Tom Brokaw, NBC Tickler

Wolf said:

Except having to deal with him, not being able to tell him off, and worrying about losing her job if he pressed the issue and didn't get his way.
Or, that he might someday have decided he was butt-hurt about the first rejection, or jealous that she started dating someone outside the office.

Click to expand...

That’s all pure speculation on your part. We don’t know if any of that is true or would have happened.

smokinj said:

That’s all pure speculation on your part. We don’t know if any of that is true or would have happened.

Click to expand...

Tom, is that you? Get off our website.

smokinj said:

That’s all pure speculation on your part. We don’t know if any of that is true or would have happened.

Click to expand...

This is what people who are sexually harassed have to deal with; the possibility of all these things happening, because someone else was horny and used their position.
Do you really think people who prey on people at work are into taking no for an answer?

Wolf said:

This is what people who are sexually harassed have to deal with; the possibility of all these things happening, because someone else was horny and used their position.
Do you really think people who prey on people at work are into taking no for an answer?

Click to expand...

Fine. You win. He’s a predator who took advantage of a young subordinate and now must deal with it.

smokinj said:

Fine. You win. He’s a predator who took advantage of a young subordinate and now must deal with it.

Click to expand...

Put away the crying towel, I never said that.
I'm just sick of you dismissing someone else's hardships just because you have no empathy or frame of reference.

Wolf said:

Put away the crying towel, I never said that.
I'm just sick of you dismissing someone else's hardships just because you have no empathy or frame of reference.

Click to expand...

I said I didn’t believe it was a big deal. I’ll save my empathy for Brokaw.

smokinj said:

I said I didn’t believe it was a big deal. I’ll save my empathy for Brokaw.

Click to expand...

That's a wise move. It doesn't sound like you have much to spare.

Wolf said:

That's a wise move. It doesn't sound like you have much to spare.

Click to expand...

There’s plenty for people who deserve it.

smokinj said:

There’s plenty for people who deserve it.

Click to expand...

From what you've said, repeatedly, that's a pretty narrow group. It even excludes people who are telling the truth.

Wolf said:

From what you've said, repeatedly, that's a pretty narrow group. It even excludes people who are telling the truth.

Click to expand...

I really don’t know what else to say on this subject. You feel one way about how it went down and I feel another way. Regardless, I think we can both agree it’s a sad, preventable situation.

smokinj said:

I really don’t know what else to say on this subject. You feel one way about how it went down and I feel another way. Regardless, I think we can both agree it’s a sad, preventable situation.

Click to expand...

It's not your opinion on the Brokaw issue I have a problem with. That's just a matter of opinion.
It's your stance on employers having the right to feel up their employees I find objectionable.

Wolf said:

It's not your opinion on the Brokaw issue I have a problem with. That's just a matter of opinion.
It's your stance on employers having the right to feel up their employees I find objectionable.

Click to expand...

Well said Wolf.

Wolf said:

It's not your opinion on the Brokaw issue I have a problem with. That's just a matter of opinion.
It's your stance on employers having the right to feel up their employees I find objectionable.

Click to expand...

Ok well for the record, I don’t think an employer has the right to ‘feel up’ his or her employees. We were talking about a quick tickle as it related to the Brokaw situation. Further, Brokaw was only a senior staff member of NBC news, he wasn’t her employer or even direct supervisor. Just so we’re clear.

smokinj said:

Ok well for the record, I don’t think an employer has the right to ‘feel up’ his or her employees. We were talking about a quick tickle as it related to the Brokaw situation. Further, Brokaw was only a senior staff member of NBC news, he wasn’t her employer or even direct supervisor. Just so we’re clear.

Click to expand...

So it's the quick tickles employers have a right to?

It's shit like this why so many workplace handbooks have to literally spell out that tickling is an inappropriate work activity.

Even those hokey sexual harassment sensitivity training videos portray a shoulder rub as potential unwanted touching / harassment. The audacity to think tickling is ok is mind boggling.

Tickling often has an aspect of power to it and personal space is something to be respected. When you take away someone's power to control their personal space and you're a person of authority, that's violating in and of itself.

chicago said:

So it's the quick tickles employers have a right to?

It's shit like this why so many workplace handbooks have to literally spell out that tickling is an inappropriate work activity.

Click to expand...

This. It's pretty simple. Keep your hands to yourself in the damn workplace. And imo even if a girl from work lets on that she is interested in you, just don't. Plenty of fish in the sea so no reason to shit where you eat.

chicago said:

So it's the quick tickles employers have a right to?

It's shit like this why so many workplace handbooks have to literally spell out that tickling is an inappropriate work activity.

Even those hokey sexual harassment sensitivity training videos portray a shoulder rub as potential unwanted touching / harassment. The audacity to think tickling is ok is mind boggling.

Tickling often has an aspect of power to it and personal space is something to be respected. When you take away someone's power to control their personal space and you're a person of authority, that's violating in and of itself.

