Every male matinee idol chasing every female matinee starlet in every romance movie from time immemorial is now a sexual predator according to the loopy redefinition. This is not helpful to women. It is desperately important to separate clumsy philanderers like Rose and childish attempts at humor like Franken's from full-blown threats to the community, like Trump.
10
It sounds like Charlie is the prototypical "dirty old man." Who knew being a tv personality was so complicated?
2
As retired people, we watched Rose closely: CBS Eyeopener in a.m., the roundtable interview at noon, and sometimes, if I got a second wind, Bloomberg at night. In this perplexing year, he invited people like Gerry Sheib of the Wall St. Journal, Ian Bremer and many who did not show their hands with regard to Trump. We developed a theory he was Trumpian. Look back how he (rudely) grilled Hillary Clinton right before the election. He was not a fan. I had heard about his friendship with George Clooney, happy bachelors who could attract (young gorgeous) women. Clooney had the sense to divert into family life. Charlie had to stay on the prowl. His eponymous show was described as a fiefdom, with little recourse for young interns with complaints and with a gate keeper, Yvette Vega, who is now apologizing.
4
Not for nothing, but perhaps now all the Bill Cosby apologists might want to rethink their unwavering support of him.
2
Nothing about any of these allegations is shocking. Nothing is surprising and nothing is truly worthy of complete shuttering of one's professional life. We are living in dangerous times when an allegation of something as benign and natural as sexual advances destroys decades of good will.
Men are pigs, women are wolves. Nothing about this is new. Next you'll tell me that people lie and cheat and steal for their own benefit. pffff
6
While I know what I am about to write will probably be considered politically correct, as part of this process women need to consider their own complicity in this parade of sexual harassment incidents. I'm not talking about rape; I'm not talking about 14 year olds; I'm not talking about anyone who truly had no interest in the interest showered upon them. What comes to mind is the fact that some women are able and willing to use their sexual power for all types of benefit - whether social or professional. Let's face it, for a long time it was the only type of power we had. And too often we have dressed, flirted and invited attention to play that hand. One of the problems is that each woman draws the line in a different place. Some women don't even want a compliment from a man regarding her appearance at work; others consider anything short of physical force acceptable.
Somehow, I don't think this is going to end well for women; it seems more likely that men will find more and more creative ways of keeping them from access to power rather than risk "trouble".
11
This is all very simple. POWER IS SEX! We're animals, and that is ingrained in our genetic code. More opportunities for sex=more offspring with the same strategies. Sorry to y'all who don't believe in evolution, but that's the way it is...not to say you can't abide by the morals you should have been brought up with and act like a gentleman (despite what you might want to do)!
5
There was a time not too long ago when the brother or boyfriend of a woman treated this way would be on his way, directly and immediately, to make things nice and sparkling-clear for Charlie Rose and his ilk.
3
I've had women lawyers use deception to get what the wanted. I'm wiser and poorer for it too.
Grow up. Teach your daughters to guard their privates and how to knee correctly in the right spot.
Let's see Trump's taxes.
8
In college, my upstairs neighbor (female) passed me (male) a note during a group hang out that read, 'i want you to ravish me." She was hot. I complied with her request. If the note had read "I want to ravish you" instead of "I want you to ravish me," would it have been more aggressive? we were both students. neither was in a position of power vis a vis the other. The woman can say or demand almost anything, without seeming menacing or creepy. Like I said, i was thrilled by her note. But there's almost situation in which I could have passed her a note of similar sexual interest, be it passive ("I want you to ravish me") or active "I want to ravish you."
I feel like (more so now) there's no acceptable way for a man to express sexual interest in a woman other than through a question ("do you want to make out? do you want to fool around?").
I can't think of a single first person active sentence that wouldn't sound like harassment to some degree. basically, a man can't state any sexual desire. He must inquire if the woman has any sexual desire ("are you in the mood?").
My point is that I'm not sure more communication gets us past the thicket. How can a man inform a woman of his attraction/desire without the risk of harassment or menace? I think you're hot. I want to kiss you. Hey, baby girl, come over here." How can a man express desire? What words or sentences can he employ without fear of being intrusive or menacing?
13
The magic words are “hubba hubba”.
Just don’t do it at work.
1
Successful people are generally driven, hardworking and often risk takers- unwilling to settle for the mundane This risk taking aspect of personalities sometimes spills over to other aspects of their lives. Want something . . . go for it . . . why not? We've reached a point where these type A folks need to be reminded that they are not the center of the universe, that people around them are human beings worthy of consideration and respect. Hopefully the fate of those guilty of sexual harassment and abuse will be a wake up call and warning that this behavior will no longer be tolerated and those failing to take heed will suffer harsh consequences.
2
I once wrote to the Charlie Rose Show to say I noticed an unfortunate dearth of women experts on his show, and that if he had a woman on, she was usually an actress, and his demeanor would change to something more entranced by her than interviewing her. I often wondered if he were a little drunk on some of his shows---he seemed sometimes to be testy and out of sync on his timing---like let the guest speak already. This sheds more light on the situation.
6
I once worked for a man much like these powerful men. Briliant, charming, rich, powerful, appealing. Some women gave in, some of us walked away. He had second men, people who stood by and enabled him, all of us beholden to the money and the power. Maybe this will be a moment when some thing changes. I hope so.
,
1
Has this been mentioned yet? Maybe not because it is "politically incorrect". One assumes that Rose and Moore selected women they found highly attractive and used their power to get an interaction with no strings attached. The bad news is that these attractive young women were abused. The other bad news is that girls and women not considered "attractive" are not even given an interview. Clearly, even today, there are a lot of blonde, busty leggy females reading the news and weather.
2
While this is shocking the irony in the timing of these revelations when we have a sexual predator in the white house who has never owned up or been prosecuted for these is significant.
9
NYT: missing from this article is mention of Norah O’Donnell, the other anchor on the morning show, and one with vast experience in political reporting and interviewing.
Having been around a while, and being a woman, I can tell you this is way old stuff. It has been going on since Genesis. If I could collect all the women that any one man in my life had come into contact with that man there would be 100s of women saying the same of that man.. God made men that way. Ask any rooster. I am sick of women whining about the moves made on them. Just say no and walk away.
5
So I guess these days its no longer "Innocent Until Proven Guilty" it's you are automatically guilty an are fired, all these companies are so limp wristed these days they wont even stand behind someone an give them the benefit of the doubt.
1
I feel compelled to speak out that I heard of Charlie Rose’s behaviour from friends who worked with him in the 1980s, when his behaviour was common knowledge. I do not recall anyone being disgusted by him, but rather it was viewed as an extension of the freewheeling sexual mores of that era.
As a Legal Secretary at top corporate law firms in Washington, DC from the 1970s - 1990s, I was a first hand witness to dozens and dozens of sexual escapades in the office. I believe that 80% of the Partners and Associates were unfaithful to wives and significant others. Secretaries and Female Summer Associates were hired more on their looks than brains.
Charlie Rose is simply a relic of those times, the last of those dinosaurs ...
3
With Charlie Rose's firing by CBS, I can finally see some justice in the media.
This is the guy who two-timed Amanda Burden until he was exposed as keeping a young woman " on the side".
The daughter of a colleague of my husband's was a P.A. For him, which involved tailing him when he was on his motorcycle, riding in for the show on 13 from the bellport. The idea was that if he had a breakdown, he could drive in --and the assistant would deal with the broken bike.
It's not about sex, it's about the exercise of power. That the malefactor is a right-thinking media darling, just underscores the degree to which, so long as you have the right politics, the rest are "mere peccadillos".
1
I think you only need to consider the extent to which Charlie Rose regularly pandered to the likes of Henry Kissinger and a host of other neocons, as well as scions of the US military postindustrial technological corporate complex, to check those impulses to find him a person of high integrity. He may have been on occasion a good interviewer (usually at his best when he shut up and just let his guests talk) but he is and was hardly an icon of probity. Indeed, every time he extolled the wonders of those who have "sat at this table" he underscored his egomaniacal obsession with being understood as a man of power, influence, and rectitude. Like Kissinger, against whom he never pushed a tough question, he fell prey to the notion that "power is the greatest aphrodisiac" and set about enacting that conviction very crudely, brutally, and repulsively indeed. I'll miss some of the decent people he managed to bring together (including a great night with three of Mexican directors, titans of the film industry) but I won't miss him. Blinded by his own light, like Icarus, he flew too high to the sun and has now crashed hard, into an ugly and unruly sea of his own making. And what is it about old guys with bad hair and bad breath (one presumes) that they have to confirm their desirability by preying on women? (the question answers itself).
5
Media
Entertainment
Fashion
Politics
Those are the primary places you're going to find this as a pervasive situation.
In most of America and American industry, people aren't desperately falling all over themselves for some job. And a man who harasses lots of women is amplifying his risk of very serious repercussions that would involve neither law enforcement nor media attention.
3
Charlie Rose presumed to fill the role of Bill Moyers. Moyers himself was no stranger to the "shark-infested waters of the Potomac," as Moyers called DC politics. Moyers watched the sexual shenanigans of his day up close while serving two of the top ten presidential philanderers, at least according to the Atlantic's rankings. http://bigfrog104.com/presidential-extramarital-affairs/ Moyers also watched LBJ's top aide Walter Jenkins, a married man, get the boot after cavorting in a YMCA with another man. So Moyers was no prude and put up with a lot of stuff, but he would not have done what Rose is alleged to have done. PBS has only itself to blame for pretending that people like Rose could hold a candle to Moyers. Rose was always a snake, and it was apparent not just to the women he harassed, but to many who interviewed with him and just watched his shows. Contrast Rose's interviews with those of Moyers. The can of interviews does not lie. Rose was not earnest. Moyers was earnest. Rose and PBS are getting their just desserts.
11
In a few years, the world will have forgotten all about these charges, Charlie. David Letterman was accused of the same kinds of antics and worse, but now PBS airs his receipt of the Mark Twain prize and his fellow comedians take turns singing his praise. www.nytimes.com/2009/10/06/business/media/06letterman.html
6
Not in the new world!
Charlie is toast!
2
After seeing all of those clips on Last Week Tonight With John Oliver, this was about the least surprising revelation of the past few weeks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RrzxtmeIDM
In Germany, the need to rethink the country’s legal definition of rape and other forms of sexual misconduct had been discussed by German lawyers, women’s organizations and politicians for years, but the legislation was passed only last year.
The issue was brought to the fore by the incidents in Cologne on New Year’s Eve 2015, when dozens of women were sexually assaulted and many of them robbed.
In July 2016, the Bundestag, lower house of the German Parliament, voted for amendments of the country’s criminal law, introducing a new definition of rape. Rape is no longer defined as a sexual act involving violence, threats or the victim’s helpless condition, but is defined as a sexual act committed against the victim’s unambiguous will.
In addition to existing legal terms, such as “coercion” (Nötigung) and “indecent assault” (sexueller Missbrauch), the offense termed “sexual harassment” (sexuelle Belästigung), punishable by a fine or up to two years in prison, has been added to the German Criminal Code.
One would hope that the recent wave of sexual misconduct revelations would lead to a similar response from Congress.
But probably not so in the US, where over the past 20 years Congress has paid $17.2 million for its own harassment settlements.
Charlie Rose's statement sounded fake and contrived.
5
Last Week Tonight occasionally runs montages of this sort of weird/awkward sex banter between Charlie Rose and Gayle King from CBS This Morning. This one does not surprise me a whole lot. :^/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RrzxtmeIDM
5
Compliment a co-worker on her pretty dress and pack your bags.
You're on a one-way trip to Pelican Bay.
6
Reading these comments, I am utterly dismayed by this public lynching. To suggest or place Mr. Rose in the same category as Wisenstein et al is unfair.
For the past 20+ years the ONLY show I've ever watched on TV is Charlie Rose. Everything else is garbage. As he began to age I often found myself wondering who he would chose as his successor. The man is inimitable. He's iconic. His brilliance and knowledge knows no boundaries. This is a man that has met nearly every dignitary in the entire world. Presidents, celebrities, world leaders.
For people to past judgement without knowing the details and facts is as despicable as the accusations themselves. Charlie is a man of integrity and class. LISTEN TO HIS INTERVIEWS. There are thousands. Watch the way he conducts himself. Look at his eyes - watch his hands. Never once has this man ever overstepped a boundary. What you see is exactly what you get. He is not an actor.
He is a man of extraordinary intelligence which is why I believe him when he states he did not know these feelings were not mutual. You could see how socially awkward and inept he was he was when he interviewed A list celebrities opposed to luminaries, especially the females.
Watch his interview with Jodi Foster and how they spoke about living in the same building in NYC. Or his interviews with Meryl Streep, Nora Ephrom.
I fully believe him when he says the allegations are inaccurate. This will be the greatest journalistic loss if it is not amended
5
12 women all decided to lie?
Are you kidding me?
He is sanctimonious and he is done, never to be seen again. Maybe he will start harassing Hotel housekeepers like the former head of France did
3
It doesn't seem to me that any man with "integrity and class" would act they way Charlie Rose did. He said, "Baby, oh baby, why are you crying" as he tried to put his hand between the legs of a young crying woman? And you think this man has class and integrity?
My father and husband, with IQs of 145 and 165, respectively, and both men of culture and refinement, NEVER acted this way with a woman. Their superior intellects were matched by superior character. They truly have class and integrity, but Charlie Rose.
I admired Rose's program for decades. But behind the screen he's shown himself to be a diseased and deluded man. He must have gotten away with this type of tawdry and exploitative conduct throughout his career, especially when he was young and handsome.
Now he only disgusts me. Good riddance!
I’m not a big TV-watcher, although I have seen, and admired, Charlie for years on his PBS programs that I watch on occasion. It startled me to get a first-time glimpse of him earlier this year on CBS This Morning with Gayle King and Norah O’Donnell acting in a way quite contrary to the sober image I’d seen for years on PBS. His presence seemed flirtatious, smarmy, and sexist, and I’m not saying that in hindsight. It turned me off at the time. Who knew? Apparently many did.
6
Let’s remember that these antics were pushed by CBS. “Veep” had a comic arc this season where the young hunk newscaster and his veteran female anchor were encouraged to have the same flirtatious banter as Ménage a Charlie, Gayle and the other gal. They encouraged Charlie to behave in a leering manner when Gayle exposed her shoulder to him.
1
I don't think Mr. Rose knows how to have mature relationships with women. Some arrested development there.
7
The man is 75 for heavens sake. No matter how he acts towards anyone his side of a relationship has to be the definition of "mature". Maybe he's getting demented & really thinks his feelings were shared. Maybe he's just a crazy old man. He isn't alone.
2
Ugh. I give up. Can we hear about some men who actually didn't use his power to humiliate and discriminate against women but rather treated her as an equal and respected her?
5
I've never been much of a Charlie Rose fan and don't think he's a very good interviewer. Just personal taste. But do you really think his intention was to humiliate women and discriminate against them? Because frankly, absent any evidence of this, he appears to be a man hoping for a sexual liaison with a woman. IF all the accusations are true, he absolutely did step over the line. I don't think his career should be finished, whereas in the cases of Weinstein, Sandusky or Trump, there's no question for any sane person that these men should first be relieved of their job and then vigorously prosecuted.
I would appreciate a bit more realism here. The first real example in this article is of a woman who applied for a job, accepted an invitation to Mr. Rose's private estate, then felt traumatized when he arrived mostly naked in her doorway. Why was she going to his estate? A few months after entering my professional field, over a decade ago, a female colleague, my senior in age and rank, suggested she take me along on her vacation to Buenos Aires. I really wanted to go, but declined, Because We Were At Work. Since when is common sense not part of the equation. Men using power to get sex and women using sex to get power, are just two sides of the same game. If a woman is not acting in a responsible way, her complaint is not credible. Highlighting bad behavior is an important part of progress, but women should take a lot more responsibility for themselves in many of these cases. There were similar cases in the Weinstein an Louis CK stories... get real
7
My father was President of one of the largest PR firms in the country. Every time I went to visit him in NYC I'd meet his secretary ( they were called that back then, not administrative assistants ) and she would tell me how lucky she was to work for the world's best boss. After meeting up with Pops we'd make the rounds and check up on everybody from the custodian to the V-P. You see, he knew that a team he truly cared about and paid appropriately would do a great job for him. He was right about that. His salary was probably 3, maybe 4 times his highest paid employee. What's the difference between my father and these clowns? My father grew up during the Great Depression and he served in WW II. He knew that it took a lot of good people from the grunt to the 4-star general to make things work, everybody doing their part and respecting the others doing their part.
8
One thing that I and my family always noted over the years about the Charlie Rose show was that he constantly interrupted and talked over his female guests. He dominated these conversations, giving little opportunity for the women to express themselves. With men, it was just the opposite -- they could talk to their heart's content. We just pegged Mr. Rose a "garden variety sexist" yet he was always being touted for squiring famous women around town and having many women friends. We all have to do a better job of connecting the dots.
4
His PBS "Charlie Rose Show" was very boring anyways.
Fighting misogyny while accepting Republicans in our society is like fighting the plague while breeding giant rat colonies. It doesn't work.
16
Agree Voice of America. Oh, and who is still president? That would be The Grabber in Chief, Friend to Oligarchs. This doesn’t excuse the extremely inappropriate behavior of those recently accused/under investigation/fired. However, if it is okay for The Orange Wonder and Roy Moore(on), then what are we talking about here? Pulease!!
5
I'm really saddened to read that Rose, whose PBS program I enjoyed most of the time, turns out to be a real jerk with women and apparently his staff.
Charlie Rose, and his show of nakedness, the quintessential dirty old man. Yuch!
6
No surprise. Rose has thorns.
"I once had a rose named after me and I was very flattered. But I was not pleased to read the description in the catalogue: no good in a bed, but fine up against a wall."
— Eleanor Roosevelt
6
The extension of the hunt to Charlie Rose is foolish and a decay of reason. One hopes that the violence of this phenomenon will be a sign of its transience.
3
Along with all the rightful condemnation of all these apparent sexual harassers, it is worth asking: why do some people behave this way? What is it in their psychological makeup that causes them to do things that most other people wouldn't dream of doing -- even when they are clearly intelligent enough to know that what they are doing is wrong? It's not enough just to condemn them, any more than telling a heroin addict that what they are doing is wrong will lead them to change their behavior. For this widespread problem to be addressed in a meaningful way, the underlying causes of it need to be better understood and addressed in the home, in our schools and in the workplace. This can't just be the result of poor potty training.
2
Could you please explain why walking naked at home in front of a co-worker whom you believe likes you and wants to have sex with you, is "wrong" - EVEN in the case when you're mistaken?
I agree that there's a cultural problem concerning gender, but I'm not that certain that it applies to what Charlie Rose is said to have done.
5
I suspect I know "why now?". This is about obliterating the Clinton's influence in the democrat party. Just results in some acceptable collateral damage.
1
A scarlet asterisk has now found its way to the end of many famous males' names and shall follow them to their obits. More's the pity.
2
A feeble apology at best. "Inappropriate behavior" is a euphemism. "Behaving insensitively" is a euphemism. "Pursuing shared feelings" is delusional. Sounds like calculated predatory behavior to me.
9
"In one incident, a woman who had applied for a job said that Mr. Rose invited her to his estate in Bellport, N.Y., about 60 miles from New York City, in 2010."
And she went?
9
Another predator! Nothing new, predators abound. Sexual exploitation, harassment, assaults are not new. What's new is the courage of women (and men) to speak up!
End the silence! If you are being harassed or exploited please, say something!
3
Living at great remove from the movie and entertainment businesses, I was initially surprised to read recent news stories on the prevalence of sexual harassment and abuse in those commercial sectors.
I think it no accident that such harassment is now also reported to be endemic in the higher reaches of American journalism, itself so often a craven form of entertainment, basking in the tawdry Mephistophelean and solipsistic glow of the power of celebrity and the celebration of power in our society.
Mainstream journalism’s primary function is to sell advertising, not to work to embody the Jeffersonian ideal that it inform citizens of uncomfortable truths essential to the wise governance of our republic. It especially neglects our nation’s historically murderous behavior around the world, in our assertion of world-wide economic and military hegemony.
Our major news media habitually ignore basic empirical truths relevant to vital political issues (such as the history of our nuclear weapons policies and of our relations with nations like North Korea, Cuba, and Iran).
This abundantly documentable journalistic neglect occurs, not by top-down fiat, as in the former Soviet Union, but in a more insidious but very effective de-facto way, in the evolutionary and largely unconscious organizational patterns so well-described by Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky in their 1988 book “Manufacturing Consent.” Read it!
1
Why is Trump not being sued/pursued by victims of his sexual predation?
Trump's past behavior to those who criticize, oppose, question him terrifies normal people and keeps them from going after him. He sues and keeps on suing until the victim throws in the towel. Normal people cannot afford the lawsuits. Look at the venders of goods and services to his hotels, etc., who got stiffed when he refused to pay. Some (like a company that supplied pianos to a hotel) were put out of business. Others had to take partial payment.
His threats include ruining their lives. No one can fight a billionaire.
Look at today. He hates CNN, so he has sicced the Justice Dept. on AT&T. He's relentless, and it's all personal. He'll never stop, so what chance does a model or a pageant contestant or a waitress have?
12
I'd just like to know how a coordinated suite of allegations came to all be reported simultaneously. And if they were not how the reporting occurred. The Post reported that in the case of Roy More it pursued the story interviewing the women multiple times as they were reluctant to come forth. We need to know more about how the process unfolded. And was this the case with Mr. Rose?
While I condemn any form of bullying, intimidation, harassment, or assault I am uncomfortable with all this being paraded through the press and other media. I also condemn petty revenge when people don't get their way. So I think the public needs more detailed information regarding how these indictments came about.
And furthermore, well we won't go into that right now....
3
Young women have always been "prey" There needs to be more education and awareness training in high school and college. If the behavior feels "creepy" its because it is.
3
There are at least two sets of victims of this kind of harassment and assault. One, the actual victims, who are somehow stunted and never the same again. They deserve the most compassion and support. Just look at Rose McGowan. Everybody could see in the 1990s that something had befallen her (even before the rumors started flying), that she fell off the rail, so to speak. But there is a second category. The decent men and women without predator instincts, who competed without the ruthlessness of a Weinstein or Spacey or Trump for success in their professional or artistic world and where shoved aside with the very similar bullying and menace that the sexual harassment and assault victims experienced. Because, let's face it, the predator instincts of these animals are not only used when pursuing young and alluring female companions but also when they built their professional empires.
11
Does it make it worse that they were young interns as opposed to confident, experienced women better able to deal with a creep? Yes it does. It also makes it a very familiar form of executive office sexual abuse.
11
I can't help but wonder why "the woman who applied for a job" went to his bedroom in Bellport AFTER she was so offended by his open bathrobe. This behavior by the Rogue's List the public has had to endure for the last several weeks is disgusting, but as a woman, I keep thinking, "and why didn't you leave?"
