mega love!

Some of the women now a days are too strong. But, they don’t need to be mouses either, and they don’t need to not need their knight in shining armor. A woman who is strong in spirit, and in faithfulness, but also, knows how to hold her own, if being verbally attacked, is a virtuous woman indeed. In the middle ages, it was considered not a woman’s place to take up the sword, to go to war. But if she were the only one at home at the time, while her knight is away at war, she must needs find any means she can to protect her home, even if it includes fighting with a sword, or negotiating peace with enemies. Like the Virtuous Woman in the Proverb, she is industrious, an entrepeneur, a humble woman. Is it wrong to protect your family, spiritually, by taking up the sword of the Spirit, and weilding it against the fiery darts of the devil? That is what I believe we women should do everyday, to keep our children safe. So, brandish that spiritual sword against the devilish darts, and stand for what is right, with no comprimises.

Anyway, that is what I think.
Laura Hines, Sequim, Wa

We have a policy at work called “zero tolerance”, didn’t seem like a big deal till I read the employee manual. The policy says no: unwelcome conversation, unwelcome glances, no glaring, sexual jokes, etc. So technically at my company, if you look at a female for the moment of a “glance” meaning more then 3 seconds, and she doesn’t like it, your fired!

That’s technically what could happen and your new reputation will follow you to your next position as having been “terminated for sexual harassment”. In corporate America we do several checks before we hire a person: background, drug, state, references and internet!

Think about it, two people interviewing for the same position. One candidate has a “sexual harassment” charge with EOE and the other doesn’t, it’s a “no brainier”. If you hire the person with the harassment charge you’re liable if anything should happen, why take the chance. And here’s the interesting part of the policy, technically if you glance and she does likes it, no big deal right? Unless someone who witnessed the act of “sexual harassment” was offended by it, then that person could have you charge with sexual harassment because they witnessed an act of harassment and may have felt un-comfortable. Worst of all, it doesn’t require proof of what actually happened; it’s about how it makes the other person feel “I felt uncomfortable when he looked at me/her”!

Our HR department is dominated by females: 48 females, 2 males. Most of the women are HR professionals proudly displaying on their walls and cubes the company’s awards for diversity and policy awareness, certified experts in digging out any “harassment” after all they did write the company manual.

I don’t think a guy is going to catch an even break here, if HR can’t figure it out they technically could fire both people, why take a chance? So let’s plan some PC (political correctness) classes and train all employees to help the company stamp out harassment. This is an attitude that companies feel they have to adopt to keep from being constantly sued for millions of dollars.

Being a gentleman in corporate America is a roll of the dice with your employment at stake and perhaps your career and reputation. Please don’t think badly if a man doesn’t open the door for you, he’s been conditioned not to.

If you work in corporate America, read your employee manual, the part about sexual harassment and harassment, they both apply if a male and female are involved. Don’t think “Oh that’s not really what they mean” technically if it says it in the manual then that’s what it means. Here’s where this gets interesting, if they don’t follow the company’s guide lines in a printed policy like “zero tolerance” the company is liable for discrimination, so technically speaking they must terminate employment and file with EOE.