Click to expand...

Exactly, perfectly put. No one, male or female should touch another person without consent. Don't tickle, grope, kiss, hug, caress or touch anyone with out their consent and if your response to that is "you are too "PC" you are part of the problem.

LordJroy said:

Exactly, perfectly put. No one, male or female should touch another person without consent. Don't tickle, grope, kiss, hug, caress or touch anyone with out their consent and if your response to that is "you are too "PC" you are part of the problem.

Click to expand...

Are you implying that if I take a girl out on a date, I should get her verbal consent to go in for a hug/kiss at the end? That sounds spontaneous and fun....Ladies love that for sure.

gator12138 said:

Are you implying that if I take a girl out on a date, I should get her verbal consent to go in for a hug/kiss at the end? That sounds spontaneous and fun....Ladies love that for sure.

Click to expand...

Are you equating the situation in the OP to a date? Lmfao

And yeah, ladies do love.consent.

gator12138 said:

Are you implying that if I take a girl out on a date, I should get her verbal consent to go in for a hug/kiss at the end? That sounds spontaneous and fun....Ladies love that for sure.

Click to expand...

I’m implying that when you are at work you should refrain from molesting your coworkers. I’m implying that outside of work you should act appropriately and not do anything on a date that would make a woman feel uncomfortable, the fact that you can not grasp this concept is utterly baffling to me.

Several posters seem to have blinders on because of the tickle aspect. Substitute "tickle" with "grab ass," grab boobs." Still think it's harmless? He GRABBED her for his pleasure. Doesn't matter where, or how. Period.

How sad that these kinds of debates have to take place. And go on and on, tryng to convince people that tickling someone without their consent is WRONG. Touching anyone whether it be at work or anywhere without they permission is WRONG.

But.. there's hundreds of prisons FULL of people who didn't care about wrong vs right, one issue or another. So... I'm not shocked by this anymore. They consider this a trite expression of touch- cute and funny. And sexually adventurous. Even sadistically a good time for them. 20 seconds or less... THAT is worth it to them to risk everything they have worked so hard for. Tom Brokaw being the newest example of this. An entire, long, and distinguished career... circling the drain as we speak because he woulden't keep his hands to himself. WOW. I may not be shocked but... I am shocked in the sense of how easy people are willing to throw away their life for a moment of satisfaction. 20 seconds... (give or take)

Maybe when they get a hard slap to the face... or... lose their job... or lose their friendship... or even go to jail.... MAYBE they'll realize THAT ONE FLEETING MOMENT cost them something they won't be able to get back. But that's highly doubtful. You can only give so much reasoning and FACT, before its time to say... "Fine, go ahead... keep doing it. None of my business anymore" .

If you LOVE: REAL NON CONSENSUAL SITUATIONS.... DON"T complain if the consequences of your actions catch up with you. Because if you DO wind up in jail... big Bubba isn't gonna care either about consent. But at least you'll have someone who understands your plight.

You may be lucky NOW... but you won't be forever...

*sips my coffee as only Kermit The Frog ever could*

A story just shared that I read on Tumblr. Figured I'd post it considering the issue being debated.


'Why I don't Party Anymore'

When I was in college I went to a party at one of the largest and well known colleges in my state. My friends wanted to party and I was DD so I played wall flower that night. Well as I was hiding in the darkness, this guy who was definitely intoxicated came over and started talking to me. He kept inching closer and I was repeating steps on how to bring him down in my head just in case, reminding myself my knife was just between my boobs and that it’d be quick to pull. Suddenly, he puts his arm around my shoulder and leans up against me and as I turned to shrug out of it and to ask him nicely to stop be grabbed my boob and kissed me. I grabbed his hand, snapped his finger and bolted outside of the party and hid in the bushes. He stumbled out looking for me but after being unable to see me he wandered back inside. One of the school’s football players found me shaking and crying (I was a freshman at the time and unfamiliar with the campus) and asked me if I was okay and what was wrong and he sat there with me till my friends wanted to leave trying to calm me down. He gave me his number and told me to call him when I got home safe because he wanted to make sure I made it. And proceeded to escort my friends and I back. It startled me beyond belief and after that I couldn’t handle going to a party, in fact I couldn’t be around guys without feeling the need to be prepared to fight them.


I don't see ANY difference here of this story and the case in question. And so to add on to what consequences may come to those who do not respect boundaries... wanna get your finger snapped? Or knifed? Be my guest...

(That was SMART thinking snapping his finger wasn't it? That bought her enought time to get out of there. But she shoulden't have had to go through that in the first place. )
.

Against my better judgement, if I may try to bridge this dangerous canyon, I believe it's time both sides of the #MeToo debate acknowledged the other.

Have there been wealthy, powerful (and sometimes famous) men who feel entitled to grope, grab, crudely proposition and forcibly kiss and rape subordinate employees whenever the lustful urge moves them? Of course. Don't we all know that? Glad to see them called out.