16
Or simply tell him that you're not interesting and then continue the job you were there to do in the first place?
I'm not judging her though. In order to be able to say "no" in time, and in a clear way, you need to have learned how to correctly and "in real time" analyze your own feelings, AND have learned not to judge those feelings but know you have the right to feel them, AND have learned how to communicate them without offending the other.
Many women never learned things like that. It's one of the reason why more than men, they tend to suffer from a lack of self-esteem, as studies have shown. And that, in turn, only makes it even more complicated to say no, as at the same time you're flattered THAT the other likes you.
It's also why women can feel so disgusted by men who, as Rose was apparently doing, simply clearly show their desire to go to bed with them, and believe they may be able to seduce you.
It's feeling powerless to understand your OWN feelings, and feeling how you're too ashamed to stand up for yourself, that makes situations like these so traumatizing, NOT what the man (in this case at least) is doing in itself.
Because let's admit it: there's absolutely nothing wrong with a man walking naked in his own home, EVEN not when this wasn't part of the plan and clearly an attempt to seduce you. Men, just like women, have the RIGHT to try to seduce others. They just have to know when to stop, and that becomes more difficult when women don't know how to say no...
4
Why she (and other women in similar predicaments) couldn'l leave or tell police etc. afterword?
Why some who were "kissed without permission" are "lifelong traumatized", struggling with demons of depression, etc?
From these revelation and testimonies of women affected one thing is clear: women and men are not equal, certainly in emotionally and rationally processing such situations and experiences. With all due respect, it looks (yet again) that women are not completely sovereign adults. They seem to need a special protection (that say conservative Judaism, Islam, or traditional Christianity used to provide to "women and children").
4
As Charlie Rose was reporting the Weinstein, Moore, Cosby, Franken, et al stories, did not occur to him that someone was going to out him for what he was?
14
What is WITH these men? There is NO context in which it's okay to walk around naked in front of somebody not your doctor or lover; no context in which it's okay to grope somebody not already your lover. It's not a "pass," its horribly unwelcome. No ambushing women with kisses either. Charlie, there were no "shared feelings" among the women 50 YEARS your junior and over whose careers you may exert influence. No. you do not get a pass.
13
Why are we letting Trump off the hook?
25
In a country there are cheerleaders displaying their feminine attractions in sport events and can-can type dancing in TV at Christmas I am not surprised to see sex offenders. Bad manners to say the least.
4
I'm appalled by the "blame the victim" observations of so many commenters.
The vast minority of women who choose to wear provocative clothing do not give men license to grope them or any other woman. Period. Full stop.
Knowing now how some men with power will use it to sexually exploit women, I have to wonder about the number of women who were sexually abused by men when they were children, the time when they were most vulnerable.
When I was an attractive young woman, I had my share of unwanted advances, remarks and bodily contact, but thankfully I was never coerced into a compromising sexual situation by one of my bosses.
But as a child, I was sexually exploited, in varying degrees, by five seemingly normal neighbors. In the first instance, I was only five or six years old. I also knew of several other young girls who had had similar encounters with adult men in our neighborhood.
Given my childhood experiences and the reported proclivities of several powerful men, I'm profoundly worried about what's going on behind closed doors with our young children.
5
DAVID BOIES, YET AGAIN
How many sexual predators has he protected? How many women continued to be put in danger because Boies helped silence others?
1
There are plenty more predators lurking at CBS with decades of abusing their power on women. They should step out now: Leslie Moonves (salary $70 million), Steve Capus, Jeff Fager, Steve Kroft etc. Society of Professional Journalists SPJ should create a 'safe' website for women survivors to report abuse before these predators destroy journalism from the inside out.
4
Regardless of guilt or innocence, and regardless of the name of an alleged perpetrator, the media is advancing into dangerous territory with sensational reporting. Sensationalism is the handmaiden of fascism. These numerous sexual harassment stories have become a media "trial without judge or jury" evoking tried and true tactics used by fascists in the 1920's and 1930's. Read history, not twitter. It is reasonable to ask why this has all exploded during a time when the United States is in such great social turmoil. Bad behavior is not the same as illegal behavior, and everyone, including Judge Moore, deserves their day in court. If there is no court, then the media simply becomes a vehicle for the advancement of personal smears. In the end, the public will fail to believe anything and news will become all opinion. Is that the point of all these stories? Is there some hidden agenda, to smear the media as a vehicle of the truth?
11
Excellent point.
2
One unfortunate result of all these revelations is that all of these men are being lumped together. It almost diminishes the truly horrible and criminal behavior of Harvey Weinstein, Ratner etc. Franken’s behavior is inappropriate, creepy, and sophomoric. Sounds like Rose is a level worse than Franken but not at the level of Weinstein.
9
Since so many men (and some women) seem to be flailing around, demanding to know how people are ever going to have sex again, let me offer some helpful advice. The issue is not what you do. The issue is not who you do it with. The issue is consent. If you put your hand on a woman’s behind and she snuggles up to you, it’s all good. If she pulls away, get ready to be sued. ‘But how do I know in advance how she’ll react?” Men cry. Here is the secret: ask. Believe it or not, guys, we are human beings too. We have sexual desires just like you do. We can talk. And when we are asked for consent, we either give it - or not. And if we don’t, ask somebody else. This is why they invented Tinder.
4
Why now.
The Liberals have done away with statutes of limitations and broadened the definitions of sexual assault.
This is all about money.
Cable generates a lot of money that is passed on to the celebrities.
The women now want part of it.
Hastert is being sued by a 57 year old for what happened in high school.
2
Charlie Rose is small fish. Bill Cosby should be very worried. His denials are becoming so irrelevant. It's time he went to jail.
4
It’s called “Institutional Social Pathology.” Many men, including Rose, are raised within the grip of institutional social pathology. It does not necessarily mean that he is a 100% sociopath, however, most probably, one or more of his gestalts were corrupted at a very young age which produced the “Hyde” aspect of his Jekyll & Hyde personality. This has some similar ramifications as the more familiar phenomenon commonly known as “Institutional Racism.” Again, it does not necessarily mean that a particular individual is a “racist,” even though their behavior, more than their inner feelings, has been coopted to act in an aberrant manner toward members of another race or races.
1
For quite some time, I've been a teacher, teaching private courses at my own home, with students coming to my place.
Did I have some problems? Yes.
First, there were men who apparently weren't used to this kind of format, and were convinced that IF I told people to come to my home and alone, it's because I had no intention whatsoever to work, and simply wanted to go to bed with my "student". So they felt insulted when they arrived and tried to touch me and I said no, or even when I tried to start teaching, even though that was exactly what we agreed upon before I allowed them in.
Then there were the wives of married men, who were convinced that IF I wanted to teach from my home place and accepted someone like their husband, then it MUST be that I actually wanted to seduce him. Those women then insulted me in public, as if I were some kind of prostitute.
All this goes on to show that there's something seriously wrong with our gender culture today.
Work is work, no matter where you do it. Starting to refuse to meet women when they're alone (or men when they're alone) just because in THEORY there COULD be sex involved, only has one effect: even more anti-female discrimination on the work floor.
What we need, instead, is for men to accept that most women do NOT want to go to bed with them, even not when working at home, and for women to finally learn how and when to clearly say "no" ... !
4
The left is cleaning house. Time for the right to clean theirs. Like Roy Moore and the POTUS for example.
8
The left is not “cleaning house” — they are being exposed as lecherous hypocrites. Quite different.
2
Right. But the "right" has no morals. They rather have power than do the right thing!
5
The left must do much deeper house cleaning.
Why?
Because for decades now and with great propagandist zeal
they presented themselves, especially to women,
in their production and public talk
to be the Women Rights Warriors.
All of these men, quit, resign and/or get fired, but the one in the white house gets a pass, go figure. Furthermore, if you travel to a man's house, aren't you putting yourself in harms way. I think at some point you have to recognize and take some of the responsibility for your actions/inactions.
7
I have a question, from someone who isn't invested in this on any sort of personal level: On what planet is Charlie Rose from? How could he possibly believe his advances were mutually met?? I suppose they may have been, back in the mid-1800's, when Charlie was a young lad, but the man is ancient, scraggly and wrinkled. No one at the ripe, old age, which pre-dates dirt, should ever believe that women want to see their bits. Just laughable.
8
No it isn't. I'm quite certain that I'm not the only woman decades younger than he is, and who finds him extremely attractive - as he is today.
It's men who tend to have difficulties understanding how older women can be very attractive too, and then project their own imagination onto women ... .
One of the huge advantages of older men - IF they belong to those who become wiser the more they get older - is that they have much more experience, maturity and self-confidence, which allows a sexual relationship to blossom much more than when you're in bed with young, self-conscious men who don't fully grasp yet what it is that a woman likes, or rather, how to understand and feel what this or that particular woman likes.
And yes, wrinkled human skin can be VERY beautiful too, precisely because it expresses all these qualities that young men tend to lack.
Sex, for a woman, isn't merely physical, it's first of all cultivating deep love for someone you truly admire and adore. And there's no reason why you couldn't truly admire and adore older men, quite on the contrary.
That being said, it's ALWAYS a mistake to assume, as a man, that because you have this or that quality (good looks/young skin/...) most women will automatically want to have sex with you, and it's THAT mistake that at best leads to embarrassing situations and in the worst cases (Roy Moore) to sexual assault and rape.
So old AND young men, STOP imagining that most women want to go to bed with you anyhow ... !
6
University Professors, University Administrators next?
3
We would be talking thousands, many thousands here.
Such purge might - at least by few percents - improve the almost total domination of liberals in our higher learning faculty.
I thought I was over being shocked by the sexual harassment stories about so many men in so many fields, but the Charlie Rose revelation has totally shocked me. He seemed like such a gentleman.
5
Not just a "gentleman" but a True Progressive and Women's Rights Warrior to boot.
1
He left like he arrived, fired with enthusiasm. He did not end up smelling like a rose, however.
What is the point of all these Employee Manuals where the management states "we do not tolerate any act of sexual harassment..."? Is this just a boilerplate document to have in place to pay lower premiums for your Employment Practices Liability insurance? Are these settlements paid for, at least in part, by insurance payouts from EPL ? If you ask me, that's institutionalized sanction of rape, harassment and sexual abuse. Is this just another cost of doing business, like fines paid by banks too big to fail?
Charlie Rose becomes the complex character revealing layers of behavior his television "character" doesn't tell us.
But how much does anyone know about many people we respect, admire,
and look forward to seeing on our screens. Charlie Rose has made an enormous intellectual difference in my life - through his brilliant programs on the brain, on day-to-day [political analysis and in depth discussions with international writers, public intellectuals, and performing artists, I have learned more than through any other show on TV .... so what to make of all this:
Male sexual behavior is unpredictable and apparently uncontrollable at
times. I will miss his nightly program and hope this somehow works out
in his favor, which will also be in his viewers' favor.
11
Unfortunately for Charlie Rose and his progressive propaganda ilks I can't say that he enriched me with anyb "brilliant programs" and I learned from him mainly how relatively effective liberal propaganda is done.
Surviving communism, we are a bit more skeptical of these "do gooders" and their "struggle for better world". Usually it is a better world only for themselves. Opportunists as they come.
1
And Charlie Rose had such great progressive qualifications. PBS, CBS. Wow.
4
Nothing "progressive" about CBS other than maybe Colbert.
It's a network for old people.
Like my auto adjuster said, there's seldom 100%/0% culpability. No excuses for inexcusable behavior by powerful men (mostly politicians, entertainers), but we need a conversation about our hyper-sexualized culture. I do not watch television for this reason -- so seamy, so sexualized. We act, dress, and expose skin suggestively. Again, no excuses. But a highly sexualized culture abets this sort of behavior.
4
It is stunning how many people in the comments essentialize men and women, as if each is a monolithic entity with entirely different needs and wants. In my view, this inability to see the common humanity between us is one of ways that these male predators justify their actions. Men such as Rose see women as essentially different and beneath them.
Several commenters have pointed out personal anecdotes to demonstrate how all men act out their sexual impulses in a predatory way. I fear that this line of reasoning and the assumption that all men are like Weinstein, Rose, Cosby, and so on, gives license to men to blame their impulses on some sexually impulsive biological drive that only men have. I think we need to make clear that there is a distinction between things that are socioculturally shaped (men using their power/strength/position to sexually assault or harass women and remain largely unchallenged until recently) and things that are biologically shaped. Too much of the reaction towards these powerful pigs falls into the latter camp (i.e., all men are innately sexual predators). This line of reasoning has been used for centuries to excuse the inappropriate sexual behavior of men. The far too common belief that "after all, men can't help it", is easily and erroneously deduced from this logic. As a man, I refuse to believe that I am no better than Charlie Rose, just a victim of my own essential nature.
5
Rose was low hanging fruit. His behavior was well-known, and it made my stomach turn to watch Gayle and Norah fawn over him on a daily basis.
The team at the Washington Post (mostly) who are pursuing these stories will find plenty of boorish dinosaurs to take down. Whether this proves to be a good thing overall is yet to be determined. Surely I hope it brings greater protection to women who otherwise would be abused in this manner. [Unmentioned, of course, are the men who didn't get the interview, didn't get the job . . . though those would be crocodile tears.] But there will be a backlash, and it will manifest itself in unexpected ways.
5
Gayle King and Norah O'Donnell looked pathetic this morning. They were all about themselves and their feelings. They weren't the victims. They were among the enablers. If they didn’t know what was going on, they would have said so. O'Donnell said, "I've been doing a lot of listening." Red flag - she knew. Gayle King said, “We are all rocked by this.” Careful not to use the word “shocked.” Because shocked, they weren't.
7
Oh, I see. From many of the comments here it is clear that if a conservative does it he should be burned at the stake, but if a "progressive" does it we must consider the circumstances. Obviously the women were throwing themselves that the "progressive".
Perhaps "progressives" believe in some type of relative morality? Conditional morality? Obviously not a morality that applies equally to all.
1
I've skimmed scores of comments and I don't see Charlie getting a free pass from most of them. Nor did Louis CK, Harvey Weinstein , et al.
But I happened to notice that the boor who now resides at 1600 Pennsylvania got a free pass from about 45% of voters and continues to get support from nearly 90% of professed conservative Christians.
Now that is comment-worthy.
1
Human male sexual behavior is rooted in biology and is evolutionarily adaptive. . It is present in all cultures/tribes. Cultures are composed of tribes. We are a nation of many tribes. Each has adopted rules about the extent to which a male may express this natural behavior. Tribes that have very strict rules are intolerant of deviation from them and teach their females to feel shame if they allow males to violate the rules. High testosterone males tend to be alpha males who succeed in their occupations and provide leadership. They also have libedos that cause part of their behavior to violate the sensitivities of females from tribes that teach shame. A society that recognizes these facts may choose to penalize the males even if they have caused no biological harm to the female, or not. And to determine the extent of the punishment. Tribe hysteria can foster a level of intolerance that allows for no objective evaluation of the long term consequences of its short term emotional response. Do we really want to dump the men who committed no biological harm as being valueless because they acted naturally?
4
Sounds like we need more omega men
1
How can someone who is so urbane, so erudite, so controlled on camera be so boorish behind the scenes. None of the others were a surprise but this is truly disillusioning.
Not to mention -- even Mr. Enlightened (so we thought) goes for women half his age or less.
3
This mass hysteria is going to re-inscribe many men's sexual behavior to the realms of anonymity (internet hookups) and prostitution; they might also consider bisexuality as a useful outlet. The resulting path forward for many women will be closed in both their marriage and career prospects as men become more insular in the expression of their sexuality under the new regime. The feminist utopia is not as inviting as some would have us believe. Mike Pence grins.
4
Heartbreaking news for longtime fans
5
Wow, I just don't know where to begin. Charlie Rose! He was a part of my weekly program watching, listening to his oak table discussions. I would have never thought him to be such a 'man'. So, many people have lost ~ I feel especially sad for those who have lost their jobs, from this unpleasant discovery at end of the day. A sad day in journalism.
5
I sent a message a little while ago before I had finished editing it. Here is the edited version:
I don't see anything in this article stating that Rose was expecting sexual favors for attaining or keeping a job. The use of force isn't mentioned here. Men have always come on to women by touching them, even in sensitive places. This is part of the mating game.
Women have been walking around naked or semi-naked in front of men as long as I can recall. Dress styles for women are largely for the purpose of luring men into looking at them. They create lascivious thoughts which become hard to resist. Men need to stop apologizing and start fighting these charges. Women who claim to have been traumatized by a touch or seeing a man naked need to grow up.
8
Your statement IS the problem! Sexual harassment is not about male sexuality it is about...power. Quite different from courting! Having a man expose himself or worse touch me without permission IS awful and can be terrifying!!
It's matters not how women dress! In the Middle East where women are covered up sexual harassment is rampant! It...is...about...power! And exploitation of women, whom these predators see as objects!
2
Exactly. Thank You.
But it wasn't the mating game. It was a work situation. Do you have proof that the women involved were all traipsing about "naked or semi-naked?" The reporting here suggests that the only semi-naked person around was... Charlie Rose.
2
Public persons in politics and media are being thrown out, but the Predator-In-Chief - who by the way has NO redeeming personal qualities whatsoever - is allowed to continue to sully the nation’s highest office?
23
Who's next? It's got a long way to go. I don't think anyone will escape, so I have to wonder why all these big bad sexual predators are such fraidy cats that they can't get ahead of the story and own up to what they did before being outed. Instead all we get is self-serving apologies after the fact and remarkably poor memories. They then add insult to injury by proclaiming their continued commitment to women's rights. Wooh! What if they weren't so righteously "liberal?"
Unfortunately they're no better than those poor young basketball players who were caught shoplifting in China and were so dense and immature that they could hardly stumble through their prepared statements, or those frat boys who poisoned their friend with alcohol and then clumsily tried to cover their tracks.
What is wrong with this country? How do we raise our boys? They're supposed to grow up to be heroes, and good husbands and fathers and breadwinners. Instead with too few exceptions they turn out to be a bunch of sniveling babies in diapers trying to prove their "manhood." Most amazing, their women and mothers and many of their supporters in the media continue to stand behind them and make excuses for them.
What will it lead to after the headlines go away? Probably more of the same.
3
Terribly disappointed!
1
Another "progressive" icon bites the dust. What is wrong with powerful "progressives"?
2
The same thing as what is wrong with powerful conservatives - although to a lesser degree, apparently: walking naked at home in front of an adult co-worker whom you believe to be in love with you isn't exactly comparable to dating minors or raping someone ...
4
I am astonished that all of these men think that women are so attracted to them. The ridiculous "meet at the door in a robe" routine is nauseating. Really? Charlie Rose actually thought these women wanted his old, wrinkled body because they made the mistake of talking to him? And he did it over and over again. So gross the way he used his power against them. The same with Harvey Weinstein and all the rest of these men. They deserve every bit of shame and disgrace levied against them. CBS and PBS should fire him now. There are too many allegations by too many women for this to be wrong.
4
Gentlemen of the World, let's go on strike. Suggested motto:'NO SEX WITH YOU GIRL.' Am I remembering a classic Greek comedy where the women refused sexual relations with men until they (the women) got what they wanted. JUSTICE of some sort. To make their cause stick the women played 'hard ball' till they won. (Aristophanes?) Brava!
1
Lysistrata--it's time!
1
Those Athenian women indeed refused to go to bed with their men, unless they accepted to end the Peloponnesian War and start peace talks, until there's reconciliation.
The play is called Lysistrata, written indeed by Aristophanes.
That being said, what's the point of your proposal for men to go on strike here ... ? What exactly is it that you'd want women to accomplish, and that would benefit both sexes ... ?
1
The writing was on the wall during Anita Hill's testimony but no one wanted to hear it. Imagine if we would have taken it seriously then.
11
I am a 55 year old man, so I grew up during the 70's and 80's. I always bridled at the idea that there was a "culture of rape" as espoused by a certain faction of feminist thought. I worked in the restaurant industry as a chef, so I have seen and heard about misogyny and sexual harassment throughout my career. I was in a position of responsibility/authority and always strived to create and maintain an environment of respect and collegiality in my kitchens and restaurants, I held my staff accountable for treating each other well and always thought that the men who abused their staff were reprehensible exceptions.
The recent flood of revelations, (they are more than allegations in my opinion), has forced me to re-evaluate. I have come to accept that there is a culture of rape in a broad swath of society. It's tied into the culture of pornography, (as opposed to erotic photography), objectification of women, body shaming and the "bros before hos" mentality.
This has special resonance for me: I am raising a 12 year old daughter and I never want to see the light in her diminish. I am consciously bringing her up to value herself beyond the attention she gets from boys based on a firm grasp of her value as a person and as a young woman.
My son is 14 and so I think a lot about how to raise him to be a better man than the men around him. I think a lot of it just comes down to treating women as valuable, alive human beings. Doesn't seem like that should be so hard......
16
It isn't hard when a young man has a father like you, who is bringing him up with the right values. Kudos to you for that. Unfortunately, too many people do not have a proper upbringing. I'm guessing that most of the perpetrators of these vile acts would fall into that category. And today's culture pushes people in the opposite direction unfortunately, so if they don't get the right messages at home or in church, they're not likely to get them elsewhere -- even from their peers.
3
You know I can understand, not condone, this type of evil behavior fro m a 18 year old whose harmones are playing havoc with his body and mind and who has no impulse control. But from mature, very successful, powerful and rich people? Give me a break. They can have just about any woman if they try to pursue her. How many women would spurn them? And, they can have as many as they want or can handle. But these beasts have to sexually assault helpless women and make them feel like pieces of meat is unforgivable. Not in a MIllion Years I would have suspected Charlie Rose of these activities. But, he turned out to be another sewer rat and a maggott as well.
7
I used to admire the man, enjoyed his in depth interviews.
Then came CBS, why on earth did a man like him have to sell his soul to the morning program and occasional 60 minutes segments other than for money.
And then came the change in style, rather than taking a step back, he infused himself with his interlocutor and was boastful about himself, and he changed (liked not wear his cuflink :- ), and personalize things (as after his surery in Paris).
I stopped watching him a while ago.
I hope that he vanishes in disgrace.
2
We now have a president who boasted about groping women and making unwanted sexual advances. Not only that, almost half the people that voted for him were women. He has been accused of sexual assault by at least 16 women, and rather than apologize, he has threatened to sue them. Why is it that we have come to accept that this President isn't accountable for his behavior, but others in much less of a position of power are?
18
Why are we not able to comment on Glenn Thrush? If Rose is a 10 on the scale of inappropriate behavior, I'm not sure based on the article that Thrush even earns a 1. Who hasn't left a party and made out with somebody?
1
Don't get worked up all at once, people.
There will be more. Many more.
1
There is a spectrum of bad sexual behavior with Trump, Cosby, Moore, and Weinstein on one end committing rape and Franken on the other end French-kissing and pretending to feel up a coworker. They need to be treated appropriately at the level of abuse they committed and not lumped. Trump being President and the severity of scorn heaped on Franken both make me want to throw up.
