SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN AMERICA - TS. DUONG NGOC DUNG

18/ 07/ 2022

During his thirty years of teaching theology, Professor Snyder has always used a single example to explain the difference between Judaism and Christianity: a man fell from a roof and accidentally fell on a woman lying below, this fall is so “special” that it makes for a very “special” pose. According to the Judaic Talmud, a man is not guilty because when he does the act, he doesn't think about it (in Vietnamese words, "not intentionally, just accidentally") but from the Christian point of view (in the New Testament) thinking means doing it, for example, lusting for a woman in the mind alone is enough to constitute fornication. This theological distinction is too subtle for us to extend here, but the point is that the above casual example of Professor Snyder was expounded by a female student as "creating a hostile environment of a sexual harassment in class” and she filed a lawsuit against Professor Snyder. She further emphasizes that the example above constitutes what is known as "insensitivity to rape" because rapists always argue that "we didn't mean and "think" about it, we just did it..”

Instead of correcting the abusive student, the school agreed with her and suspended Professor Snyder's teaching, requiring him to receive mental health treatment for causing an "environmental hostile” in class.

The main problem is that the term or concept of "sexual harassment" here is increasingly expanded in meaning. It originally indicated a particular "loathing" demanded by an individual in a position of higher power from his subordinates. But gradually, even the "accidental touches" are also listed in the category of sexual harassment, even language, verbal communication, are also dragged into the note. This violates the First Amendment in the American legal system because it clearly states that "ensuring the people's right to freedom of speech". Having allowed the people to freely speak, how can they punish "the people" for the crime of "communication in the language"?

In 1992, Stroh beer was sued by female employees when it released a commercial in which bikini-clad beauties clutched barrels of Stroh beer parachuting down on men camping in the area below. In the complaint, the female workers allege that Stroh's owner created a "hostile environment" in the brewery due to the advertisement. Fortunately, the court rejected the lawsuit of these "excessive" female workers, if they win the case, I don't know what other "unique lawsuits" they will launch. In the language of Buddhist philosophy, what we perceive in the real world is a reflection of our own "mind". If you have been sexually obsessed, you can infer anything from looking at it that it has something to do with "that". And if the matter is pushed to its logical final consequence, the current law, if it wants to avoid messy litigation, needs to be left to the ladies to make sure, because in America only men are at risk. Most likely to be convicted of sexual harassment, but women do not know what sex is, and to mock these naive claims, Michael Crichton wrote Disclosure, which was adapted into a famous movie of the same name with actress Demi Moore playing the role. The boss sexually harasses an employee under the role played by Michael Douglas. If even language is condemned now the issue of free speech becomes a pipe dream of the past because whatever you say can be interpreted by women as sexual harassment. For example, a very trivial statement like "It's raining, wait back" can also be sued in court for the purpose of "inciting someone not to leave, but to stay to do something shady". Duc Huy's song "Wet and Rainy Road" showed. A common question like “Is he out yet?” could also be prosecuted for sexual harassment by means of language.” In general, everything will be chaotic and everyone should have a lawyer standing by before they want to say anything.

  • READ MORE
popup

Số lượng:

Tổng tiền: