) The U.K.'s Daily Mail published a picture of Swift as a “nude cyborg.” The song she's promoting is called “... Ready For It?” An excerpt: “In the middle of the night, in my dreams /You should see the things we do, baby/In the middle of the night, in my dreams/I know I'm gonna be with you.”

Does this suggestive material have an effect on young female and male minds? Of course it does, or they wouldn't produce it. Can it lead to sexual harassment and worse? It kills the spirit as much as a poison can kill the body.

The entertainment industry has a lot to answer for. Instead of taking baby steps, it should take giant leaps. If it doesn't, this stuff will continue, from Capitol Hill to Hollywood and everywhere in between.

Cal Thomas is a columnist for USA Today.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.