14
'I always felt that I was pursuing shared feelings ...'
For all provocative behavior there is a sexual predator; just as there is at least two sides to every story.
3
Charlie (we were on a first name basis, I had seen him so often) would be the one to ask guests profound questions like, "what do you want your legacy to be?" or "how would you like to be remembered?" Well Charlie, I guess you had something different in mind for yourself and you certainly should have known better. Shame!
3
My dear old mother adored and worshiped Charlie Rose. “Oy, what a genius, “she’d say! She is now rolling over non stop in her grave.
3
PBS deserves their share of the blame for distributing product, paying practically nothing for it, and claiming it as their own brand. Charlie Rose Productions had no HR department, and PBS and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting never questioned it.
3
What is it with male baby boomers these days?
5
Couldn't Charlie find someone to say 'Yes'?
2
Sorry, but I never thought Charlie Rose was a gifted interviewer. He was slow and bumbling and didn't seem as sharp or shrewd as people thought. His CBS morning show was equally insipid. That said, what idiot invites a woman who works for him to his home 60 miles away??? Or to his hotel room? Or comes out of a room in a bathrobe? Did he think he was invincible because he was rich and famous and powerful? He's too old not to know what sexual harassment is. Shame on him and shame on his show for keeping him so long. Good riddance.
11
It doesn't just happen to "famous" people......what about those battered wives and girlfriends who can't get away from their monsters??
9
are you equating crude advances with battering?
2
That's not news. It's only when it involves the fancy people that the media discovers it. Then, they make it look like revealing it was their idea.
3
Liberals in the entertainment business have not had to conform to corporate norms that started evolving 30 years ago as a result of legal developments. Some of the comments to this article seem to suggest the sleaze in the entertainment business is the same in other business sectors. Not even close. Wonder why these individuals felt they could get away with it? The reasons are obvious.
1
Good point . It's been at least twenty years since legal actions regarding sexual harassment have governed behavior in the corporate world. Most of these events have taken place in entertainment, and politics.
2
I strongly disagree with the idea that as a woman you cannot possibly accept business meetings at your boss' home or in a hotel room.
There can be a lot of reasons why that's the most convenient place, and of course being able to have a more intimate conversation can be part of it, and there's nothing wrong with that.
It's well-known that male bosses ALSO invite male employees or clients to come to their home/hotel room, which allows them to create friendships that may then enhance business in general.
To start asking women to install physical separations between them and male colleagues and bosses is totally absurd. It would only prejudice women even more, on the work floor, compared to men (as Pence is doing, for instance).
The only way to stop this is to:
1. start educating our boys and girls (and men and women) on gender relationships
2. teach boys that women do NOT always want to go to bed with them and that they have to withdraw immediately as soon as a woman says "no"
3. teach girls that they are wonderful human beings whose feelings and desires deserve to be fully respected by THEMSELVES, to start with, so that they don't hesitate to say "no" as soon as someone (intentionally or mistakenly) crosses a boundary they don't want to see crossed.
Studies show that women tend to suffer much more from lack of self-esteem than men, which may explain why they wait so long to say "no". So this is a complex, cultural issue. Simply firing men may not be the solution ...
9
this was a surprise. (the other recent people-in-the-spotlight - not so much). just because of the apparent contradiction between the thoughtful / insightful / sensitive "on camera" persona and the in-person, private stuff that is pretty much the polar opposite of his on-the-air personality. I guess "you never really know". Disappointing.
3
Time to rewrite the history of Bill Clinton
7
Time to get rid of our groper-in-chief, whose accusers far outnumber Clinton's.
1
Do women lack brain power? So this woman who is so traumatized she wishes to remain anonymous -- goes for a job interview to his estate? First stupid move. Then he makes an excuse to go change, comes out in a bathrobe open at the front, she stays and sits by the pool until they go up to his bedroom?
Really? Here's the way I'd read it if I were CR. Ok, I've tried a little bit of the flash, then the dash to the bedroom. She hasn't left, slapped me, told me to put my pants on, etc. It's 2010. Women are empowered to stand up for themselves. Now she's accompanied me to the boudoir -- I think I've seduced her. A mix of charm and power, ok, mostly power, but -- she could have left at any time. I wouldn't view it as she is this helpless creature that I'm abusing.
Tell you what women. I'm a straight male. If I wanted a job working for a gay guy and he invited me for an interview to his estate, I'd say -- not for me thanks. I'm a pro, we interview in your office or a neutral site. But say I'm dumb enough or ambitious enough that I'm willing to go to his estate, he comes out in a bathrobe with goodies on display, I make it real clear I'm out of there. Period. Attorneys to be calling him.
Until women acknowledge some culpability in their behavior and that they have agency this will go on. You aren't helpless little creatures. If you don't have the gumption to make things real clear, or if your greed and ambition makes you so manipulable then ....
17
If a woman is crying when you try to feel her up and you continue, you're a sick sexual predator. Period. Let's drop the blame game. These women didn't do anything to Charlie. He did it all to them. Shame on him!
Fun that CBS would fire him, since they had ads running about the sexual tension between him and the other 2 females host.
But what a pervert walking around nude in front of others.
3
Can we add, what an idiot? I can't think of anything that would upset him more than being placed in the same category as Trump.
1
At least 3 houses or apartments in NYC or nearby. Starting as no nonsense interviewer on his own show with his own name.
Then becoming interviewer on 60 minutes; then entertainer on a morning coffee ha ha show.
Charles , we thought we knew you. Now in your 70s? Why didn’t you retire at 65, normal retirement age? Because you needed the power, power, power, and the spoils to keep up your lavish lifestyle?
3
“I always felt that I was pursuing shared feelings, even though I now realize I was mistaken.” HaHa No way Charlie. You are at work, and not at the Chocolate Factory.
Those women are someones daughters, sisters, and mothers. You are a lecherous old fool to think that there are any "shared" feelings.
Do me a favor, look at a picture online of a woman in a swimsuit that is the same age as you. Tell me sir, how attracted do you feel? That is exactly how those women felt. Nothing shared.
6
Gag. I loved him and his style but he is clearly a disgusting human being.
3
Behind every successful man is a bunch of sexually harassed women. Sad.
12
Surely this is the first anyone at PBS has heard of these alllegations.
2
This happens everywhere, not just with high profile men. I worked in a professional firm early in my career where one particular client was always fondling me, another was habitually lewd on the phone, and a third pounced on me with a big wet kiss including tongue at an office party that included clients. When I talked with the senior partner about their behaviour his response was to burst out laughing and tell me to lighten up. I had to deal with it myself and told him I would do so. I lifted the first client's hand off me the next time he touched me. I told the second one I would hang up on him if he did not clean up his act and told the third one off for the unwanted intimate kiss. This was some time ago, but things haven't changed much in the interim. So, we are hearing about well known men behaving very badly, but also have to understand that there are hordes of them who are less well known who exert their power over women in the workplace. It has to stop whether it is Charlie Rose, Harvey Weinstein, Al Franken, your boss or colleague or mine. What is needed is not just for women to stand up and speak up, but also for men to be heard from by saying that they will not stand idly by as women are being harassed and assaulted by their peers.
11
In some instances the women still have to accept some of the responsibility for what happens to them. A man invites you to his estate for a "job interview," he interviews you by the pool, his pants get wet, you go to his bedroom with him while he changes -- seriously -- at that point, Rose had every right to think that the woman was up for whatever happened next.
I'm not excusing him but I am saying that women need to be smarter too in regard to how they interact with men.
I still question the accusations against Franken from a rightwing radio host, veteran of USO tours, Hooters girl, Playboy cover girl, Playboy and Fredericks of Hollywood lingerie model who was "traumatized" by skit kiss and a joke photo. I also have a hard time believing a woman who claims Franken touched her behind with her father and husband standing in front of them taking a photo at a fair in MN. Sorry this is all a "bridge too far" on Franken and smacks of politically motivated "me too-ism." Looks very much like the work of a sleaze like Roger Stone.
19
i think it is kind of a planted story also and supposedly stone knew ahead of time this story would break? everything is orchestrated
7
As “To Kill A Mockingbird” reminds us, we see what we want to see. I don’t want to believe Al Franken did this, but in a world where there’s only the accuser’s word against the the perpetrator, at least there’s a photo. For crying out loud, how much smoke needs to flow from the barrel before it’s a smoking gun?
There are plenty of men who are kind and supportive to women who get stepped on by the jerks who are rushing to treat women like dirt.
Why shouldn’t there be a reckoning for those who use their power to humiliate and damage others?
1
CBS had just announced it has fired Charlie Rose. PBS and Bloomberg will certainly cut their ties completely.
I hope that they also require that he hand over his Rolodex or the digital equivalent.
I have watched his show for years, and while it was obvious that he had a gargantuan ego, his extensive network of experts in multiple fields and their insights added immensely to my understanding of the world.
Let us hope that a show with a similar format will be developed to present in-depth conversations on the many issues we face in today's world, perhaps with multiple hosts, hopefully many women.
Charlie Rose is not indispensable.
Just as his victims should not have had to suffer the indignities and anxiety they have, so his audience should not lose a source of valuable information.
This would be a great loss for professional journalism and all its good work to keep our citizens informed and to protect us from truly fake news.
9
Yes, a similar format for an hour with another host. Please.
4
If it hasn’t been done already, maybe the Supreme Court should draw up rules of conduct assuring that all future sexual encounters between the sexes -- including those taking place within the confines of marriage -- must henceforth be mutually consented to in advance in writing. Of course, all such contracts will have to be signed by the participating parties, witnessed and notarized. While not absolutely mandatory, videos of the actual sexual encounters will be encouraged as a means of further protecting the rights of the participating parties.
What a great country this is. All over the place right now we’ve got guys making these tortured apologies when what they are really trying to do is avoid saying “I am crude and ignorant and always have been and always will be.”
3
I wish the press would spend its time digging into the unequal pay women in the workforce suffer. That strikes me as a more important problem affecting all women who work.
As to unwanted sexual encounters in the workplace, young women should be told what they might expect and how to handle unwanted advances. I'm not talking about rape, stalking, assault, which are criminal offenses. I'm talking about flirting, kissing, groping, which are wrongdoings. I wish I was hearing that women were proud to have handled their offenders. It doesn't make the incident less unpleasant, but we are farther ahead when we know to confront or to walk away from these situations. I am kicking myself because I never raised these issues with my own daughter, but I sure have talked with her about her addressing it with her daughter.
14
If we go by what you said, no flirting, etc. let's just end the whole dating
'Thing' and have arranged marriages. Give me a break!
Sorry, you're right. Flirting doesn't have to be off limits. But I thought that might be old fashioned. The young TV women seem to be anti-flirting, so I was bowing to them. What do I know about this generation? They do seem a bit hysterical.
No matter how Charlie Rose (or Roy Moore, or Al Franken, or Donald Trump, etc., etc.) explains himself, I think you can be sure that he knew what he was doing was wrong. (How nauseating to hear the apologies flow, AFTER their exploits become public). If he was so clueless then why would he have fired the woman who described the experience to the mutual friend who then told Rose. If he had so misinterpreted their relationship then he would have apologized to the woman, not fired her. His response exhibited anger that he'd been exposed and you don't get angry about being exposed unless you are aware you're behaving in an unacceptable manner.
These powerful, predatory men continue to behave the way they do because they are protected; they have handlers who actively support and/or cover up the abuses in order to protect the money tree. (as did Rose's producer Yvette Vega).
5
will there be litigation ? probably
It's amazing that this is happening in the 21st century. Women have been in the workforce in full force for almost 40 yrs now. And yet, some men do not know how to "deal" a woman if she is not his mom or his girlfriend. This is unacceptable behavior, but I agree with some of the comments- a man invites you to his country house, alone, you don't go. a man invites you to his room, alone, you don't go unless you are in fact interested. Any other response is naivete at best and stupidity at worst. Unfair? Maybe. Self-preserving? you bet.
7
Is this story, shocking as it may be, really more important than the Domesday (for the middle classes) tax bill being pushed in Congress, the thousands of people being killed in Syria and Yemen, the plight of Puerto Rico, and the ongoing story of a stolen democracy and system of government in jeopardy?
Somehow, news coverage seems to have become very unbalanced with a focus on sexual stories and "crude advances." These should be reported but are daily reports on some, like this one, really more important to our world that dying and starving people or complete corruption of government?
11
Yes, I'm sure this is all a convenient and timely distraction as far as the Trump administration is concerned.
4
This story is about the people who set the tone for how we perceive the world and how we find our role in it.
Men and woman can of course be caring, have good judgement and excellent in their relationships and career and still be impulsive and reckless in reacting to sexual urges. That goes for straight and gay men and women who cross boundaries. I suspect women will come out accusing other women at some point. Grandiosity, narcissism, ego. The desire to work, the effort to be accommodating agreeable can create confusion for anyone of either sex pressed by superiors in power and that’s heightened when it’s a highly respected or famous professional. A pass is a pass but can and does confuse the heck and stress out the recipient of advances and worry about the impact of the moment can create fear and anxiety. What’s with this naked or exposure deal? It’s pathetic. The nudity, open robes, towels etc. are like a bad movie. How in gods name can anyone think that doing that or worse groping and touching , worse yet grabbing and attacking young people in in one case a famous man hitting on a 14 year old! Developmental issues in amok. From the smallest company or store to the boardroom, military to entertainment and every race there’s a consciousness that needs to be clear. It’s not ok. Also false accusations and gold digging will hopefully be exposed for what they are. Some seem very transparent. Yet if the person is seen as warm and fuzzy they seem to get a pass or get in front of it. Oh well thanks life.
Meanwhile POTUS in the White House with his video statement goes on.
3
One fears the inevitable "Handmaid's Tale" backlash in response to the explosion of these allegations of men behaving hormonally toward women. One should remember that many of these men are extremely wealthy, they sit on corporate boards--until they're turned out--and have access to political power that the little people can only dream of. Look out for the repressive reprisals that are sure to come.
5
I have to admit that I'm not sure that I'm getting it here.
If a man believes that you like him and would like to have a relationship with him, and he tries to seduce you by walking naked, is this a case of "sexual assault"?
And if a woman doesn't react and then even goes to his bedroom with him, AND allows him to touch her between the legs but simply starts to cry, is it still sexual assault?
Of course a man has to stop IMMEDIATELY when a woman says "no". But apparently, she never said no.
Are men now supposed to seduce women by asking them to sign a document first?
To me, this whole "movement" is starting to go too far.
Of course you have to fire men who are raping co-workers. But stories like these ones, are they a reason to fire people?
I consider myself to be a feminist, and I too have a list of men trying to kiss me without asking, sometimes even after I said "no". But I have to admit that in certain cases, I did like it, and it turned into real relationships.
On the other hand, it took me at least 10 years before I learned how and when to say no, so I fully understand how bad these women may have felt. When I was younger, I thought a clear "no" would offend them, hurt them, make them believe that I despised them although that wasn't the case at all, and yes, sometimes I really wanted to be liked by them although I didn't want any sexual relationship.
But not having learned to say no is one thing, ALWAYS blaming the other is a totally different thing ...
10
Trump remains extremely quiet about all of this, except for the occasional comment about how bad the Democrats are. Consider the context as others have aptly proposed on the NYT Comments: Power corrupts and people use power (implied, actual, economic, career growth, etc) to coerce others into acts and deeds they are hurt by. Trump's silence suggests to me he has been a serial abuser and there have been several women who have stepped forth. I suspect there can be more salacious behavior in Trump's past.
Not to dismiss any of their anger nor emotional hurt, but what are Republicans doing today? They are jamming through "tax reform" that is a policy which masquerades the transfer of wealth from America's Middle Class and Poor to the upper 1% and large multi-national corporations.
Want to talk about abuse and social harassment? Shifting the tax codes to legally rob 90+% of America in favor of the few, the already wealthy, seems like where the focus by the media and press ought to remain. That economic abuse is permanently bad for our society.
Is it possible our nation can focus on both topics and drive to equitable social fairness?
7
The default blaming system has changed. We are listening to the accusers.
3
I've gone in the opposite direction as a result of the current mania.
I used to take allegations of sexual assault seriously. Now every woman who got kissed once by a guy they didn't like says they were assaulted. I don't even listen anymore.
1
A major mistake we make in evaluating other people is our tendency to divide the human race into two categories, good OR bad. It seldom occurs to us that someone can be both.
Most human beings have the potential for bad, even evil, behavior. Fortunately, most of us keep our darker impulses in check most of the time. But I think the risk is always there, to varying degrees.
2
How has Trump been able to get away with this? My fear is that this problem is so rampant, that if and when we revisit Trumps behavior towards women that people are going to become anesthetized that it's going to be seen as "well everyone does it" and he's given yet another pass.
12
It has become abundantly clear that men in positions of power, from high level executives to officers on the beat to low level managers, have felt entitled to the women who work for and with them. They have abused, assaulted, and harassed women because those in power to whom women could complain were also men. Women who have gone public have been blamed if believed, or dismissed as liars. Remember Anita Hill? Mr. Trump's many accusers? The women accusing Roy Moore?
Just 4 years ago in Iowa, a female GOP staffer, one with many years of experience, was fired 7 hours after filing detailed complaints against males in her caucus who created a hostile work environment for her and other women. She hired a lawyer and sued, winning a 2.2 million dollar settlement. Of course, the harassers and abusers are still in power, and Iowa taxpayers will pay the tab for their abuses.
Finally, enough women are coming out and being believed that other women are encouraged to report their abuses.
Hopefully we are beginning to turn a corner where men who assault and harass will live in fear that THEIR OWN careers and reputations are at risk.
7
This is going to sound like piling on at this point but I've always thought Mr. Rose was highly overrated as an interviewer, largely due to one humongous flaw: he often starts a question with a wonderfully broad query but then proceeds to expound on his question, adding more detail and information about the subject, until he's narrowed down the possible "answer space" to a sliver of the original. How many times I've thought to myself, "Oh, great question; can't wait to hear the answer from the guest" only to hear Charlie drone on (often it seems to make it clear how "knowledgeable" he is), leaving the guest to just say something like "Yes" or "No". It told me: 1) this guy's ego is getting in the way, and 2) he must never review his own tapes to see how he could improve (probably related to #1).
This emperor has no clothes.
(guess he has a bath robe, at least, though)
5
Why aren't all these cases being treated as crimes? They are crimes, aren't they? Sexual harassment? Intimidation? Threats--implied or otherwise? Assault? Sexual assault? Yet they still strut around like masters of the universe subject only to the tiny wrist-slap of being momentarily the subject of this so-called
"national conversation." Why are they being dealt with completely outside the law? Why are they censured only in the press and in corporate boardrooms as though they had committed no crime? What's the deal? Where are the police in all this? I think, if the statute of limitations hasn't expired, these predators and perverts ought to be in handcuffs. The insolence of these non-apology "apologies" by men who still believe they're immune to criminal prosecution is outrageous. Embarrassment is not the punishment for criminal behavior. Jail is.
3
This greatly saddens me, yet does not surprise me. My wife and I have both noticed that he offers more deference to male interviewees, whereas he more frequently interrupts and talks over women on his show.
12
good point megyn kelly said the same thing about her interview with him for her book
3
I was never a fan of Charlie Rose. But How do we know these charges are true? I am getting more and more apprehensive viewing what is becoming a McCarthy-like witchhunt!!
4
Sad to hear this since I liked his reporting and his intellect. Sounds like long ago CBS should have fired him if they knew he was predatory. A small thing that could be done is to prevent male executives from meeting alone in their homes with women. That's a situation ripe for problems. Conduct business at work. Another way to solve it is to hire way more women than men for top level positions in government and in the media and in all top level positions. How many times do you hear about female executives coming out nude before male subordinates, or women trying to seduce young men? It's just not routine. Sorry Charlie, but you should have retired years ago.
3
The Frankens and Roses of the world are products of a culture, not guilty of creating it. As despicable as their acts may be, they have an opportunity to be part of the need for change. All the brave women coming out make it clear that enough is enough and it’s game on. There needs to be enough space for dialogue, contrition and rehabilitation. Unlike Moore, while imperfect, the statements released by Rose and Franken acknowledge wrongdoing. Meanwhile, the worst offender sits in the White House.
4
It’s NOT about blaming the victim. There’s no doubt that the behavior of these men ranged from tasteless to criminal and they deserve every negative consequence coming to them. That being said the reactions of many women over the years just confirmed their belief that they could do anything and get away with it. Some of the women were very young and it’s certainly understandable that they didn’t have the confidence to respond appropriately and were inexperienced or immature enough to wonder if they were somehow at fault.
However some made the calculation that this awful behavior was something they had to endure. According to the Washington post article, “There are so few jobs,” said one of the women who said Rose groped her. “You know if you don’t behave a certain way, there’s someone else behind you.”
Really?? This isn’t some teenager or young woman earning minimum wage who endures harassment from an assistant manager because their job puts food on the table. These are women with choices. As bad as the situation might seem right now, I don’t for a minute believe that EVERY man in EVERY industry is an abuser. If standing up to an abuser results in a lost job, so be it. And if there are a lot of “someone else behind you’s” out there willing to trade their self-respect for a job, then we have a larger problem.
4
There always seemed to me that there was something 'wrong' about Charlie Rose. Without knowing it I assumed from his manner that he did not have a wife or children and probably did not have a girlfriend. If you are and old person, as I am, and have been around, so to speak, you have a sense when there is something not quite right about certain people; there expression, their manner.
6
anhedonia fear of real relationships
1
It seems offenders are taking two clear courses of action. Offenders from the right admit no wrongdoing, demean their accusers and ride it out - sometimes all the way to the White House. Offenders from the left mostly come clean, apologize to their accusers, and go off somewhere to regroup. But there's really only one correct response to this sort of abuse. And that's the swift and sure removal from the position of power that allowed the behavior in the first place. This applies equally to workplace offenders from Fox and PBS, to politicians who do and don't share our views, even to men who entertained us and made us laugh. Shouldn't we all at least agree on that?
2
Very disappointing! I will miss Charlie Rose's incredible interviews!
How could none of his friends or colleagues get him to stop this self-destructive behavior? And why was Charlie not able to recognize his behavior was not only illegal but damaging to these young women? Does he not have a conscience?
How can such a smart person be so dumb at the same time? Sad!
3
So much for being around smart people as a model to good behavior.
I feel like the last nice guy in the world and perhaps a bit of a dupe for thinking respect and the golden rule was the norm.
3
For all of his warts, I for one want Charlie Rose back on the air.
He has apologized and we need to accept that and move on.
We are poorer in the morning and in journalism in general for not having him.
He's made mistakes but he is ours - please bring him back.
49
We're poorer for not having Mark Halperin, too. But now it is time to give someone else their jobs. Maybe women.
6
I'm not so forgiving!
Maybe because I have three young daughters and 'hate' men like Charlie that are sexual predators who prey on young women!