Can there also be relatively normal guys who have misconstrued flirtation signals and made a woman feel uncomfortable as a result of that misunderstanding? Guys who only ever did relatively minor things (which I consider a single tickle in that space) -- and don't deserve to be denounced before the world as sexual predators and also don't deserve to have their careers ended? Yes, wouldn't we all agree that's possible too? These guys might indeed have been inappropriate, once, but after they sense the unwelcome reaction, they stop.

And to complete the range, can't there be some women who are made uncomfortable by little more than a change in barometric pressure? Sure.

The point, ultimately, is two ends of this continuum -- I'll call it the Aziz Ansari to Harvey Weinstein continuum -- then after that, aren't there shades of gray along that line, from "only a little worse than Ansari," up to "almost as bad as Weinstein"? As I said before, I find the stories about Brokaw credible, and I plot him somewhere in the middle of that range. Also as I've said, if it were only the tickling once, without the hotel room visit, I don't believe any of us would have ever been reading about this in the press.

What wearies me is seeing some people write as if real asshole predators aren't out there, and others write as if unreasonable or mendacious women don't exist. In fact, all of it exists.

brotherted said:

Against my better judgement, if I may try to bridge this dangerous canyon, I believe it's time both sides of the #MeToo debate acknowledged the other.
Have there been wealthy, powerful (and sometimes famous) men who feel entitled to grope, grab, crudely proposition and forcibly kiss and rape subordinate employees whenever the lustful urge moves them? Of course. Don't we all know that? Glad to see them called out.
Can there also be relatively normal guys who have misconstrued flirtation signals and made a woman feel uncomfortable as a result of that misunderstanding? Guys who only ever did relatively minor things (which I consider a single tickle in that space) -- and don't deserve to be denounced before the world as sexual predators and also don't deserve to have their careers ended? Yes, wouldn't we all agree that's possible too? These guys might indeed have been inappropriate, once, but after they sense the unwelcome reaction, they stop.
And to complete the range, can't there be some women who are made uncomfortable by little more than a change in barometric pressure? Sure.
The point, ultimately, is two ends of this continuum -- I'll call it the Aziz Ansari to Harvey Weinstein continuum -- then after that, aren't there shades of gray along that line, from "only a little worse than Ansari," up to "almost as bad as Weinstein"? As I said before, I find the stories about Brokaw credible, and I plot him somewhere in the middle of that range. Also as I've said, if it were only the tickling once, without the hotel room visit, I don't believe any of us would have ever been reading about this in the press.
What wearies me is seeing some people write as if real asshole predators aren't out there, and others write as if unreasonable or mendacious women don't exist. In fact, all of it exists.

Click to expand...

Okay...but who are these men who've had their careers ended by undeserved denouncements based on "relatively minor" things?

I can't believe that there are 7 pages of back-and-forth arguments over consent when the message board is dedicated to an activity that requires consent to be legal. Let me spell it out.

Touching someone you don't know without consent isn't cool at all. It's especially uncool when the person being touched belongs to a part of society at high risk for rape and assault, because they already have to be defensive to protect themselves.

Consent isn't rocket science. If you go in for a hug and the person looks worried or steps back, you don't have consent. It's as simple as that. As far as tickling is concerned, it's an activity we engage in to elicit a response that the other party has little or no control over, and as such needs consent first, even from a good friend, and always if the tickling is even remotely sexual, which for most of us it is.

Moving on from the legal necessity of consent, it's also sexy. I work in a field where my colleagues are touchy-feely people. I hate when these people come up to me expecting a hug as greeting even if we've never met. I deal with it because they're good people and frankly it's difficult to move ahead in music and theater if you're perceived as unfriendly. When someone says "Hi, can I hug you?", that's when it feels good, because boundaries are being respected.

I come from the perspective of a survivor. Up until my event, I was unsure about the whole concept of consent because I was a stupid and inexperienced kid, and like many people here who think of tickling as harmless, I wasn't entirely convinced it was necessary because "it's such a little thing...". Well, a lot of "little things" led up to it, and I'm consent's #1 fan. Those of us who advocate strongly for consent aren't out to ruin fun for everyone, we advocate for consent because we have felt the effects of a lack of consent and we don't want anyone else to go through that hell.

Like I said before, consent is sexy. When someone asks for permission to tickle (or whatever else), it means that they don't view the other person as an object for sexual gratification, and that their feelings and needs are being considered. If nothing else, think about what is going through the other person's mind if consent isn't given. "Oh my God, it's happening all over again..." and "I hope he doesn't kill me." are just a couple examples.

In conclusion, always ask for consent. You don't know what a person has been through and where your surprise tickle attack will put them. Ultimately, if tickling, an act that involves two or more people, is only about you and your pleasure, it's probably not an activity you should engage in.