His behavior is illegal and reprehensible.
He needs to retire and call it a career.
4
I'm so disappointed in Charlie Rose for his actions. I'm also disappointed in his responses. A perfunctory apology and then denial, in his tweet and when a reporter asked him about wrongdoings. "There were no wrongdoings." A good man wouldn't be so dismissive. It wasn't just one. I'd be suspect, as I am of Franken's accusers. Rose, like Harvey Weinstein, Louis CK, Roy Moore, had it down to a system, and there are so many accusations for each of them.
Maybe, as a man, you can move on. Most of us can't.
3
Due process?
5
Due process is an amendment to the US Constitution that applies to government action. If Mr. Rose believes he's been treated unjustly by his contractors, he can sue
2
"Due process" is something we all need to consider even though it is a legalistic term that does not apply to mere allegations and day to day behavior. Unfortunately, all that is necessary to "convict" someone for life in the mind of most of the public is a credible, well reported news item. This should in no way be taken as a defense of Charlie Rose (please!) but rather a defense of the idea that caution is required in these and other situations.
1
Quite correct. It is indeed, and he may indeed. But it is also a concept in natural law invoking fairness in all matters of jurisprudence, civil or criminal, and as a protection against unequal or prejudicial procedure. It is from that principle--not its per se code construct--that legal reasoning and judgment in rights most effectively stem. Corporations are often curiously deficient in their understanding and compliance in procedure, or, in the easy cause of action they may thereby create. This is also of interest in numerous media and public judgments over so-called terror acts that survive procedurally despite an absence of investigation and due diligence. Regards.
1
A Rose is a Rose is an O’Reilly.
18
Nor quite , there are no 32 Million dollar payouts
So O’Reilly was smarter. Otherwise... same, same.
Charlie Rose is so busy talking and interrupting his guests that I can't imagine when he found time to make crude sexual advances.
17
Excellent point well stated. Jimmy Carter was on the Rose show on PBS several times. On one occasion, he interrupted Rose and said, "I thought you were supposed to interview me." Rose exhibited a massive sense of insecurity by repeatedly dragging out questions and using the comments, recycling, of those being interviewed as a way to make himself look smart.
3
Not to mention not paying attention to his guests or reading up on some of the topics they discussed.
1
I see a "Franken-Stein scale" of Sexual Harassment evolving..
What was the level of the harassment? Was it as horrible and perverted as Weinstein or was it merely uncomfortable and demeaning like Franken..? We either draw lines and examine each case by case or lump everyone together as misogynist predators.
15
Sexual Harassment.....(translation: Sex, Power, 'Money'):
It's been almost a month (and counting) and this issue commands 24/7 TV Network coverage, as the list of perverts increases after every commercial break. What is one to do?
"Newsflash": - Hold a National Fess-Up Fest
On a more serious note, this, and many other pressing issues demand Presidential leadership(?), Congressional doggedness, and Spiritual guidance.
- Sexual Harassment (we-the-people morality issue)
- North Korea (military/congressional, we-the-people issue)
- Gun Control (we-the-people morality, mental health, guts issue)
- Russian Meddling (DOJ/Special Counsel, Congressional, we-the-people
issue)
Our national priorities swing in the balance, as we grapple with the deeply troubling issue of sexual harassment, and the related criminal acts of intimidation through power and money. There should be no double standard here for anyone. They all should resign or face suspension....all of them including Rose, Spacey, Weinstein, Franken, Conyers, Moore, etc. As for Trump, Bush and Clinton, they should all come forward with their wives in tow, face the nation, apologize, and beg forgiveness.
Are you kidding me !!
2
I blame Hugh Hefner. Living the playboy life.
8
You should blame Bill Clinton and his defenders. It's just about sex, and everybody does it. The feminists thought they were just giving Bill Clinton a pass; it turns out the feminists were giving a lot of men mixed signals and a pass on harassment.
1
It is very interesting and unsettling to see the Times is allowing reader comments on the stories about Charlie Rose and Al Franken, but not the one about Glenn Thrush. Why not?
26
Why not, indeed? You get only one guess...
Yes! Thank you. And why was Thrush even suspended in the first place? It is acknowldged his interractions with McGann were "consensual." Moreover, as McGann was his superior, if anyone was to be accused of inappropriate behavior or harrassment, shouldn't it be her? The three other instances in which Thrush is said to have kissed women all took place in office party settings where, admittedly, alcohol was a factor, and all parties acknowledged that Thrush desisted when they asked. I understand that while the Times may feel it imperative to announce a formal procedure at this stage, the public shaming and the abjectness of Thrush's response are more than concerning -- it's frightening.
another hypocrite is exposed....finally
what took so long ?
who else knew and stayed silent ?
6
Bill Cosby! Charlie Rose! Wow!
Makes you wonder how many others once thought respectable are now skulking around worrying if their creepy behavior will be outed next.
Who's next? Santa Claus?
6
Keep your kids off his lap, just in case.
1
Christ, have we all gone insane? What man has not made sexual advances in an attempt to woo a desirable woman to go to bed? Before you chop my head off, I am not saying FORCED advances, or locking them in your car and refusing to let them go. If the woman says no, then you must know that no sometimes means "not yet, keep trying". Sometimes it means "NO absolutely not". It is an age old courting game. One must be real with themselves as well as others. Im sure this statement will be misunderstood by some. I am not saying forced sexual advances is OK sometimes, but measured advanced do walk the line. Ultimately you cannot think with the penis. I think some of these celebrity perps have been faced with a ton of girls (relatively speaking) who are ready and willing to have sex. Over time this leads the celebrity (or popular fella) to assume most want sex and they get a bit arrogant and socially lazy and eventually just expect it... sometimes unfortunately to the point of insisting on it. That is when the line is crossed. I think that some accusers of celebrity "perps" also retaliate when they find the celebrity only wanted sex and not a relationship. This needs to be considered before burning these fellas at the stake. Now, creeps like Roy Moore who foist themselves upon naive teenage girls, they should be castrated and prohibited from ever holding a public position of any kind.
23
THESE WERE WORK SITUATIONS WHERE HE HAD THE POWER. This is wrong. Plain and simple.
7
I wrote a long post about this which the NYT evidently rejected, but I agree with you. I've been harassed, embarrassed, offended, discriminated against, or assumed compliant to advances at every job in 4 decades of working. I'm a very reserved person, and there would never have been any reason for any man to think I would appreciate his advances, dirty jokes, double entendres, constant references to sex, erections, and ejaculation.
When I've protested or complained, I've been fired. I've sued an employer and won. I understand the anger.
But I would classify these incidents as indignities. Gross indignities. Unless you were forced or assaulted or exposed to the egregious acts that many accusers have detailed, it's an indignity, not assault.
I think the current "J'accuse" backlash is like many trends or behaviors that undergo dramatic change. The anger has been suppressed for centuries and now the fury is seismic. It will settle down, although I hope all women (including me) will now interrupt and confront these encounters in the moment. And do it publicly if warranted. But unless it's truly an assault or harassment, going to the media about having your butt grabbed puts out the message that you (and all women) are too fragile to just handle the incident on their own.
7
14 year old girls are one thing but grown women need to speak up and speak out immediately when they are harassed. If that means changing departments, jobs, schools, etc. yes, it sucks but it needs to be done. Otherwise it enables the harasser and sets things up for the next victim. Susan Fowler should be the role model here.
4
I believe some of these women did speak up -- specifically, to Rose's producer ,
Yvette Vega (a woman). She has apoogized for not doing anything about the complaints.
4
Well, Mr Big, there's Anita Hill's story. She spoke up, but the powers that be (looking at you Joe Biden) chose to be dismissive of her complaints, and didn't even bother to hear the other ladies' versions.
7
Mr. Big,
It can take a very long time to get a job and it is almost impossible to stay afloat financially on unemployment. It is not the role of the victim to change their lives or financial prospects or to attempt to change the behavior of the predator. The reason why you see so many of these victims coming out now is that finally the culture is having a moment where they are being heard. When this happened to me, 16 years ago, I had landed a job I loved at an animation company after having completed a 6 month internship there. A fellow coworker began harassing me over email and in person. I asked him to stop over email and explained that I was uncomfortable. Her wrote back that he didn't believe in sexual harassment and that I had gorgeous legs. I forwarded his emails to the HR department who got freaked out that he might quit over this, as he was a more important and talented senior member of the team so they bought him an expensive art book as a gift. And told me not to engage in "banter" with him. I began looking for another job and as I was fresh out of school and the only thing that qualified me for the job I currently had was my prior internship with them, it took me months to get out. There are may circumstances why people can't just leave, Mr. Big. And sometimes complaints get you shunned, fired (for some mysterious other cause) or are just ignored. Just thought you should hear one such case..
6
I learned more from the Charlie Rose Show than all other news broadcasts and media presentations combined. His simple, but effective format, in which quality, substantial guests could speak candidly at length and in depth about their area of expertise, real life experience, opinions on current issues and suggestions for the future, was compelling, provocative, useful and informative. His political views notwithstanding, I was always enlightened by his show and inspired to seek further knowledge, insight and perspective. If he is permanently silenced, America will suffer a great loss. However, we are a Nation of Laws and Due Process, under those laws and practices, must prevail. I must admit I have great difficulty reconciling the punishment, legal, economic, ethical and moral, that Charlie will suffer vis-a vis the punishments meted out for the cowardly, heinous acts of Ted Kennedy at Chappaquiddick in 1969 and the incessant, interminable abuse by the Clintons. As always, apathy and ignorance remain the ultimate enemies.
10
Had you watched his show recently -- like in the last 3 or 4 years? Not much to learn there in my opinion, just a lot of self-promotion by the guests and yawning by Rose, who should have retired years ago as far as I'm concerned.
1
Wow. You must be some die-hard Republican to be reaching back to Ted Kennedy in 1969 (!) and the "Clintons." The last time I checked Hillary wasn't accused of fondling or harassing a male intern.
2
DUALITY! That's the monster. I too appreciated the information gleaned from his interviews but could also see signs that things were off. CR's incessant fawning over intriguing women like Tilda Swinton and Annie Lennox and his yearning to be as hip as Bono and others. Sometimes his gotcha approach, especially when interviewing Bashar al-Asaad was troubling and made his approach read as juvenile. A disconnection with reality and so the liberties he took gained steam. He appeared to believe his own hype and was far from introspective. Seems to have lost his compass long ago but managed to talk and read his way around most subjects until time caught up with him. A waste but a valuable lesson.
As D. Trump mentored would be celebrity Billy Bush on how to treat women when you are a "star," the future president of the United States gave by far the best explanation of the behavior of men in power. As far as pretty women and their private parts are concerned, Billy, if you want it, take it! When you are a star they let you. You can do anything, grab them anywhere.
The future leader of the free word demonstrated enormous analytic ability as he dispassionately elucidated the prerogatives of men in power. Every new instance of predation that has come to light is fully explained by Trump's Billy Bush Tutorial on the Bus.
Thank you, Mr. President
16
You're right. Hate to say it.
At least he tried to cut down on the grossness by eating Tic-Tacs before grabbing/kissing/manhandling his victims.
I hope these revelations and accusations will deter bad behavior in the future. I refuse to judge people I don't know talking about events I didn't witness. We have a court system, it includes Criminal Statutes of Limitations for a reason. It appears that many powerful men have become sexual bullies and I hope any current or future event is reported and prosecuted thoroughly. I am not interested in the past as much, because it was a culture and society that hopefully has passed.
1
I was sad but not surprised about this news. I can remember watching CBS Morning News on many occasions when Charlie Rose made creepy, inappropriate sexual comments to both Norah O'Donnell and Gayle King who seemed to do their best to laugh it off and move on. I found it surprising and always wondered what was going through their minds at those awkward moments.
11
Even if this abuse of women has been going on for 10,000 years, I hope I never become a rich successful man with power over women. I wouldn't do well.
I don't see anything in this article stating htat Rose was expecting sexual favors for attaining or keeping a job. The ue of force isn't mentioned here. Men have always come n towomen by touching them, even in sensitive plces. This is part of the mating game.
Women have been walking around naked or semi-naked in front of men as long as I can recall. Drress styles for women are largely for the purse of luring men into looking at them. They create lascivious thoughts which become hard to resist.
Men need to stop apologizing and strt fighting these chages.
women who claim to hae been traumatized by a touch or seeing a man naked need to grow up.
12
Actually, it's the male predators who need to grow up. Unwanted sexual advances from a man indicate that he suffers from infantile and narcissistic longings.
4
robert I don't know where you live where men have always come on to women by touching them in sensitive places. Where I live in LA you are not allowed to touch people even in insensitive places without their consent. Without consent it is called "battery," not "coming on" to someone.
Rose stated that he thought that he was pursuing "shared feelings." He probably did - he thinks that every 20 something woman would want to see his naked shriveled body just because he is intelligent and has power and money. Yuck.
Every single woman that I know - from 18 to 80 years old - has experienced something like this at one point (or many points) in their lives.
17
Yes, it is really gross when you think about what he must look like naked.
1
So we've covered Hollywood, Congress and now we are into Anchormen. Waiting for Corporate America's Boys Club. That should be quite a loooonng list but its time that dinosaur is brought kicking and screaming into the 21st century.
8
And academe.
1
Don't forget to include the white house. Lots of activity there to be investigated.
3
Power and integrity just do not go together. Somewhere along the way he lost himself and started thinking it was all about himself. I am shattered by this outcome, sickened by the reaches of the problem. Sheer vanity rules the halls of power with no end in sight.
1
This new accusation puts a new perspective on the accusations against Franken. This is the kind of thing that Weinstein did, and far worse than anything Franken is accused of. We can recognize this distinction without compromising our principles. Franken should be punished if he is guilty. Have the Senate censure him, and take away away his salary for a year. But these charges are not sufficient reason to fire him. The punishment should fit the crime.
9
Let me see. A man invites a woman to his private estate sixty miles out in the country? Then invites her into his bedroom? Both of which offers she apparently accepts of her own free will. And then is shocked, truly shocked, to discover that he has sexual intentions? What kind of a world are we living in?
23
Too many of these young women worked for Mr. Rose's production company as entry level non paid interns. The price they have paid for experience with a prestigious name is far too high and too close to the women Harvey Weinstein preyed on while promising employment contracts. the EEOC needs to more thoroughly check internship programs and contracted employment. there was a red flag when Rose fired his fulltime PBS Staff to replace them with recent college graduates. the Charlie Rose Show settled a class action lawsuit there was a class action lawsuit filed by unpaid interns 5 years ago.
7
"But he seemed like such a nice boy," as the women of my grandmother's generation used to say.
The frequency of men being multiply accused of varying degrees of sexual impropriety is dizzying. Apparently many of them mistook their places of employment for a sexual safari.
I joined the workforce in 1983, in a male-dominated field. I never gave it much thought, but in retrospect I suppose I've been extremely lucky over the years to have worked with well-mannered, respectful men of all ranks. Some were more refined than others, but with the exception of one married colleague who propositioned me (I stared at him and said, "don't make me take you to HR" -- problem solved) even the crassest among them always acted professionally.
In the past weeks, as sexual harassment and predation have become inescapable topics of conversation in the office, I've casually thanked some of these guys for being classier than the names-in-the-news and for, through their own good examples, fostering an environment of good behavior. Their reactions, as I would anticipate from high-caliber people, is disbelief that anyone anywhere would fail to meet that minimum standard.
I feel certain that more males at work are like the ones I know than like the ones making headlines. Still, what does it mean that I feel so grateful that the men I've worked with are credits to their gender?
15
OK I'm gonna get yelled at for saying this but here goes:
Boys and girls we live int he twentieth first century and by now all of your parents have had the 'birds and the bees' conversation with you. And that means generally that two people of the opposite gender have to have -- well-- sex to have you.
And the way two people go about this is always, and in many ways 'different'. But it often involves the masculine role(s) which sometimes include aggression and the other partner's role(s) can include manipulation and other concepts which many of us don't like to consider in the age of post feminism.
That said, Sexual Harassment ( yes - the unwelcome kind ) in the workplace is strictly forbidden by law, but unfortunately, it happens all too often and comes from both sides , even today with oftentimes the parties going along with it ( even though it is disruptive) and then ratifying the aggressor's actions. So what do we do when the 'victim' ratifies ( assuming they are not minors or the power disparity is not too great ) that 'action' either by acquiescence or by acceptance including silence for decades for example?
This is often the dilemma we face.
So, let's consider this all over again in the human context. Yes we are animals and appropriate sex is a normal expression of that animal's existence.
I think the American people already understood this little talk because in 2016 they voted for President, and they took his 'animal' behavior into account.
5
This information about Charlie Rose is no surprise to me. Heck, I've seen video clips of Rose being inappropriate on his morning show. Being that I'm not too prudish, I, as did the comedy show which played the videos, thought the behavior was funny. What is not funny is when a person uses his or her position of power to be inappropriate with someone who is a subordinate.
Say "Goodnight" Charlie.
2
yes a lot of teasing sexual implications but i thought it was all in fun tension from being on tv to a national audience never though he could be so evil preying on young women were they unpaid so not considered an employee to avoid lawsuits?
So far, not one of the men publicly accused of harassing women has been, by any stretch, attractive. Which is probably why they do it. Gaining power and money and still not be able to interest any good looking women must lead them to this aggressive unwanted behavior.
Rose is 75. When he was younger, he looked like a male model. He's got two degrees from Duke. In his youth, he was about as desirable as a man can be.
Dustin Hoffman didn't look half bad back in the day.
1
I am a woman and have, over the many years I have been alive, had to endure the blatant entitlement of men....especially men in power. It's part of the fabric of our society and it has negatively effected me in my career and my personal life. I am not the "man" I would be if I were a man. And I want to see that change. No doubt.
Even so, I am disturbed that sexual "misconduct" by powerful or famous men, especially only involving adults, would lead to immediate loss of jobs, contracts, agents, and intellectual respectability. Yes, they behaved badly. But should they be judged without due process? Is it legal to dump them? Is it ethical?
There is such a fine line between seduction (which is a natural part of human sexuality) and harassment. No one should be sexually approached at work or in a situation that places you in a position where rejecting advances threatens your job. But a situation that makes you uncomfortable (as any attempted unwanted seduction would be)? Is that grounds for a witch hunt?
Am I the only liberal feminist out there who feels uncomfortable about the dramatic responses to some of these allegations (or truths)? Obviously, some deserve to be called out for it and punished. But for others these were private sexual idiotic attempted seductions. Why are we dragging them into the limelight?
And what about Trump?
15
This is why my wife only meets with business acquaintances in public, does not drink with coworkers, and refuses to work for a man. Too many bad experiences. Let's not forget that for every important man accused of bad behavior, there are literally millions of regular men who's crimes will never be publicized - yet are no less damaging to the women unfortunate enough to come in contact with them.
63
But why should your wife's professional opportunities (no male bosses?), networking opportunities (no drinks after work?), and basic expectation of personal safety (no male bosses?) be compromised at every turn? Why does she have to retreat?
Why does one gender have to treat the workplace like a dark alley?
3
Your wife refuses to work for a man? Given that most workplaces of any significance have men running offices, departments, or the entire company, this seems somewhat limiting to a woman's job prospects. If all women refused to work for men then most women would be working at home. The answer is to get men to act as if their parents were in the room with them, not to restrict women's job prospects and activities. In Saudi Arabia women can't be in the presence of males who aren't related to them, that can't be the best solution.
2
In fact, let's do forget that you say for each 'important' man there are literally millions of 'regular' men committing sexual crimes against women, because you have absolutely no rational basis for making that assertion, do you?
I am so incredibly sad by this. Angry, disgusted, outraged, but above all...sad.
That Donald Trump is a serially sexual assailant hardly takes a leap of imagination. He is morally bankrupt, arrogant, entitled, and misogynistic. The Access Hollywood taped horrified me, but it certainly didn't surprise me.
But Charlie Rose? He had the wisdom and curiosity of a genuine public intellectual - someone who could hold his own across the table from politicians, architects, rap artists, activists, and scientists. He had the kindness and decency of a Mr. Rogers for grownups. In an era where "news" is either partisan hysteria (CNN, Fox) or watered down, entertainment-based drivel (The Today Show), his programs were such a breath of fresh air.
Right as I felt that the aftermath of Harvey Weinstein had reached fever pitch with somewhat strange accusations against Senator Franklen, I realize I was wrong to think this had gone too far. Clearly, our public reckoning hasn't gone far enough if "good guys" like Mr. Rose stand accused of such heinous actions and still haven't been ratted out. Godspeed to these courageous women who continue to speak up.
9
I don’t care what Charlie did.
I don’t care what Bill or Al did.
I don’t care as long as no laws were broken (as MIGHT be the case with Harvey, Roy & Kevin). We’ll see.
Men are fiends and it’s up to women to sort out whom they’re gonna hang with!
We’re not gonna change thousands of years of evolved behavior.
Men are driven to BE in high-powered positions by the very URGE to exploit those powers...sexually!
Q: WHY are we publicizing private behavior?
A: because sex sells!
I don’t even care what Trump did...except if any of it were illegal.
What I DO care about is that Trump is insane AND wants to destroy our nation!
All this sex stuff is a distraction from what REALLY matters!
Give it a rest, Ladies!
16
I'm a man. I was born and raised in the 90s. I don't know what men before me were taught exactly as young boys but it's pretty obvious being in the company of men that those who pretend to be the "liberal" and "feminist" men are quite often the most full of nonsense men. Most of these "pro-women" talking men on camera and in Hollywood in particular act a certain way so as to charm a certain type of women and prey on them for their sexual desires. In other cases they are also trying to fight off/hide the guilt of what they've done by pretending to be champions of causes that combat these behaviors.
Nice to see the farce of liberalism being exposed every day. The cleaner they look, the more dirt they're hiding!
6
Excess testosterone and predation on others is not limited to any political or religious group. Let's not get smug about something so sad and destructive.
Yes...better to be a Republican and regard the charge of "RAPIST" as a badge of honor, like our leader.
C'mon.
Is there any attractive woman out there, like me, who hasn't been the hitee at one time or another?
Or any soi-disant good looking guy, like me, who hasn't been the hitter?
We're in John 8:7 territory, folks, at least for the men.
Woh! It never ends. Men in position of power using their leverage to abuse women.
2
Probably some men will be crucified unjustly but that’s just collateral damage.
There are now thousands of men in power who are serial sex offenders and are shivering in their pants. I believe this watershed of accusations will forever curtail, to some degree, the behavior of men in power.
3
The Bloom is off the rose.
3
Some people have mentioned to me that Rose is single! Many women are drawn to powerful men! All the women are over twenty one! Men have been hitting on women since time immemorial! Some women accept guys advances! Some flee! What’s the big deal?! Are we so much a Puritanical society?!!!
10
Seriously—a man comes to the door in an open bathrobe with nothing on underneath—is that what you call “hitting” on someone? You are very naive.
2
Seriously--at his estate 60 miles from the city? I call it answering the door.
When I hear of these things I wonder; can I separate and evaluate the professional (on screen) from the individual off? I would like to be able to do that especially for people like Charlie Rose and Bill Cosby. Great on screen presence, but .....
1
Quote from Brian de Palma's "Scarface": "In America, first you get the money, then you get the power, then you get the women."
This quote reflects deeply on our animal nature, in which the "alpha male" has his choice of females, in some species as many as he wants. Changes in sexual behavior occur through natural selection, so females do have a choice. As such, norms evolve in tandem......males behave as they do because females behave as they do because males behave as they do because.....etc.
Humans are capable of transcending animal nature. I grew up in the 60's when standard comedy was secretaries being chased around desks by their bosses, when Playboy magazine celebrated male predatory behavior and everybody knew the meaning of "the casting couch." Some older males haven't figured out times have changed, but one must wonder if it is because they've still managed to carry off successes.
The new rules will be tricky, as there will always be genuine office romances. There will always be the male impetus of testosterone. There will always be women willing to compromise themselves for power and money. There will always be hyper-sensitive women, women who misjudge intentions, women who knowingly make false and vengeful accusations.
But at least from now on men will be more careful. And it is good to see the door slammed closed on acceptance of the most vulgar throwback behaviors.
11
When did making crude sexual advances become a "crime?" Whatever he did in his personal life is not my concern. I am tired of this witch hunt mentality. I am a woman, and I have been assaulted ... I know the difference between a crude advance and an assault. If these women did not file charges 18 years ago, it probably wasn't a big deal.
Have you ever noticed that almost every correspondent on the CBS morning news is a woman? Almost every story they cover is about women? I am tired of open season on men. And, tired of all unsubstantiated facts being reported as truths.
13
Sorry for your assault, but his behavior seems pretty disgusting and alarming to me. We are just going to draw the line at out and out assault and not punish clear harassment? These were young women working for a powerful man—this is one of the definitions of sexual harassment.
I also am a woman and I do somewhat agree; many of the incidents being reported in recent weeks fall into the "clod" category rather than the criminal. At least, among peers. When there is a big age disparity and/or employer/employee relationship, that changes things.
2
What women can't seem to comprehend is that all men secretly yearn to win that fiercest of competitions - having the biggest sex scandal ever.
2
Here's a thought. How many men have been sexually harassed by women?
Women who are now in power. C'mon guys, women should not have all the fun destroying careers of people in power.
1
When it comes to sexual harassment, there's a chorus of indignant "no ways." When it comes to tax abuse by the rich, the American people are passive and quiescent, letting the rich do whatever they like.
12
Men like sex and some don't know how to properly get it. Most women like sex as well but usually like something of a relationship with it. Some women just like one night stands. It is complicated. What is not complicated is how you get it. Not by force, not by coercion and not by power over others. Apparent;y Charlie Rose liked women as new outlets have reported about his reputation. So why does he not ask a woman out for dinner, explain, I like women, I"m just like to have fun, not going to remarry. You either want that or you don't as a woman. Sorry Charlie but it is called a date, dinner, ballet, movie whatever. Rich guys: don't be so cheap, but be clear if you've invited someone to dinner just for the dessert. And make it clear if that person is not interested in dinner, she/he will not loose her job or will still be considered for the job.
About men exposing themselves as a come on: My answer, just tell them looking at their privates seems not worth your time. They would open the door for you to leave fairly quickly.
15
I could never stand watching Charlie Rose's PBS show because he talked over his guests, interrupted them, explained them to themselves, told them what they thought, so his treatment of women really doesn't surprise me.
16
I have to say I am not surprised.
I always thought he was a thoughtful interviewer, but after watching "CBS This Morning" these past few years, he comes across sometimes as a dirty old man. Even John Oliver thinks so; he's done than one more segment on the creepy sex talk that would often take place between Rose, Gayle King and Nora O'Donnell. It put me off so much I stopped watching.
10
Thanks—I wasn’t surprised, but am surprised by how revered he seems to be. I always thought he was kind of sexist. Maybe not such a creep as we find out, but sexist for sure.
3
We are going to need to define assault, harassment, and bad/unwelcome behavior. While all are unwelcome, there are degrees of severity and right they are all being lumped into the former category.
Example being there is no moral equivalence between Al Franken and say Weinstein. The former thought he was being funny, his accuser accepted his apology; case closed. Weinstein's was a predator!
That said, why have all of the Trump accusers been silent, this is their moment!
11
Water cooler banter goes on in any office so to think no one knew about Rose's behavior is hard to believe. Now that the dam is broken there has to be a great deal of powerful men shaking in their boots wondering if they will be next on the chopping block. This daily drip of the powerful being exposed cannot change what has passed but it has to effect the future. Men in power have to know now if you want to play you have to pay. They will be paying with their careers and their stature. These guys have long believed that one of the perks of their position was to be a leech without any repercussions. For men to think they can destroy someone's life because they won't let them abuse them is the height of privilege. Guess its time these guys realize they don't walk on water.
7
There is a saying, "Fidelity among men isn't a case of morality, but opportunity"
So far we have only scratched the surface of big media names, and some in political office. "I remember a tape from LBJs storehouse, on subject of his predecessors career conquests, he said, "I get more ---- before dinner than the does in a year." OK maybe bravado, but conveyed the "good old boys" mentality that was pretty wide spread.
We haven't begun to look at academia, where it's especially tempting for youngish professors and some graduate students. It's legal, but this interplay certainly takes the focus off of rigorous transmission of a culture's knowledge base. I await the drop of the first shoe in this vast arena.
3
I certainly sympathize with these women and certainly know that they were powerless while a very powerful, famous, wealthy man took advantage of them. But why would a young woman come to his "estate" at night to meet with him? Certainly she was bright enough to know that this wasn't proper or professional...again, not excusing his appalling and repugnant behavior but she should've met him during at the day, at the very least. And why did she go to his bedroom? Really.
11
A senior partner at a firm where I worked harassed every woman in the place. Finally he went too far - he hit on a representative from another firm and insulted her (in front of everyone) when she refused his crude advances. She returned with her lawyer and threatened to sue. I'm happy to say that the firm took that seriously - they warned him to cut it out, moved his office to another floor and assigned him a tall German secretary who looked like a valkyrie.
These guys do stop when someone in authority tells them they have to. I think it is terribly sad that Charlie Rose's otherwise distinguished career has to end like this. Someone should have sic'd the valkyries on him long ago.
8
Those faulting the young women are way off base!
They cannot be blamed for the disgusting behavior of Mr. Rose toward them. He is solely responsible for his behavior! And the young women may have been naive - but that is not culpability. And it does not warrant either harassment or sexual exploitation.
9
CBS This Morning did the right thing having Rose's two coworkers, Norah O'Donnell and Gayle King speak out as coworkers, friends and as women this morning's show. I think it is important that viewers see how everybody is affected by sexual predation. I applaud CBS, PBS and Bloomberg for their stance on this.
I do have to say i feel the same way that Gayle King described. I am conflicted because I greatly admired Charlie Rose as a journalist but I am reviled by his actions toward these women.
Ultimately we, as a society, can not give successful men a pass when they commit sexual predation, advances upon women.
8
Rose did this out in the open! I remember back in '05-06 I used to solo dine every sunday night at the bar at The Spotted Pig in the West Village, a hotspot at the time and tables were scarce. Rose would always be immediately seated and get the most prominent table, right up front by the window and would either dine solo or with a very lovely young lady, clearly in her 20s. It certainly never appeared very businesslike. It was like he was showing off.
4
So what?
Since when is it a crime to have dinner with a 20-something woman at a nice restaurant, even with the age difference.
Honestly I think the press has gone too far already with this hearsay. These were all consenting adult situations and nothing illegal going on. However, Mr. Rose should have used better judgement than to hit on his employees or interns. That’s really the error and perhaps violates some labor rules.
Lacking good taste in his seduction practices is not for us to judge.
NYT can we get back to real news like the overturning of healthcare and net neutrality. I think the outrage of the people is being misdirected. Where is the outrage on your poor reporting during the election?
These male transgressions should have been dealt between the employer and employee or between the parties at the time. It ain’t none of my business or is it really news if it doesn’t impact our lives. At this point, it’s all tongue winging gossip.
Please stop becoming The National Enquirer and get back to all the “news” that’s fit to print.
Thanks.
P.S.
That list of accused men that was published today seems especially unjust. It is deeply unfair to use one brush to tarnish and lump together men who actually did heinous and illegal acts, like rape, with men who did foolish and ill-mannered things like accidentally touch a butt or go over board in a skit rehearsal.
There is no informed balance in presenting those men all together. Shame on you and your editors.
3
As much as I have admired Charlie Rose and his stellar interview panache, perhaps it's time for all of these men with unbridled power to fall, if only so that we can finally do an accounting about Trump and see him fall. It just seems that we are at that crossroads.
5
As has often been said about rape, "it's not about sex, it's primarily about power." And that's quite true about all of the acts we're discussing now. Men, especially many ones who have powerful positions in economic, political, and social organizations, need to be reassured over and over that that power is their secure possession. They need to *feel* that power. And combined with the sexual desires that all of us humans have, the result is really almost inevitable.
Until the huge power imbalance in this society, which is supposed to be a democratic one in which "all men (and women!) are created equal," is redressed, these behaviors will recur constantly.
4
Amongst all the outrage over misconduct, ranging from gross behavior to criminal acts, I have a question.
As we commit ourselves, rightly, to condemnation and changing the consciousness of men and how they see and treat women, a thought for this aspect:
What should be our position, attitude, policy toward men like Mr. Rose after the passage of time, appropriate contrition, and redress of wrongs? Something, some action that goes toward helping the victim heal and recover.
I heard Stephanie Ruhle on with Brian Williams last night.
She expressed her disgust at these continuing revelations and had such a well conceived, nuanced view of the issue, the insult, the harm.
But, she also spoke about the way forward for the victims and the men who commit the wrong. She wondered about forgiveness.
Can reconciliation and redress happen?
Is there a place for moving forward, for forgiveness or are the accused required to disappear forever?
Outrage is needed and appropriate.
Attitudes and behavior must change.
Dismissive outrage is very easy.
Harder, is reconciliation, recognition of our human failings, and even forgiveness if possible.
Even formerly hard criminals get out of prison when they show improvement.
Where is the rehabilitation piece in all this?
4
A man who had been abusive toward me said "Let's bury the hatchet." I replied, "To bury the hatchet you have to do a lot of digging." He didn't own his abuse, didn't want to hear about it. I'm definitely not a fan of premature (waaaaay premature!) talk of reconciliation.
4
This does it ; I no longer feel that I can assess , much less trust , any famous or powerful person that I do not know on a personal basis - - - which means ALL of them . Charlie would have been the last to suspect , save Jimmy Carter , of course . If Jimmy falls , I'll never believe in anything anymore .
Now I cannot watch TV , read the news or go to a movie without wondering if so - and - so is a sexual deviant in real life . As more admired and respected Charlies fall , our country is in for a rough period of readjustment . I worry that we will never trust again in those we once aspired to become . It could prove to be a crippling malaise without solution .
3
At first reading - it was pure disbelief! Then shock set in, as Charlie Rose was always pitch perfect, world renown and revered, having interviewed the whose who of greats. So now there's no reason to believe anyone as smartly educated and gifted can stop lecherous behavior. Is it overload of testosterone? Should newborn males be tested? Better yet, test men in power!
1
This is terrible. Charlie is arguably the best in the business...his shows on PBS are always first rate....This is a very sad day for up-scale journalism.
5
I think it is more than appropriate that Charlie Rose is being replaced by Antiques Roadshow, because I think that was what these unfortunate women were apparently subjected to during their employment.
7
What makes a 75 year old man think that an attractive woman in her 20's would be attracted to him?
35
Yes, Rose is old, but, when he was younger, he was the "perfect" man: Tall, handsome, Duke educated, successful. If he were 50, most women would throw themselves at him or a guy like him (6' 3", lean, handsome, supremely well educated). Rose probably spent his life getting a lot of attention from women. At any rate, Charlie Rose (younger version) is what most women describe as their perfect man.
3
Thank you for your input, Charlie
1
If he was so perfect why is he single?
He’s done. These guys generally have one thing in common, it seems. They get power and then use it to try to obtain sexual favors which were unavailable to them previously, for whatever reason. And there certainly have to be more revelations on the way. It’s getting to be like mass AK 47 shootings.
3
In men like Trump and Moore, I expect stupidity, lack of self-control and sheer moral blindness; and when I see it, I say to myself, well nothing new here, they just don't know any better. But as I watch these scandals coming to light about Franken, Thrush, Charlie Rose and men from our recent past like Bill Clinton who ostensibly represented and have produced good things for our country, I say to myself what could these fools have been thinking about when they let their families and themselves down in this way. And whatever happened to cold showers?
8
Charlie Rose just proved the adage that "It takes a lifetime to build a reputation, but you can blow it in five minutes."
19
I'm so sad by all of this.
7
I think it would be worth our time and In our collective interest to not only expose all of these predators, but to also examine why and how sex and power became such rampant pathologies in so many industries.
4
Clearly, the Shakespeare quote, "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" does NOT apply to this particular Rose, in any way, shape or form now or ever. He and his actions are a disgrace and one more name to be added to that infamous wall of shame.
3
I always ask..who were the mothers of these men? Why did they fail in teaching their sons basic respect for women?
4
It is also the duty of the father to teach respect for women -- and to model it by his behavior and moral instruction from childhood.
9
Precisely ECWB! Respect, appropriate behavior and moral instruction should come from both parents - from their words and more importantly, by their actions! I always wondered what kind of role models, if any, these men had in their life when growing up which would either condone or show by example that such behavior is appropriate and acceptable.
5
Blame the fathers. How did the father treat the mother?
3
One genius pundit I never have to listen to again. He'll enjoy his new career of writing think pieces for money-losing magazines...and not being on TV. He'll enjoy earning $75 a week (in a good week)...and not being on TV.
1
Because Charlie Rose is a keenly intelligent, highly intuitive man it is truly puzzling and dismaying to learn that he has been so self-delusional in feeling that he was always "pursuing shared feelings." It would add greatly to societiy's understanding of the current watershed change in attitudes toward gender relationships if Charlie and his accusers could all find the courage to hold a mutual public interactive interview to explore the dynamics of the actual interactions that have obviously been so distressing and harmful to the women, while Charlie apparently remained clueless. What was he thinking and what were they thinking and why were their thoughts so out of sync? What went wrong so repeatedly? Did Charlie really misread the women's signals so badly? Did they send mixed signals? Or did Charlie just not care?
57
Intelligence is not a shield from men behaving badly.
59
I seriously doubt Charlie was clueless!
He’s just defending himself! Crudely!
4
Rose's claim that he perceived "shared feelings" seems to me to be less about his true state of mind and more about offering an excuse that is socially palatable. Such an excuse is aimed at evoking a "poor delusion Charlie" response -- it evokes if not sympathy, at least understanding (misreading romantic intent is not uncommon). Rose's "shared feelings" claim doesn't ring true. It's PR intended to salvage his career.
Rose's intellect, experience, and sophistication and the fact that his manager brushed of complaints about Mr. Rose, saying, "Charlie is just being Charlie," convince me that Charlie Rose was predatory and not in love.
The claim of "shared feelings" is PR. Charlie Rose want to leave open the possibility of returning to air time. The strategy of claiming will certainly lose his career if he were to directly acknowledge his abuse of power
3
I am beginning to think that this kind of cleansing has not been fair. I admire Charlie Rose, his wit, knowledge and exceptional interviewing and communication skills. I'm truly sad that I won't get to his program anymore.
Now, how come former President Clinton has escaped the cleansing and purging process? That's one thing that needs to examined. All you "tainted' guys need to take a close look at his special playbook. (sarcasm deeply intended.)
3
I personally always had difficulty with Rose's interview demeanor. Unctuous, smoothly pompous, leering, moist palmed. Like an uneasy impression of William Buckley. He must have seen it coming after doing that Friday segment on Al Franklen for CBS. If he didn't he's deluded. Time to head out Chuck.
7
Many of us saw him as a natonal treasure. His pathetic and embarassing private behavior notwithstanding, the national dialogue is losing a singularly great component.
3
Do you think he was leering at Supreme Court Judge Ruth Bader-Ginsburg when he interviewed her?
It is easy to jump into the fray of the recent spate of sexual impropriety allegations made against powerful men. To join the chorus of the aghast and scolding imbues us with a sense of our own moral superiority, our own moral rectitude. This is not to impugn the truthfulness of the allegations, nor to discount the deep and obvious hurt felt by these women who have come forward and raised them. However, we must always consider the American tendency to revert to the witch hunt. Whether it was Salem in the 17th century, McCarthy's Red Scare of the 1950's or the McMartin Pre-School hysteria of the 1980's there have been enough incidents of reactionary behavior and me-tooism to urge caution. What is clear is that these accusations are to be taken seriously and that the accused must be dealt with in some fashion. The tendency seems to be that companies fire the person (Charlie Rose) or divorce themselves from responsibility by making the offender a pariah (Harvey Weinstein). While it seems satisfying and safe to demand justice, we must remember the long line of innocents who have been swept up in these cases, and whose lives were ruined. We love simple solutions, but sadly solutions are rarely simple, and those that seem to be are rarely solutions.
3
Bear with me. I'm now in my 60s, and have had many men who had power over me--over where I worked (or didn't), where I lived (or didn't live), where I was hired next (or not)--retaliate against my utter lack of desire for older (often married) men) by denying me the job/apartment/earned reference that I needed to succeed in the normal course of life. My conclusion: Men who have any power over woman (usually younger) will exert that power, to her detriment. It NEVER occurs to them that the woman does not desire them. If a woman says no forcibly, she's toast, as far as her normal career or habitation wants are concerned. Men who are in power over women, in specific circumstances, honestly believe they are desirable demi-gods. I certainly hope Charlie (him, too!!??) finally gets it. Soon. We may flirt, but that's not the same as coming onto an old man. Subtle distinction? Perhaps. Learn it.
9
Agree! The financial industry is rife with this.
4
CBS should've offered Rose chance to give his side and stated in beginning if he declined. Other than that appears just fed him alive for ratings. Shame CBS because Norah is good, Gayle OK, but Charlie makes that Morning Show. tsk
1
Eight women! Carefully sourced! With contemporary witnesses who recall being told!
The rapidity with which 3 prominent news organizations released him indicates that lawyers could see the handwriting immediately!
Rose is TOAST!
3
Men, and women, should know that men's genitals, in particular, can be a source of great derision. Make the most of it.
5
Quick, everybody who's been alone with this guy, jump on the gravy train. Time's running out.
2
That’s a supremely ignorant comment, Ned. “Gravy train?” In coming forward, these women are exposing painful episodes that continue to haunt them even years later. And they are having to listen to people like you who have NO idea what that’s like but feel defensive enough to cast doubt on their testimony. That’s continued harassment.
5
Ms. Dessler,
The women coming forward now are brave. Due process should take its course. However those popping out of the woodwork as time goes by could be another story.
1
In so many comments I'm still reading things like, "why would a woman meet a man in a hotel room, why didn't the woman just leave, why didn't she just say no?" Why does no one write, "why would these men invite a woman to a hotel room for a business meeting? Why do these men think it's appropriate to touch, or kiss or rape women? Why don't these men conduct themselves professionally?"
Still too much blame placed on the woman. Can't we please, please stop seeing these men as the victims? Why are so many so willing to let these men off the hook? Why do we accept that the men in these situations are acting appropriately and the women are not? Both people are not to blame. The men are predators and they alone are responsible for their actions.
166
This needs to be kept uppermost in everyone's mind. Thanks very much for writing this.
4
Economics drive so much of this. When it happened to me as a single mother, I had kids to feed, rent to pay. I had a job I had to keep in order to do that. If women had equal pay and equal access, things might be different.
3
Rose must have pulled out all the stops this morning! Trolls galore!
Asserting that the woman is responsible? For his nakedness? His wandering hands? His lewd phone calls?
1
Lee M said: "If I were applying for a job and the would-be boss asked me to go to some house somewhere, I would assume they were inviting me for sex and I would refuse. If I did not get the job too bad."
I bet there are many women who just did not accept the offer to be interviewed under questionable circumstances, but we will never hear the stories that say "I was asked to go to an interview at so-and-so's house, hotel room, [fill in the blank]. I didn't. I didn't get the job." That is not "newsworthy" enough, because nothing scandalous happened. Failing to tell the story simply gives the bad actor a "pass" and allows that person to try the same thing again and again, some of which instances do result in something "newsworthy."
But what is a person supposed to do when they do have the job, and then such a request is made? Failure to comply without a good reason could be a firing offense, while complying could be an invitation to a "newsworthy" event. Smart employers will have a policy that such invitations are improper, or are proper only if there are more than two people present for the duration of the event.
3
As long as we allow men to view us as sex objects and suppress our pain, anger and disapproval, we are implicitly allowing this behavior to continue. It has become painfully obvious in the last few weeks that what we women thought was true about our patriarchal society is, in fact, true, but more importantly, the sheer scope of this epidemic of male lust is overwhelmingly heartbreaking. It is time to hold the men who perpetrate these selfish and yes, sometimes criminal, acts accountable, and to promise ourselves we will make our voices heard in the future with each new act of unwanted male sexual aggression, and the subsequent act of trying to silence us.
Only women, and some willing men, can change this behavior and prevent it in the future. We must do this for our daughters, and their daughters.
5
When Bill Cosby's case was going on I thought he can't be the only one! Since then so many men have fallen and I think it is still the tip of the iceberg.
8
How many men are walking around thinking that they are entitled to do whatever to anyone they choose? How did these men develop this attitude and what messages did they receive that influenced their decision to become vultures among us? Our society is drifting towards an environment of meanness, discourtesy, and a lack of respect for others. God help us all!
4
It's not some genetic defect that makes them behave the way they end up behaving. The behavior comes from power and all it brings those who have it. In Rose's case, it seems, creepily, like he was designing these little mini dramas, to get his needs met without getting his hands dirty. Playing the long game. Grooming. Probing, Testing. The offering of work, perks, places to sleep, and eat...the attention, the private cars to bring them out and take them back. In the end it all amounts to the same thing. Abuse of the power imbalance to manipulate people into doing things "to you or with you": they would not otherwise do.
Some guys just reach out and try and grab what they want. Charlie used the approach he thought was more fitting to his style...the sleazy debonair approach. His definition of smooth. In his head he probably thought this approach gave him deniability. That's why he came up with the excuse "pursuing shared feelings". Total and complete lack of self awareness of his own behavior. Time to retire Charlie. Write some books. Have some folks over for dinner. You got caught.
4
Charlie Rose is added to a long list of sexual predators and the names seem to grow in number. California Assembly Majority Whip, Raul Bocanegra, is stepping down after allegations of sexual misconduct have been directed towards him. It has also been reported that Democratic Rep. John Conyers settled a complaint with an ex employee. There are others who have accused Mr. Conyers of abuse. These latest allegations are quite shocking as you would not expect these men to do these sordid things.
It has taken years to learn about this unseemly behavior and it is good it is now out in the open. Hopefully, with all the revelations about these men being made public, they will come to an abrupt end. This despicable behavior must stop and our society should demand it.
1
"Even as Mr. Rose hired a lean young staff, he also fostered a work environment in which a personal assistant and some employees worked out of his home instead of the office. The women were often young, just out of college."
I would call this enabling. What are the motivations of people who would willingly accept those conditions of employment?
It is not uncommon for your personal assistant to work out of your home. Motivation would be employment with a respected journalist, a nice bullet point for your resume, and I'm guessing the compensation was more than minimum wage. One job paid 6 figures...silly them.
5
It is a very good development that these reports of sexual harassment and assault are now coming to light. It is essential that this problem, which appears to be endemic, be addressed. What is unfortunate, however, is that the experience of being the victim of such harassment and assault is being gendered, mostly by women, repeatedly, over and over, as if boys, and even men, never face the same. The reason for this is that the women who are rightly taking up this cause do not want to acknowledge that gay men harass too. It is a difficult topic to bring up and own, because it seems to feed the homophobic stance perpetuated by so many that all gay men are always on "the make", and boys and straight men must always be cautious around them. But opposition to that homophobic stereotype is not an excuse to now pretend that only women are the subject of sexual harassment and abuse. The clergy abuse scandals, the Kevin Spacey incidents, the Mann School and others, show us that boys have been subjected to abuse as well, and as long as that fact is denied, as long as this endemic problem is portrayed as one in which only girls and women are subjected to it, the problem will never be addressed in all of its diversity and will never be rooted out from all of its shadows.
7
Rose charmed my old mother but always seemed creepy & intrusive to me. He was the kind of interviewer who needed to show off his own savvy. Smarmy & predictable, he was really lucky to have cornered the market on 'intellectual' & high art long form conversations.
Unattractive men with power seem to exploit their position with more neediness and delusion than others...
6
Yes he committed a crime, but does he have to pay for it for his whole life? I'm just asking the question. May be he could have some sort of severe sanction for each proven event.
I'm just asking, because in our society the authors of terrible crimes can pay their debt to society and be free again. Why not in certain cases of lesser sexual crimes could the author pay his debts and be back to his or her professional activities, especially when it can benefit everyone in society?
I hope this is going to be treated on a case by case basis, because, for example, there is no comparaison between what Harvey W. did and what Mr. Rose did. And their punishment should not be the same IMHO.
3
Rose is 75 years old. Old enough to have retired more than a few years ago. He'll pay for the rest of his life, what's left of it. Poor poor Charlie. His reputation is shot.
Dear Pierre M.
So far at least, none of these guys are in prison. Quite the reverse. They are all wealthy men living still in high style. Their reputations have been destroyed, but that is the consequence of their actions.
If they want to make a comeback they certainly can try, but like an ex-con, it is really hard to find work back on the outside.
I never cared much about the other men who engaged in inappropriate behavior, but I always thought Charlie Rose was a profession journalist that I respected. Unfortunately, he too has succumbed to fame and power. How our heroes have fallen. I am very pessimistic about the future. More women in positions of power would help, but I suspect given enough time, even women will abuse their positions. It is just the nature of humans.
3
I really have a hard time with Charlie's assertion that "I always felt that I was pursuing shared feelings..." Given how the young women receiving his unwanted attention describe their experiences, I feel this is blatantly false. Charlie's a smart guy and he knows better. His loyal audience, me among them, feel betrayed.
2
It's funny, I always thought who a person was in private should influence how the world receives their work. Now, I'm not so sure. What good is it to complain about someone being lecherous when so much time has past? It's starting to feel like witnessing hit jobs.
2
Very, very disappointing. I enjoyed his show because of the wide range of generally very interesting guests. I was surprised but somehow not shocked. His quite large ego was so often on display in the way that he sometimes monopolised the speaking time and frequently interrupted the people he was interviewing. Still, it was a good show and will be missed if it's discontinued.
2
Charlie Rose, stop talking and listen to yourself.
SHARED FEELINGS? If any part of this story is inaccurate it is that you only NOW realize that you were in the wrong. It took getting caught to bring you this "profound new respect." Well get used to it, women will be silent NO LONGER.
Unfortunately I had respect for you earlier which I will never get back. I would not have expected this behavior of you but even so I would at least have thought that once caught you would say something straightforward like "What I did was wrong. I should have known better, I should not have done it. The culture that enabled me was toxic for women. We have to change that and I make no excuses for my actions and my failure to seek help as soon as I saw myself descending into such reprehensible behavior."
Every moment you spend with ifs and buts and delusions of "shared feelings" or supposed inaccuracies in the allegations simply perpetuates the toxic culture of assuming that a woman employee who, in the effort to do her job, smiles and cooperates with requests for after-hours meetings etc has somehow "asked" for your advances.
6
I'm going to miss his show! It was the only one left where the cameras don't wander incessantly.
4
I only watched for Charlie.
It makes me wonder, if he’d paid his interns a livable wage (NYC livable), would as many women have come forward? It’s disheartening to hear the lavish lifestyle he led, while taking advantage of his young employees like this.
1
All these revelations of sexual assault makes every male guilty before being proved innocent. I am a woman and just can't help being cynical.
2
When you confess, and apologize for revealed behavior, what is their to prove?
2
Give a good man, even a Great Man, power --- as in the shape of wealth, fame, accomplishment or popularity --- and sooner or later he is quite likely to "do something" that is
a) really wrong (obvious as in the cases of Weinstein, Cosby or Clinton)
or
b) judged or presented to be "wrong" by the new sensitivity, established by an un-elected and self-appointed power.
Intent no longer counts for anything.
Perception, sometimes delayed by decades, trumps everything.
This is the situation.
This is not necessarily a bad state of affairs, but it has many dangers.
What does anyone think?
1
Like other entitled men/predators, Charlie Rose had enablers, in his case, a senior female producer.
The deference afforded powerful men like Rose is increasingly looking like a hard outer shell - of deterrence.
1
Is it time to just assume that--pretty much--all men have some past terrible behavior? Let's start a list of those who don't.
1
Perhaps we should ask whether powerful men are intrinsically less capable of controlling their masculinity than ordinary men. The answer is probably yes. It happens all over the animal kingdom. This isn`t to excuse their behavior, but powerful men must contend with an over-sized ego and a supercharged sex drive, the same as alpha males in any primate species. Nothing is straightforward in biology, and it could very well be the case that the prize we would pay for good behavior among alpha males could just be the absence of leadership. We are primates, after all.
1
This comment deserved to be a Times Pick.
In the light of the recent revelations, listening to commentary and reading comments here and elsewhere I am left wondering; Why is there no revival and call for accountability now for last year's "locker room talk" and the subsequent accusations it prompted?
2
Earlier this year I worked with a younger female accountant at a nice hotel for two long days. We met and worked in the lobby and it had good accommodations for such activities. At no time did either one of us suggest we move to a more private setting, nor would I have ever agreed to it. I found her to be hard working and likable, and I learned a lot during from her the course of our meeting.
Meeting at Charlie Roses' house? That should have raised a bright red flag, no matter how respectable he may seem to be.
63
I think that he often made requests that "research" be delivered to him and asked for specific employees. He owns the company; that would be very difficult to refused if a woman hoped to keep her job.
4
Charlie Rose is an entertainer who had the power to have the interview in any place he wanted. The woman should not be shamed for agreeing.
3
There is a hard reign falling; a collapse of predatory male power, rotting from the inside out from deception and depravity in the intelligentsia, politics, the military, religious institutions, sports, movies and theater, and other bastions of male dominance in America. The darkness of its vampire viciousness is being revealed in the light by those it victimizes but who no longer fear it. And perhaps from involuntary death wishes as well. Let's make sure to drive a stake into its heart.
14
Hard rain.
No...he was correct in his usage. Read the entire comment.
It made me very sad to hear Gayle and Nora talk about their cohost Charlie. You could tell their total shock at these allegations lodged against their comrade. But the reality is that Charlie Rose is only the first of many men in positions of fame and power who will be done in by past incidents of sexual harassment. This behavior is a pervasive sickness among a lot of men. As far as Charlie Rose is concerned, we've probably seen the last of him.
25
Anyone who was impressed with Mr. Rose before this week should have a thorough checkup of their critical faculties.
10
You posted a display of prominent men who are accused of acting inappropriately with women. Why do you omit THE most prominent, the President?
112
Weird, it's almost like sexism is systemic or something.
34
A former employer of mine was on Charlie Rose a couple of decades ago, and I found Charlie Rose to be an arrogant poophead.
16
rarifiedbloom Berkeley, ca Pending Approval
So sad and disappointed to learn that this highly regarded pillar of decency sexually exploited, diligent, talented, and serious minded young interns whose goals were to become broadcast journalists. My appreciation of Charlie Rose's thought provoking interviews has been long-standing. The intellectual sophistication, quality and depth of content, as well as the effortless repartee between Rose and his guests have delighted me beyond measure. I'm in utter disbelief that he, too, is a boorish sexual predator!
9
If Mr Rose was sophisticated, this would not have happened. I think you are confusing sophisticated with liberal.
In interview after interview, Rose cared more about hearing himself talk than listening to his guests. I'll miss his guests, but not him--great guests, rude host. Smug, self-satisfied, sycophantic. Good riddance.
I feel like "sexual advances" (crude or not) undercuts the seriousness of his actions. It's not an "advance" to subject someone to your naked body, in a work setting, without their consent.
20
I just don't believe Al Franken's acts are in the same category as this stuff. This stuff should not be lumped together. Franken is more like bad taste. In the latest version, I read that he kissed a woman without permission. But other versions say he wanted to rehearse a kiss. She didn't want to but finally agreed. So the kiss was part of the rehearsal and both parties agreed, though reluctant. Alright, so the tongue was then forced - that part was beyond the permission. This is splitting hairs. Franken grabbing a boob or a butt check during a photo is in bad taste and does not rise to the level of these other men. Look if a woman grabbed a man's butt cheek during a photo-op where people are fooling around and joking, would it be news?
38
Debra, I agree that Al Franken should not be lumped with these clowns. Discussing him in the same sentence as the them suggests there's some sort of equivalency between him and the group mentioned. Take Franken out of the mix when discussing this issue, please.
5
Me either, Debra. Franken is being included with a bunch of real sleeze bags.
5
Thanks, Debra. And let's not forget that USO tours have a history of presenting "cheesecake" to the troops...
I am so happy that Ministers of the Christian Religion came out ‘publicly’ and found ways to speak in ‘modern terms’ for morality regarding our public issue regarding these 8 women publicly testifying against Moore’s illegal-behavior!
Could it be that morality, itself, is being challenged by the loss of respect for authority, through government and law, and in an obvious manner; ‘while’ politicians are overlooking Moore’s illegal-ways to obtain a cheap-political win for the government?!
How did ‘these ways’ of Moore and his supporters attempt to do to use us, The American Public, according to The Ministers? Did these ‘politicians of religion’ spin their false representation of religious morality against us, the American Public; with the, he who casts the first stone (against ‘Moore’ spin), ‘while they’ publicly stoned these women for being liars with no evidence to assume, or even suspect that they could be, liars?!
3
Rose. Franken. Moore. Spacey. And on and on. All public/celebrities. I hope those victimized by these well-known men feel some relief, some vindication for the abuse they suffered. But what about the other women who were no doubt assaulted by the anonymous pig? The cook. The dentist. The personal trainer. The jerk in the next cubicle. None of these abuser will ever make the front page of The New York Times. But they're out there. Let's hope the women who have suffered assault and humiliation at their hands find a way to teach them a lesson - publicly!
19
All the unnamed abusers most likely read these shocking revelations -- and think -- great, there's nothing wrong withme if they're doing it...
I swear, as G-d is my witness, if Tom Hanks is accused of such impropriety, I am giving up.
46
I swear if Robert Mueller is I'm going to cross the border into Canada and never look back.
2
Yes, that would be beyond shocking. But please take that oath back. It is not beyond feasible that someone as clean cut as Tom Hanks would have felt as ruthlessly empowered by his fame as others have by theirs; although we hope not and trust it is not so.
Those who become very successful often do because they overcompensate for something. That gives them the extra push and energy. And distorts their worldview. When they arrive they take what before had not been given.
1
‘That’s just Charlie being Charlie.’ -Executive Producer Yvette Vega
“We’re all here because with Charlie Rose, one woman is never enough.”-Norah O'Donnell
These statements speak volume. Women (or. men) like these are complicit in condoning and promoting the behavior of sexual predators like Charlie Rose. Yvette Vega should be FIRED for her lack of judgement and for her delinquency in executing her responsibilities. What is the guarantee that she would ever stand up to sexual predators in authority?
10
RC - I do believe you have hit the nail on the head with your comment. When women, knowingly, allow this misconduct to occur by remaining mute or worse, condone such behavior with statements like, "That's just Charlie being Charlie", they are perpetuating these pathetic attitudes and behaviors, letting men know it's okay to behavior poorly and disrespectfully towards women. I am almost more appalled at Yvette Vega's comment than by Charlie Rose's actions.
4
Imagine the tick-tick-tick going in this guy's head for the last six weeks...Who's next?
9
You shouldn't have to give up a career because someone is abusing their power. THAT is the problem!!! You shouldn't have to do that in order to get the same access and opportunities that men do. Some of these comments. Have you every been in that situation, you are so shocked and dumbfounded by it, it' s like "this can't be happening". These men aren't dumb, they prey on that or groom you, and then you don't know what hit you. Do not make excuses. I like Charlie Rose too, but the guy was abusing his power with these young women, he knew what he was doing, and then tried to "gaslight" them like "what do you mean, it was nothing". C'mon women, we have ALL seen this before, some man or woman trying to make you feel like you are the one with the problem, or you misunderstood, when you know EXACTLY what you saw, heard or experienced. Stop blaming these young women for being ambitious about their careers. No one was expecting to be touched or for him not to come out dressed inappropriately. Would you do that?? Does that seem right?? Would you do that with your family or neighbors?? But somehow as an employer that was perfectly alright. Ugh!!!
20
All of this groping and beyond groping is truly disgusting....but what is even more disgusting is that a large number of American citizens found it OK to elect Trump, a sexual predator who confessed in advance, to be president. He has no moral authority to move men away from this type of behavior. He is currently supporting the predator in Alabama who is running for the Senate. We are in trouble.
63
King and O'Donnell, the two colleagues of Charlie Rose, sided with women who have been harassed.
Yet, Trump still supports Moore. He sides with the sexual predator.
When they go low, they just go lower !
16
The bloom is off the Rose!
6
I quit watching the Today Show for many reasons. The final straw was how Anne Curry was treated. I changed to CBS and have enjoyed it's harder news approach. Now this. And if you believe that Ms King and Ms O'Donnell didn't know about Mr Rose, I have a bridge to sell you. Now what to watch.
1
They are excellent judges of character. People you can trust.
I agree with your Anne Curry comment. As for Charlie Rose I always thought he was a blowhard who liked to listen to himself talk.
1
I watched the Charlie Rose Show occasionally, and sometimes enjoyed the conversation -- but his guest roster was so heavily male. All these men talking about the news, business, or arts of the day. So many women's voices weren't heard -- why? They were warned or didn't want to put up with him? He values men's thoughts over women's -- because he objectifies and humiliates women? Who knows. But once again, beyond the damage to the women who've come forward, we all lose out -- because women aren't getting a seat at the table. We are just not heard.
14
Ask the Times, it is the most influential news organization. It sets the agenda for every network morning show and nightly newscast.
I have never been a particularly avid Rose fan - he seems really studied. He takes forever to ask a question and is always predicting the response. Is it, however, time to discuss and instruct about "consent" in its various forms? Do people lower the bar of acceptance depending on the circumstances - a television skit for example? Job seeking? Does consent occur AFTER the person gets in the car or the office or the room or the estate or does the "getting in" say something? Were the women who went to the Rose estate aware of any guest list? Did Rose's employers, who must be in the know, advise him against have employees in his home? Is there a grapevine suggesting untoward behavior in the case of Rose and others? What have people done with grapevine information? Tell me it is not possible that djt is correct: "When you're famous....."
1
Some in this comments thread have expressed surprise that Charlie Rose of all people could be guilty of such appalling behavior. I can’t say that I suspected him of such transgressions, but neither can I say that it surprises me. I have always found him to be oily and rather dim. The description of him as a master interviewer, probing and perceptive is a joke. (If you want to see - er - hear a master at work, listen to Terry Gross) The revelation that Rose is in reality a preening narcissist so in love with himself that he can’t convieve how anyone else could fail to feel the same, jives perfectly with what I’ve seen of him before.
25
The complexity of the human mind is made even more so by a sex drive that is not the same as women's. This sex drive can exist in parallel, yet isolated from the other instincts and urges. The mature and responsible male integrates the sex drive's behavior with his behavior as a whole. But there's never a guarantee of perpetual integrity. It's not easy to be a good man.
2
Long Island Dave, your opening seems to indicate that the human mind is male and that women are something else.
4
Thanks chrigd. No, please don't read that from my comment. I'm noting that one of the differences* between the men and women is the sex drives). Not to justify Charlie's behavior, just to understand it.
*While recognizing the spectrum of in-between sexuality.
2
In no way is my comment intended to excuse the behavior of the men involved. However, what has not been talked about very much is the benefit the women derived from contacts with such men. For example: money and career advancement. If the women had called a halt to such behavior, STRONGLY indicated that they were not interested, and made it known (in various ways) that such behavior by the men had occurred, I don't believe that we would be witnessing such an epidemic. For some women, being noticed by a man who is perceived to be powerful is a big boost to the ego. This is an example of the "benefit" can one can experience when being sexually exploited.
4
You really should modify your statement to the "perceived or anticipated benefit." Because in many of these cases, women who thought, or were told that they could advance their careers, found out that was as much a part of the lie as anything else.
“I always felt that I was pursuing shared feelings, even though I now realize I was mistaken.”
I'd like to know why Rose felt that he was pursuing "shared feelings". Human beings are human beings.
1
There seems to be a shocking lack of self-awareness and self-respect in the behavior of these men being accused today. Why would a man, in Mr. Rose’s case, who has interviewed so many people of great integrity and intellectual depth, act in this way toward women? I think it is not just that he has a lot of power, he does obviously, but he is narcissistic and belligerent around women.
I don’t like to think that everyone will be sitting around on Thanksgiving Day talking about this topic, but it is probably true.
4
I always tell my daughters to never go alone to a job interview at the boss's private residence.
6
In my view, it's vital to use this period, not just to punish the culpable, but also as an opportunity for positive change. And that includes the necessity for changing men's learned distortions and misguided thinking and interpretations regarding what women want. Like, for example, Donald Trump's statement that "when you are a star they let you do it." Or Charlie Rose concluding that women he harassed wanted what he was dishing out. No, on both accounts.
It's a fact that changed thinking and raised awareness means changed behavior. That's the basis for cognitive/behavioral therapy.
Also, this particular painful shocking time can be a reminder to raise our boys to respect girls and women and see them as equals. And also a reminder that It's easier to build a boy (from the ground up) than it is to mend a messed up destructive man. "When you know better you do better." Thus, this can be seen as an opportunity for men to know better and thus to also behave respectfully.
5
I first read the long article about Rose in the Washington Post, which goes into the accusations in startling detail. Something struck me in his case that reminded me of other recent instances of men who have been accused of harassing or abusing women or have admitted it. People involved with Rose's show knew about his behavior, yet did nothing. One of them was his longtime producer, a woman. It seems reckless of Rose and others to risk their careers and their reputations--though the example of the Predator in Chief shows that many men think they can get away with it.
4
These stories bring up things I haven't thought about in years. But one striking thing I remember is that even when you tell people, they will instantly announce whether or not they believe you and the reasons why, i.e. "I believe you because you're very attractive," or snickers if you're not their type.
In the past, any woman who spoke up was putting her self-worth at risk from those kind of stupid judgments. The behavior of men like Charlie Rose is beyond the pale and these reports are the only kind of "exposure" that is appropriate.
3
After reading the Post's story yesterday I am just reeling. It's awful that the multiple women (how many more are there?) have suffered this type of harassment and indignity. I really admired Charlie Rose and his very thoughtful, in depth interviewing skills. You really learned something valuable by watching this show. Very tough to take in that he could be like this in private life (or in his public life off camera).
Apparently the Post had the story ready in 2010 but the women would not go on the record. I'm glad that people who have suffered this type of abuse are now coming forward. It is not just the Weinstein story, although that was the penultimate factor. Trump started us all talking about sexual harassment in earnest last summer and it has not left the media's eye since then. Let's not forget the most powerful man in the world stands accused of the same sort of behavior.
7
Much as I decry such behavior, this is supra legal and as such defies due
process. Weren't any of these women, especially after Anita Hill, courageous
enough to come forth? For that matter, I'm afraid the impulse is, rather
than for justice is to seek revenge. When is this contemporary witch hunt
going to stop?
2
Et tu, Rose?
Enough already..we're surely undergoing the cultural equivalent of a hormone-crazed teenager experiencing the throes of impending adulthood.
On this specific topic of (lets face it: male) sexual misconduct -
can the fourth estate come up with a consensus on a "journalistic statute of limitations" on previously unreported/unsubstantiated/uncharged claims of sexual victimization?
How about one year...how about five years...or better still, how about a moratorium on reportage of allegations where incidents are older than a decade? At this rate I've to consider a Thanksgiving talk with my parents, uncles and aunts so they can confess to any real or perceived sexual wrongdoing from their salad days (the 60's) - if they can possibly recall anything!
Sometimes old news IS old news. Thank you.
We can all surely watch this belated mudslinging with a certain degree of schadenfreude and hope for righteous comeuppance in the corporate world and elsewhere...and quite deservedly so in most cases.
However, when an outcry begins to border on a trend (especially without legal wind in its sails), then we start castigation of others in the court of public opinion, and ultimately insult our own collective social intelligence.
1
For years Rose has in his interviews repeatedly talked over women, interrupted them, answered questions himself instead of listening to his women guests' responses, and generally condescended to women interviewees. He sometimes does this with men, but does it to a far greater extent with women. Sadly, this sexual manifestation of his disregard for women is not surprising.
20
Why do men like Charlie Rose first only "hear" their victims and "deeply apologize for [their] inappropriate behavior" AFTER allegations surface publicly and they have been suspended from their jobs?
Please - these "apologies" are as shallow, hollow, and insincere as they are hurtful, disrespectful and emotionally scaring to women.
These repeated news accounts makes me wonder how many decent and honorable men are left in the workplace?
5
Of all the men "outed" so far, the allegations against Charlie Rose make me really sad.
The other men previously "outed" were known pigs and I was not surprised.
But Charlie Rose, I did/ would have trusted. He had that trust persona that validates him in his job as a new journalist.
What he did is wrong.
We are not done with the last of it.
Your father, brother, husband, cousin, neighbor, teacher, rabbi, minister have sometime in their lives committed some form of passive aggressive or outright sexual harassment or abuse.
When you live in a society that is dominated by men and the male dominated christian church, this is to be expected.
Men's behavior has been conditioned by entitlements for so long society thinks their behavior is acceptable.
Resist, speak up & fight for an equal society for all!
6
Not defending Mr. Rose here but want to make the point he ascended in a career during a time when this kind of behavior was given a pass. Also our culture's pornification of women has gone beyond the bounds. Some mainstream TV shows and movies still pair older men with younger women and put women (even in work settings) in tight clothes with low cleavage. Why, if not to objectify women and lower their standing and power? In Mr. Rose's case, did his power and prestige -- and young women showing deference -- lead to deranged thinking and behavior. Pretty sad.
1
Charlie Rose abused his position and power. No excuses. Time for it to end and the only way is for women to speak out right now, forcefully, so other women and men cannot continue to make excuses.
Suppressing women is no longer acceptable anywhere in the world.
9
"Some mainstream TV shows and movies still pair older men with younger women and put women (even in work settings) in tight clothes with low cleavage;" which accurately describes every Fox "News" show that features women.
Are the Good Old Boys still laughing? Are they still proud the The Con Don is in OUR white house to trying to destroy OUR government? Are they still proud they attacked and tried to destroy Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton for 30+ years. Are they still proud that they have tried to keep women down in the workplace and every societal segment since Roe v Wade, which finally legalized a Woman's Right To Choose what she does with her own body and life?
Sorry Good Old Boys and Girls. The Sleeping Giant has awakened and SHE is furious. The Silent Majority - women - have found their voice across America and around the world. The message? No more "business as usual" and "boys will be boys".
Yet even though there area multiple sexual/power abuse accusations against Roy Moore, Charlie Rose, Harvey Weinstien, Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reilly and many other BIG names the press is trying to make a big deal about Senator Al Franken and are trying to revive charges against Bill Clinton.
That get-the-democrats-by-sexual-misconduct playbook is ridiculous, boys and girls of the media. Historically when democrats have learned about this behavior they have quickly denounced it and forced the accused to resign. "Conservatives", on the other hand, try to play down the accusations and use the "boys will be boys" argument. Does the media know the difference between systemic, institutionalized sexual/power abuse and personal conduct? Women do.
32
Unfortunately, so many women voted for Donald Trump that he was elected President. Which boggles my mind. And Moore will undoubtedly get more votes from women than he should in Alabama, too (one would be too many). Sadly, I'm afraid that while the sleeping giant may have awakened, too many people of both genders actually don't care.
I just always thought of Rose as smiling, light-weight, goofball journalist, who was never capable or willing to challenge his guests with probing or uncomfortable follow-up questions to the normal gas lighting or deflective answers that interviewees give. Now I know he still all of that AND a sexual harassing cad.
18
I'm shocked, shocked Rick, that a man in position of power would use that power to satisfy his prurient desires! Its what they are taught to do, Chuck was a good student.
5
Roger Stone and the dirty tricksters at the RNC are popping the champagne.
4
So...bets on whose next? If you'd mentioned Charlie Rose last week, everyone would have thought you were crazy.
6
I won't take you on on your wager, it's anybody's guess. Some crazy stuff.
It was Cosby, then Uber, then Silicon Valley in general, and then after the exposure of Harvey Weinstein's career as a sexual predator (BIG SHOUT OUT TO ASHLEY JUDD), the dam broke, wide open, and now all of these fish are spilling into the street, sqiuirming and skittering around. This is a very positive thing for the country and the world. One man's opinion.
76
Thank you for mentioning Ashley Judd. I came to see her as a woman of courage and integrity after seeing her in "Ruby in Paradise," which revolves around exactly this theme, but at a small Florida tourist shop. Highly recommended, under-rated movie.
2
Is any media outlet going to do a story about the thousands of women in Hollywood and elsewhere that are willing to sleep their way to money, celebrity, power, etc.? Men are depraved dogs, we get it. Once again, the media fails to tell the truth about a story by only presenting one side.
22
If you are equating a powerful man forcing himself upon a subordinate woman, with a woman who uses sex to attain favors or privileges, then congratulations, you have won the medal of the day for great example of a false equivalency.
6
Yes, there are MEN & WOMEN who will do ANYTHING to get ahead in the job market - Hollywood doesn't own the distinction.
This kind of behavior happens from the ghetto to the trump tower.
But the key word is "WILLING" = CONSENSUAL.
4
Why would they do such a story, when there's no story there? If women used sex to get what they want and they're happy with the result, then it was consensual and who cares? The only story there that would cast a negative light on those women is one where they used sex to advance and THEN decided to make complaints. Of all the cases that i've read about where women have come forward with complaints of sexual harassment or worse, I haven't seen one single case so far that matches those criteria.
Just to be clear on a few very important points:
1. Charlie Rose has claimed most of his actions were 'misunderstandings' of the feelings being mutual in some cases -- but he has not tried to deny any of the allegations.
2. Charlie Rose has apologized to those women offended and or disturbed by his actions or words.
3. All the women with whom Charlie Rose was inappropriate or downright creepy were well over 21 years old - NOT under 18!
4. Repercussions against Charlie Rose has been very swift; literally within a few hours of the story coming out, Rose's TV shows have been shut down.
While ** none of this excuses Charlie Rose's actions **
at least he's owning these horrible accusations and not calling women liars or paid political set-ups.
Roy Moore on the other hand: ALL OF THE ABOVE,
and still insists on running for public office!
(Unless more comes out on Al Franken, he doesn't even belong within 100 miles of these two creeper-predators! Based on the two weak and contrived situations against Franken, Al Franken is the one REALLY being 'set-up', in my opinion!)
108
I agree. And could we call this wave of #MeToo by the name of "Adjudication by Allegation" because that's what's happening. Convicted by an allegation isn't due process. Or so I thought.
No, actually Charlie is NOT owning his actions. That apology is a bandaid. He still doesn't get it. If he thinks these are in ANY WAY consensual, he's horribly mistaken.
1
And we're off.... Charlie Rose, Glenn Thrush. This is more how it creditably sounds. Al Franken can breathe a sigh of relief. His exaggerated misdeeds are going to be left in the dust at the starting gate.
7
There is a new world order between the sexes! The onus is on the men, to stop acting like frat boys as they have over the last 200 years and women have to reigned in their flirtatious charming ways as well!
2
Say it ain't so Charlie.
2
Admittedly it will be difficult to watch any of Charlie’s interviews just knowing now what he’s probably fantasizing about his guests in his mind as he’s talking to them, especially the female ones. But you have to admit, he does go through a scrupulously thourough vetting process with all of his staff, however carelessly he ties a robe. So many houses, so many bedrooms, so many showers, so many closets full of bathrobes . . .these rich white guys are like kids in candy stores.
3
Bill Cosby is African American. Just saying.
Very disappointed in you Charlie!
For all your culture and supposed refinement, you should have no difficulty seducing a woman the proper way, and of course obtaining consent.
Turns out you are crude! ....not subtle. Either you are unable or refuse to pick up the negative signals these women conveyed.
Thumbs down!
18
The bloom is off this Rose which is not smelling all too good these days.
1
What is it about these superannuated men who think that walking around naked is attractive to a woman, especially women half their age? I read this and it was reminiscent of Weinstein and his naked prancing. As the young kids I teach would say when they see something gross:Yuck!
That having been said, and having been in similar circumstances at a very young age, I can only say that the whole spectrum of behavior is a disgusting display of disproportionate power.
How does a woman reject a man who holds her future in his slimy hands? How, in a moment, can a woman make a rational decision that will affect her position, credibility and earnings?
The cavalcade of possible responses that a woman could make in these situations
flies out the window in the fleeting moment of realization that power trumps any rational response.
As women we're damned if we do and damned if we don't knee these offenders where it would hurt the most. So we must wait and choose the second most vulnerable targets, their wallets. Expose them in the media (since they have no problem with exposing themselves), and sue the pants off them. Done.
21
Keep the news about John Conyers Jr. buried for a couple more hours; your readers won't be able to handle it.
2
The interviewer who rarely let someone finish an answer. We should have known he couldn't take a 'no' for one.
20
A Rose is a Rose is a Rose,
Except when he's grabbing your nose,
Or other parts of your body,
Behaviors truly quite shoddy.
There will be no more TV shows.
9
bonemri- with respect for your mother- the point is not that one is free to abandon one's chosen career- it is that one is FORCED to, if unable to tolerate the behavior of the men in power in whatever field it is. It is no easy thing to give up your dreams and ambitions- many women cannot bear to do this and that is why they kept silent.
3
When has anyone ever had the human right to work in the career of their dreams? How many men have had to give up their dreams to support a wife and children? Choosing to stay in your preferred career is exactly that, a choice
I guess that the CBS Eye was closed or winking.
4
Sadly, yet another example that proves the mistreatment of women is not a partisan problem. I suspect it may be more pervasive in one party than another, but the fact remains that men in the US (and most of the world) continue to feel entitled to pursue potential sex partners without regard to their consent or the dynamics of power imbalance. Is this because we raise men to see sex as a conquest? A game of winners and losers? A perk of power and wealth? I'm not hearing about men behaving this way toward their female bosses or women in other positions of "superiority." No, those women could more easily refuse them or--worse yet--hurt them professionally. Even men who seem to actively advance the rights of women in public appear to often harbor a personal perspective that allows them to abuse their status for their own sexual and emotional gratification. We are raising them to do this unless and until we decide to raise them NOT to do this. And it's not just a matter of sexual gratification. Don't think this does not apply to all interaction. When one views another as weaker, subordinate, vulnerable or otherwise "less than," one tends to act accordingly.
7
The number of men who feel free to assault women with crude words, leering, menacing looks, inappropriate, unwelcome and sometimes invasive touching seems boundless. These men feel it is their right to treat women as objects. They come from all political, religious, economic, educational, ethnic, racial and age groups. Is there any woman out there who has never, not even once been the target of inappropriate, unwanted, unsolicited harassment? If so please speak up because based on the many women I know, not one of them can answer "No."
When I was 12 my Uncle tried to shove his tongue down my throat. I was so naive I asked my Father why my Uncle kissed me in "a funny way." Years latter, in my early 40's after I'd married and had a child, I was leaving my job and moving away. My boss of six years, the most prim and proper gentleman I'd ever met, walked me to the elevator ostensibly to say goodby and then grabbed me forcibly and did almost the same thing my Uncle had done all those years ago. I was so stunned I simply pushed him away and got on the elevator, shaking and unable to say a word. Then there was the time a man exposed himself. I can't even remember all the grouping etc. on crowed subways. I am not alone. We am legion! And it is time for ALL OF US to speak up! Enough is enough. Our silence allows this to continue and hides how pervasive the problem is.
40
Proving yet again - for we the public forget time and again, sometimes willingly - that we don't really "know" these public figures, whether politicians, media figures or entertainment/sports celebrities. We may know their public persona and facade, but it is often as phony as phony can be and we often fall for it hook, like and sinker. I suppose that is human nature, to want to like people we admire for certain talents or attributes, and we shouldn't let too much cynicism prevent us from some admiration, but in the process we also tend to attribute to these figures nobler and better mores, intellect and traits than mere mortals. Thus we call some athlete who may throw a ball well a "hero" even though he's a domestic abuser, or a politician who votes a certain way yet is corrupt a "role model" and "icon", or a celebrity who is a sexual abuser an "idol".
Perhaps the biggest failure, though, is how we excuse such behavior when it arises for things like political convenience or other expediency. If womanizing, groping lech of a Congressman votes the "right way" on women's issues, for example, we pretend "well, he's really alright" even though their conduct - or even own admission - speaks to the contrary.
7
I'm wondering if women in non-STEM type careers in politics, media, and entertainment are particularly vulnerable to powerful men like Charlie Rose and Harvey Weinstein. In the stories we're hearing about Charlie Rose, it sounds like he mainly hired women to work on his show over the years. Where were the young guys? Weeded out as competition to Charlie or off pursuing STEM careers? Guys like Charlie Rose rise to the top and then use women's fierce competition for the limited number of jobs to their own advantage.
3
Guess you haven't worked in a STEM career. The science and tech world has more than its share of sexism, creeps, and awful behaviour.
4
I'm wondering if you are a man. If you are you are very likely a decent guy who is totally unaware of how pervasive the problem is. Believe me when I tell you women are subjected to this type of behavior from all types of men; not just rich or powerful ones. Please check out my comment above. It would take a book to describe the reasons why women remain silent. I can only tell you based on all the women I know, and my own experiences, that it is pervasive and ongoing and not new. Perhaps now, with so much attention on the topic, it will finally stop or at the very least, women will feel empowered to speak out.
2
I'm by no means minimizing the victims with all these recent allegations against men who've made "inappropriate gestures" toward women in the workplace. They all know who they are. And they're running scared. And there's many of them, we can pretty much be assured. These are NOT criminals, in most cases. These are often men in their 60s who made the mistake of assuming these gestures/words/advances were okay because at one time they seemed to be acceptable and tolerated. But that was then and this is now. This much needed uprising against these gestures/words/advances is necessary, because it is no longer tolerated by women in the workplace. The rules have changed from here forward. If those accused come forth with admissions, then they should be held accountable, but his doesn't necessarily mean each and every one should lose their job. Each case IS different. We can't tar and feather every man in his 60s who is "guilty" of a “gesture”, but on the other hand someone who is facing accusations by many (uh hem, our President), and is NOT admitting guilty, but instead going after the victims, well, ….that’s why each case should be treated differently.
2
Charlie
I wish you hadn't done that, and I'm sorry for the victims.
Your show has been my favorite for decades. I found you were one of the very few credible sources of international and national information, interviewing the principals of the stories (having access to individuals like Putin, other chiefs of state and ministers and all sorts of officials, great actors from all around the worlds, scientists, and other major players from all fields of activities). You were asking the questions which allowed his audience to go deep into matters and to understand well what was at stakes.
You were, I thought, well liked by your guests, which often made for great interviews.
You were in class by yourself IMHO in a world where there is always an expert to contradict another expert. Your sources were rock solid and you always showed the two (or more) sides of the story.
I'm going to miss you, since I hardly missed 10 of your shows since 1985. Can someone replace you adequately? I did not see anyone susceptible of replacing you in the people you tried when you were away on assignment.
Charlie, I really wish you hadn't done that.
20
My one (and last) comment on this cascade of sexual harassment charges that are inundating the news suddenly is that I believe that a clear, demonstrated and harmful conduct of someone resulting in another person being violated either physically or psychologically should be dealt with QUICKLY and DECISIVELY. For instance, advances that are not returned, resulting in someone losing their job is a serious matter indeed. Having said this, I am nevertheless uneasy about 3 points: rushing to judgment BEFORE a proper hearing of the facts can be calmly looked into, allegations appearing years after the event took place AND perhaps most importantly what constitutes sexual harassment in the first place. I do not, for instance, believe that the second woman claiming harassment against Al Frankel has a valid claim. He "touched her bottom" while her HUSBAND was taking a picture at the State Fair? Doesn't everyone harass in front of the spouse while the spouse is snapping a photo? Or "he said I looked hot". Sorry, we are humans not robots and telling someone they "look hot" is not, by my definition, sexual harassment. To conclude, I'm uneasy by these sudden revelations appearing all at once. If misconduct occurs we all have a duty to report it if we believe the accused presents some sort of menace to society. This is never easy but waiting until years after the fact and then making such claims creates a doubtful atmosphere that doesn't seem positive in dealing with harassment.
3
It is so difficult to know here the story began of the man thinking being manly and assertive was a thing, and where they got the idea women wanted this from them. I do know that very few men believe women are looking for shy, retiring, meek and puny males that they can command to have sex with when it suits them.
I side with those who believe that if you wanted men to behave better, then maybe you should not have given Thomas, Clinton and Cosby and Weinstein et al a pass for so long. Because the message inside letting powerful public figures walk away from stuff like beating your wife unconscious in an elevator, is it makes it seem like there is something sort of normal or typically male or expected or condoned in this kind of aggression.
It is right that we look at this, but the culture (male and female) will need to self-examine a lot as to why we allowed this to go on. Women are not as weak as they are being portrayed here. And they are not above sexual competitiveness and predation themselves. We have a steady trickle of women molesting teenage boys all the time. And we have a ton of women writing about, singing about and extolling the virtues of manly, assertive powerful men. So - where to go with the conversation?
10
Just as with Al FRanken, I’m certain Charlie was just joking around.
2
i agree
All those in positions of power who practice and believe that they have “le droit du seigneur” over women should be exposed and dealt with under the law.
President Obama gave wise council to his staff and cabinet when he advised them:
“Don’t do stupid stuff.”
This should be a “RIOT ACT” to be given as a measure of proactive advice to be obeyed by all in society. This includes all those in public and private positions, from top to bottom, particularly those in positions of responsibility who have power over the careers and lives of others.
It comes down to the citizens’ trust and respect in the conduct of those in office and in the law and order on the behaviour of all those in public and private positions. Trust and respect are earned. They don`t come with the job.
But this is more than an issue of law and order. If we don’t trust or respect those who do “stupid stuff” then what happens to society and civilization ???
8
Reading about Rose and the dozens of other men makes me wonder how they reach the point where they think this kind of behavior is acceptable. Has this been a life long pattern even before they rose to fame? Are they sick or just arrogant? Either way, it's very sad commentary about how power corrupts and the lasting trauma that results.
123
I recall being shocked reading about 60 Minutes Mike Wallace and some of his peers' harassment of women in earlier years -- of it being normalized because they too were powerful and could get away with it. I wonder if Charlie Rose's behavior was formed in that anything goes environment? And more of the same, David Lettermen, also accused of harassment, just received the Mark Twain award.
https://nypost.com/2012/03/04/mike-wallace-is-here
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/06/business/media/06letterman.html
3
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
That's easy - we are immersed in "locker room" talk from day one of being born. We hang out with friends, who say and make incredibly forward comments about the girl in French class, or the girl at the coffee shop. No one stops them, interrupts them, or tries to argue that what is being said is inappropriate. I was taught such things by every male I grew up with, including my own father. It was further re-enforced in the military during basic training. The same locker room talk takes place at the office, at the gas station and so on. I am not excusing, but it's the truth - and while I found Trump's comments in his Hollywood Access tape abhorrent, I didn't find them unfamiliar in any way - I have heard them a million times over, yet so much mock outrage on the part of males. I don't have answers to this problem, just to your question.
2
I normally don't comment on things like this, but one thing troubles me. By what we are hearing and reading, we are being led to believe that no one at CBS knew of Mr. Rose's issues (especially Ms. King and Ms. O'Donnell in being his closest colleagues). Their statements of disbelief are made after years of working with Mr. Rose, (and many years of documented issues with Mr. Rose on another network).
Once again, we have the posture of mainstream media being "its all fine....until you get caught".
In closing, I think these communication issues in CBS corporate media can be best solved by hiring Sgt. Schultz as its new director of public relations.
12
Yes, pretty suspect, if you ask me. Watched this morning as the two of them sat side by side, appropriately dressed, serious with Nora O'Donnell leading the segment w/a straight disciplined reading of the accusations at 'top of the hour'. The only journalist at the table. Poor Ms. King! She's still reeling and can't 'process' this ... only got an hour's sleep last night she shared. Really? A little more of the 'Oprahization' of the culture (the sharing of personal opinion and feelings) now successfully infiltrating all segments of society news coverage included. I really don't care what Gayle King thinks or feels. She should watch out that she doesn't begin to present herself re: Mr. Rose, inadvertently, like the ladies who gathered a few days ago in Alabama in defense of Roy Moore. She and her co-anchor have long served as sycophants to an aging Rose who looks pained, bored and increasingly out of place at the table and, as has been remarked upon in other news venues this morning, 'enablers' to another ego-driven media personality aka Bill O'Reilly. Perhaps, the 'swamp' to be drained in the coming months is that of the world of "small" men (and women) who bully others, harass, victimize and abuse power in all areas of our society ... business, government, education, media and entertainment. We can only hope.
2
Did none of these incredibly smart & successful men imagine this kind of behavior would be, to quote George Costanza, 'frowned upon'?
23
I feel a deep sadness that began last night and hasn't lifted this morning. Someone I admire so much for his career skills has turned out to be another person who let his appetite for sexual excitement become abusive.
( Sure, Charlie: There probably have been some women who thought it exciting. But that doesn't excuse the fact that so many did not, and that these were employees, too.)
We have lost something with the departure of Charlie. Our "national discourse" has lost the insights that were voiced around that oak table. We no longer can listen in for one hour of good and often lengthy, deep conversation about topics that matter.
And some people who worked for his production company are now unemployed. Just in time for the holiday season...More lives hurt.
It is sad to have someone who seemed a gentle giant fall in this manner.
53
Totally agree with you - and yet, at the same time, my heart also aches for the women whose careers were diminished or sidelined by his actions. How many women in this industry could have raised as good or better insights around that oak table? How many women are gone from the industry or have been silenced because of stuff like this?
1
But we don’t even now who we missed out on in the way of brilliant female interviewers, actresses, senators, CEOs because they opted out rather than submit to these abuses of power or were so traumatized them as to be unable to effectively manage their careers. These degrading Behaviors have real world ramifications for women. Interestingly, no one is accusing Terry gross of these abuses.
I've been hearing stories about this guy for years. I applaud the women who spoke out, on and off the record.
28
Several years ago while working in the ICU I witnessed an older man standing at his deceased wife's bedside and weeping. Thinking that I could extend my sympathies, I approached him and told him how sorry I was for his loss. Expecting him to tell me a little about their love over the years, I was stunned when through his tears, he told me that never in their fifty years together had she ever refused to have sexual intercourse with him. Just another reminder of the strange trajectory of the male mind.
69
Well, that's over the top. But the reptile is just below the surface for many of us, women as well as men, I'm afraid.
Thank you for a much needed LOL moment in this comments thread.
1
Speechless.
What's beginning to become apparent is that this harassment/assault problem is far more deeply rooted in the culture than (certainly I) believed by most people had suspected. O'Reilly, Ailes, Louis C.K, Weinstein,Trump, now Rose and Franken, among many more others, are going to be just the tip of the iceberg. It's almost not even legally defensible with multiple victims turning up.
Power has been said to be an aphrodisiac to a lot of women. But it's also being used as a bludgeon by these kinds of powerful people. It's a strange (?) combination of being drunk with power and the fact that the abusers think they are actually desirable because they are powerful.
What we now are coming around to believe is that maybe these are all male constructs and that most women have been simply afraid to speak out for years. Decades. I think we're in for a long national conversation on this issue. And it's about time.
I'm really saddened to read that Rose, whose PBS program I enjoyed most of the time, turns out to be a real jerk with women and apparently his staff. "Drunk with power," I guess. What these guys don't ever understand is that a woman's smile is not necessarily an invitation to bed.
224
I have to correct you here:
"What's beginning to become apparent is that this harassment/assault problem is far more deeply rooted in the culture than (certainly I) believed by most people had suspected."
By the time females become women, most of us are fully aware the are seen as prey by men. Some females, tragically, find out as young children. Some are free of the burden of this knowledge until their late teens. But we find out, and when we raise our voices to tell, we're told to keep quiet, or are ignored. The assumption has always been that absence of evidence is evidence of absence.
1
Women being attracted to powerful men not a "male construct".
It's a real thing, a characteristic that most women share.
That being said, it's incumbent on fathers especially to teach our daughters to be aware of this tendency that they may not be aware of, or if aware, are told not to pay attention to it, because it's not " their fault".
1
In reply to Bob Burns: "It's becoming apparent" to you that this behavior is deep in our culture? This is what feminists have been trying to tell you all along. It's the same thing people of color are trying to tell white people. Privilege blinds you to real suffering and injustice. Wake up! Listen!
3
I am gonna miss Rose's nightly productions which appeared on PBS, Bloomberg as his guests and the content were in a class by themselves on TV.
A full hour every night about important issues with important people.
Some way I hope somebody else if not Rose himself can continue these
presentations.
As far as Rose himself goes I guess nobody should be surprised to learn that an influential and powerful media guy like Rose led this lifestyle.
12
Wow that goes totally against Mr Rose's "gentlemanly" image. Sad and disgusting. But it is conceivable, that Mr Rose so full of himself, did not realize what he was doing, although this is not an excuse to his behavior.
5
I keep reading these articles about sexual harassment, and I'm seeing that, in some cases, I just don't see how on earth the woman was traumatized by the experience. For example, the woman who was with Mr. Rose at his second home who saw him with his robe untied by the pool and then let her kiss him in his bedroom. She said it was 'traumatizing' and I think this instance, and others I have read, delegitimizes those who have, in fact, gone through much, far worse experiences.
7
That's the "starving kids in Africa" excuse. Just because someone has it worse doesn't mean that another wasn't legitimately hurt or "traumatized" by a situation. I think someone purposefully and non-consensually exposing themselves to me would be a very difficult experience to get over.
2
Anyone surprised by this news clearly never even flipped by CBS This Morning while channel surfing. A passing moment is all I've ever seen of the show, but in that moment was witness to Rose making passes at and threatening unwanted kisses for Gayle King - ON AIR! She seemed very off-put, rightfully so, but no one on set said anything, not even Gayle. Not even the power of being Oprah's bestie saved King from becoming objectified in front of her whole audience.
21
Thanks for pointing this out. A few weeks ago a prescient John Oliver did an incredible compendium of Charlie Rose's creepiest moments with Norah and Gayle which you can Google. I would watch the morning show from time to time and there were many cringe-worthy moments on a show that prided itself on its "hard news" approach. I actually couldn't believe I was seeing - one time, two times, three time. Was repulsed by all of them and stopped even occasional viewing.
2
What a TOTAL letdown--who, other than Charlie, could fit the perceived description of "gentleman" and scholar to his audience; and now to learn that he has been a sleaze all along and in the same category as Bill O'Reilly, et.al--
I will continue to watch CBS in the morning as a tribute to Nora and Gail who seemed as shocked as me at these serious disclosures...
9
As I watched Charlie Rose conduct an interview on his PBS show on Friday night, I kept thinking about how truly admired he was by everyone, how cultured and intelligent he was, how he always asked the best questions, about what an incredible variety of people and topics he'd covered over the years. I couldn't help but be struck by what a gentleman he was. I kept thinking, "Charlie would never behave the way all those other jerks have. He is so above that."
I was truly stunned by the allegations about him, and I felt so sad. I just couldn't believe it. It's like he died. What a way to end one of the most distinguished careers in all of journalism.
425
That's odd. I never had such a regard for Charlie Rose. I seldom watched his show, but I value the same things you do in a journalist.
I think people allow themselves to be hornswoggled by these "powerful" figures.
6
His interviews were sickening. He made sycophancy an art form yet he displayed a subtle disdain for anyone with whom he disagreed.
I loathed watching him and, therefore, did not.
3
No, not admired by everyone. Ill reserve judgment temporarily on his culpability with regard to these allegations, but if they are true it would not surprise me at all.
4
“The women spoke on condition of anonymity because they feared Mr. Rose’s power over their careers and what some described as his volatile temper.”
Another example of a man in powerful position taking advantage of and intimidating women. It’s time for Rose to go away. Who needs him? What does he contribute to the good of society? Nothing.
14
I've been a news junkie for my entire 50+ years, but have NEVER been able to sit through a Charlie Rose interview from start to finish. That, after countless attempts.
In my opinion, his ego and superficiality always got in the way of insightful discussions.
34
That personal anecdote is not relevant to the discussion at hand. I'm sorry you didn't like a show.
1
I have to agree. And somehow I feel vindicated that this carefully constructed persona turns out to be exactly that.
Yvette Vega, the show's producer for decades, told The Washington Post, “I should have stood up for them. I failed. It is crushing. I deeply regret not helping them.” A woman in a leadership role knew about it but did nothing? Isn't she as culpable as Charlie Rose? What am I supposed to make of this?
87
You are to make out that Rose is responsible for his behavior. Please stop blaming women for the despicable behavior of others.
2
#Trumptoo - let's never forget "they let you do anything" if you're famous. All this is meaningless if we continue to agree with Trump that he is above repercussion.
83
I'm sorry, but I was never a Charlie Rose fan. In interviews with celebrated people, whatever their area of talent, I'm afraid he often came off as a sycophant. Power and celebrity apparently intoxicated him. He more than likely felt that he, too, was God's gift to the world. That may be why he thought his actions were consensual.
He demonstrated a total lack of objectivity in the Clinton/Sanders interviews. He fawned over his Nantucket pal, Hillary, while going after Sanders in a most aggressive manner. Even Bernie seemed bewildered.
I guess Slick Willy and Charlie had a great deal in common to be such good friends.
Can I picture his committing these acts? Can I imagine his having a volatile temper?
Yes, to both questions.
32
If only the occupant of the oval office would be scrutinized and made accountable for his years of sexual misconduct to the degree that other abusers have been.. I simply don't understand the double standard. I truly wish Trump was an employee of CBS. They know the right thing to do and did it promptly.
51
The hypocrisy of the elites in media, politics and entertainment continues. They act like this all just happened, with sudden indignance giving them a sense of moral superiority. Where's Mo when there are so many victims to attack? Nora and Gail were "See No Evil" and "Hear No Evil" this morning.
The worst part about having to hear of the long-known-but-ignored indiscretions of these high-level cretins is that their self-importance oozes through when the media gets to talk about themselves. When the reporter becomes the story, there's not much news for regular people. Hardly the arbiters of class, we get reminded that they're just showbiz.
4
Nora would shamefully GUSH over him during CBS This Morning.
1
If I were applying for a job and the would-be boss asked me to go to some house somewhere, I would assume they were inviting me for sex and I would refuse. If I did not get the job too bad. The woman has some responsibility to make her unwillingness to participate very clear. For poor women with little or no options, that is tantamount to rape.
126
You'd be surprised at the naivete of some young women, even today. We expect them to be savvy when, often, they're really not, but think they have to put on a knowing attitude because, in our sex-saturated society, they don't want their naivete to show.
Doubtless, this particular woman will never get herself in this situation again, but it's a lesson hard learned, and the blame goes on Charlie Rose. He knew perfectly well what he was planning, and should have the maturity to make sure the woman is clear on his hopes/expectations before inviting her out there.
In his apology, Rose says that (in general), he thought the feelings were mutual. He mistook admiration (or adulation) for his work and desire to work with him for sexual/romantic interest. The woman learned about reality when she went to his house. He is learning about it now.
15
From the fact that you would make that assumption, it doesn't follow that everyone ought to make that assumption.
5
Yes, but the point that women make over and over again is that even if the woman places herself in a vulnerable position, like going to a man's house, she still has the right to expect that he will not try to exploit her body for his pleasure. Because respect is the pillar of the covenant of a civilized society.
9
Charlie's gone? Wow, that was quick, even for the ageist entertainment "industry." That leaves Franken slowly spinning on the spit, desperate to escape the NYT front page and news cycle lead, hoping that new skeletons don't come tumbling out. But if NPR's Terry Gross officially cuts him loose, he's through.
3
"That leaves Franken slowly spinning on the spit, desperate to escape the NYT front page and news cycle lead, hoping that new skeletons don't come tumbling out."
If Al Franken is forced out of the Senate and djt is not forced out of the WH, it will be an example of partisan politics at its most unfair/worst.
2
Charlie Rose has always been an exceptionally gifted interviewer. Too bad he turns out to be just another jerk to people under his power. Sad, because he exhibits the traits of empathy and insight, but, apparently fails to exercise them personally. Hardly unique. Did we elect him president? Is he setting the agenda for this nation on taxes, health care, energy, the environment, education, sex and race hypocrisy and discrimination, integrity in government and tolerance of corruption, or am I missing something?
Keep chasing those bright shiny objects, press, the Trumps, Mercers, Moores, and Bannons are loving it.
40
While we're having our sexual harassment gala, the NY Times needs to come out with an editorial on Bill Clinton's record in this area and re-evaluate him and his legacy in the light of his moral and ethical failings. While at it, Hillary Clinton's record of enabling sexual harassment and victimization of Monica Lewinsky with scornful epithets such as 'looney tunes' need also to be commented upon.
I'm under no illusion that what we're saying these days is a new awakening. It's just covering fire to get Ray Moore ousted so Democrats can work towards that elusive objective i.e., a Senate majority. It's all sordid political calculation now as it was during the Clinton era. Women's issues are an incidental beneficiary.
5
I gather you haven't been reading the Op-Ed pages, then. Dowd and Douthat have both done this within the last few days.
13
The women who came forward about Roy Moore are Republicans and many Republicans have spoken out against him. I'm under no illusion that you care about girls and women being sexually targeted. You just want to divert the discussion to Bill Clinton. What is happening, no matter what your political persuasion, is that women FINALLY feel safe about coming forward and maybe, just maybe, we can make some progress related to the way women are treated by men in power.
1
I'd like to see Charlie Rose interview Charlie Rose now, and have him ask all the tough questions like he does. "How do you square your on-air thoughtful, sensitive personna with what we've learned?" "How did you come to be like this?" "Did your parents fail to raise you to respect others and not treat young women like chattel?" "Is this similar to all the others we've been hearing about lately, and what is it about becoming famous and powerful that leads people to start acting like others are just there for their own infantile pleasures?"
336
I expect he'd do a good job.
2
Why was his manager(Yvonne) who knew and condoned this behavior at PBS not fired as well. WP interview states that a intern came to her and asked what should I do?
It is like HRC who's essential Misogyny allows other women who reach out to be ignored!
PBS, you should be ashamed
It's not just the famous and powerful. Too many men feel all women of lesser status are there for their pleasure, from the businessman and the secretary to the truck driver and the waitress. I think such men are deeply insecure, afraid to make an overture to women of equal status for fear of being rejected.
Funny....the Rose accusations sound similar to those made against our current President. Where is Trump's suspension?
125
Ageism is also a factor in this situation. There were many attractive, physically fit, intelligent women within 10 years of Charlie Rose’s age who would have been open to developing a romantic, sexual and/or companionable relation with him. Some appeared on his show. But he approached women young enough to be his daughters and granddaughters which was foolish as well as sexually harassing.
24
While I agree in principal, in reality men whose power and wealth permit them to horn dog younger women....do so. Not all but many or most.
A man I knew very well, told me years ago that when he was 14 years old he was attracted to 24 year old women....when he was 24 he was attracted to 24 year old women....and now that he was 44 he was attracted to 24 year old women. The implication is that he would always be attracted to women at their sexual & attractiveness & fertility peak -- 24 years old.
I told him then that the problem was no woman remains 24 years old forever. Pretty soon she's 26 and 30 and then too old for him. THEN WHAT? that standards means you can never marry -- or must own a harem.
Today that man is 65 years old.
I'm beginning to believe more and more the old adage: 'Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.' The increase in power magnifies existing character flaws, paraphilias, or hypermasculinity. Do these men believe that women around them are some kind of harem they have access to? Do they feel like they're an emperor with 800 concubines, a la Solomon or ancient Imperial China? I think some of them on an unconscious level, feel like they deserve to be in a similar circumstance. How is it that some of them don't think "that's someone's daughter or girlfriend. Would I want a man to do that to her? Would I want someone to do that to me?" Or is that they secretly in the recesses of their reptilian brain, *want* things to be like that; they think that it's manly to take what you want without regard to the other person's feelings, nor even just ethics; they are aroused by such displays of dominance.
366
If you look at the age of these men being charged, nearly all are over the age of 60-65.
I have 3 brothers and nary a one of them have ever been charged or accused of being anything other than chivalrous gentlemen.
As our mother taught us all...consent is like a cup of tea. Would you like a cup of tea? Do you even like tea? Would you like sugar or lemon with your tea, or do you want your tea another way? Do you want it hot or lukewarm? If you take a sip of the tea and don’t like it, please speak up and let me know you don’t like this particular tea.
2
Yes, its about power, perhaps the greater aphrodisiac. And yes it stems from the reptilian brain, which determines our opinions and actions, before our cortex puts together the rationale for them. None-the-less, most of us tame these impulses, recognizing their harmful and destructive impact on others.
3
You have made a very valid point about power dispensation to men, however I believe you must broaden the scope to include women as well when it comes to the abuse of power. You are very right on the reckless behavior of powerful men, I must tell you this behavior is not only limited to the powerful. All men are susceptible to this behavior of seeing women in the context of sexual activity however you mentioned "How is it that some of them month think thats someone's daughter or girlfriend" that is the divide. Some men see it that way but a lot do not and part of it has to do with power at their dispensation or just mental weakness. If society can recognize this possibilities and guard against it we can see a change in these attitude. Society must protect our young women, and our adult women must make sure not to put themselves in positions of compromise while living under the assumption that the man will do the right thing.
Islamic religion is very strict on separation of women from men and it is purposely to avoid these kinds of conditions, most importantly although I am not here to discuss religion but we might be able to borrow something from it on how women act around men or how men act around women.
I will like to reiterate that, power regardless of who is in possession of it creates a potential for abuse.
Here's what men do not understand: Men come to love through sex. Women come to sex through love. Your naked body, your groping, your sex talk is completely REVOLTING to a woman who doesn't love you.
295
But that’s not what the gals in Sex and the City were talking about all the time. Who are we men supposed to believe, certainly not our mothers because the world I’ve experienced was nothing like the one she taught me about should be.
2
"Crude sexual advances"??? Can you explain what non-crude ones are? Polished?? Practiced?? Learned??
1
Seems frightfully old-fashioned. Flies in the face of women groping men at the work place (a miniscule minority but known to happen), women watching porn and women owning sex toys.
3
North Carolina is certainly not getting good press this year!
3
I remember Mr. Rose's memorial to Bill Friday. It is hard to put their names in the same sentence now. I am angry and disappointed.
1
Can't wait for the memes juxtaposing Charlie Rose condemning Trump's supposed sexual peccadilloes with a picture of Charlie Rose apologizing for waving his willy in front of women.
5
I watched him two or three times and thought he was boring, too much "nice" and never penetrating the issues. Gut feeling told me that he just wasn't what he pretended to be but couldn't pin-point it. Now I know.
27
The 2010 allegation could and should bring charges in Nassau County. I would hope they will bring an indictment against him for that and any other cases.
8
The residence is in Suffolk county!
1
My mom was 17 when she modeled for Eileen Ford, and dated Joe DImaggio in the early 1960s. She was propositioned by Mark Goodson (those of a certain age will know who that is) with a trip to California to audition. She had already been on the Price is Right as a stand in. She said "No I'll pass thanks." Knowing what would perhaps go down in California and maybe on a plane with this man.
She ultimately gave up modeling, became an accountant for Grumman and raised a family. While I do not support abuse of any kind, one can always say "No" , leave a situation, kick the perpetrator somewhere that they would never forget. Showbiz is a gross, vapid, slimy business. Not sure what people are expecting from narcissistic egomaniacs. Kind and thoughtful ?
68
It should not be incumbent upon the victim to leave her job, forgo her dreams. And the idea of saying no and fighting back completely misses the context of these incidents, it's about the power of these men and it's their power and the dire consequences of fighting back or speaking up that enables them. It should be incumbent on the predator to stop. This attitude of blaming the women and putting the responsibility on them is part of the problem and also has to stop.
288
Agree, if you are going to make a public stand about a private harassment do it early and loudly, dont wait to see how your career turns out with this fellow? The harasser had a choice and chose poorly, the harassed also had a choice, and should choose early and wisely
12
I'm conflicted about these accusations myself. It's not like it's happening to a child. These are grown women. In this case, one who accepted an invitation to his estate, 60 miles away from the city. What did she think was the intention? And even if she was not streetwise enough (that's fair) what stopped her from just saying no, saying you disgust me, and getting out of there at the first opportunity? This led to a 10-year trauma?
That said, I think it's a good thing that these issues are coming to light. Powerful men (and not-powerful men) need to wake up. It's been a "boys will be boys" world for far too long
171
One after another, these prominent men are being brought down for their arrogance and sexual predation. They got away with it for years and years, and now they finally pay the price. But, why is the most powerful predator being overlooked? What about the 16 women who came forward to accuse him? Trump remains untouched, after publicly insulting and degrading his accusers. After using the power of his position to label them liars. When will he be made to pay for his actions?
503
This is exactly what I keep wondering. It is great that we are catching these people, but seriously, more evidence exists on Trump than some of these other people whose careers are now permanently over. Why is nothing being done?
9
Dear Ms. Pea
I could not agree with you more. And I don't understand why this isn't being shouted from the rooftops by everyone. If we wish to become a society where women are respected, taken seriously and treated fairly, these standards of behavior have to be equally applicable to everyone, without exception.
Mr. Trump is a self-proclaimed predator who believes he is above the law. So far he is proving to be correct.
Any outsider applying common sense to this situation would say "America, until you hold your Commander-in-chief to the same standards of behavior as everyone else, don't expect to be taken seriously."
5
The Con Don is not "untouched" by WE THE PEOPLE who will purge he and his Robber Barons from power in every segment of OUR governments and society right now.
He and people who think like him will not stand in power in OUR United States of America. Not not. Not ever again.
Charlie has had such a sterling reputation (to those of us on the outside) as a journalist. How careless for him to not work hard at being thoroughly decent and respectful to those who worked with/for him. This episode will now be a part of his legacy. Too bad.
108
" . . . to not work hard at being thoroughly decent and respectful . . ."
That's your idea of hard work? Comes naturally to some of us.
5
I'm just so shocked because I was such an admirer of his and he seems like such an intelligent, sensitive man. Then to be so crude and not realize you are being crude? How can it be that more than 50 years after Women's Liberation men still treat women like prey? For many of these young interns, who probably admired him, it is their first experience of the working world and it is traumatic. I'm glad this sick behavior is finally catching up with people who have gotten away with it and agree, Trump must go, too.
161
Shocked? He's sensitive? I always found Rose to be a pretentious bore. Arrogant, self-absorbed and riding a phony reputation as an intellectual. His behavior is entirely consonant with his persona.
5
I'm a man. I was born and raised in the 90s. I don't know what men before me were taught exactly as young boys but it's pretty obvious being in the company of men that those who pretend to be the "liberal" and "feminist" men are quite often the most full of nonsense men. Most of these "pro-women" talking men on camera and in Hollywood in particular act a certain way so as to charm a certain type of women and prey on them for their sexual desires. In other cases they are also trying to fight off/hide the guilt of what they've done by pretending to be champions of causes that combat these behaviors.
Nice to see the farce of liberalism being exposed every day. The cleaner they look, the more dirt they're hiding!
Intisar, why don't you just ask us liberals if we still beat our wives? Your ad hominem attack conveniently forgets an equal if not greater number of known conservative Republican sex criminals, from Donald Trump on down.
3
Charlie Rose?
Who is next? Big Bird? Kermit? Superman? Mother Goose? Norman Rockwell?
If anything negative ever comes out about Mr. Rogers, my faith in humanity will be irreparably shattered.
131
he is a man that makes him vulnerable! every woman who has ever dated/married/worked with a man has a sexual harassment story to tell.
1
Maybe if we had believed Anita Hill back in the day, it wouldn’t have taken 40 years to quit dismissing women’s claims of sexual harassment and sexual assault. No Bill, but no Donald either.
408
It goes back farther than Anita Hill - which I agree, was a low point in the history of American legislative and judicial politics. Ted Kennedy was guilty of manslaughter and his family's money and name saved him; what's more, he went on to be considered a "lion" of the senate. Along the way, he facilitated the papering over of numerous nephews and nieces sins. And his brothers almost certainly used their standing and money in return for sexual favors. As absolutely sickened as I am by the Roy Moore situation, I can't help but think back to Kennedy when people suggest nobody as morally corrupt has ever served in the Senate. No Kennedy, no Anita Hill (Kennedy's friend Joe Biden was one of her most dismissive critics), no Bill, no Donald. And we're surprised when we hear about Al, Charlie, etc. etc.? It's all very sad.
7
Actually, no Thomas either.
5
i believed anita hill b/c she had no reason to lie! clarence, had many reasons not to tell the truth and he didn't.
2
" Mr. Rose said he did not believe all the allegations were accurate but also apologized."
No need for all those allegations to be exactly accurate, it is enough whatever we are reading so far, we get an accurate picture, his apologies do not count much in my opinion when he said: “I always felt that I was pursuing shared feelings, even though I now realize I was mistaken.” that does not sound like an apology, to me, what does he mean by "shared feelings"? consensual sex? he is putting equal responsibility on the women for his misbehavior. CBS and PBS did the right thing, his career is over. Charlie Rose is another Bill O" Reilly, This is what Rose said when he was asked by The Associated Press about Bill O'Reilly's sexual misconduct: "All of the cases that raise the issue of sexual harassment, which is a terrible thing, (and) has probably been not exposed enough," Rose said. "Not enough in the sense of the attention in the past, so that people were afraid to come forward. I think people are coming forward now." I am glad that more and more women are coming forward now in his case.
75
This is absolutely disgusting, Rose should be fired, and let any legal action take place. But: what about the elephant in the room? D. Trump? Why are not lenses now turned on him, who's done the same behavior repeatedly?
And in a related issue: Al Franken should agree to resign the Senate if Trump does too.
96
Same? He’s done much worse.
22
Not partisan at all. Trump is a man first, and a republican Maybe 8th?
Trump abused women as a man, not as a politician! Yeah, it's the same guy, but let's be fair here about equal treatment!
10
It's not partisan politics, it's just telling it like it is. The truth.
6