<p>
</p>
<p>No, if people really enjoyed his show, they would have been watching him before this scandal. I actually enjoyed his show, I liked his humor. But I won’t watch him now.</p>
<p>I watched him before and watch him now. No difference for me.</p>
<p>The difference between Letterman, that I would watch if I stayed up that late, and Woody Allen, that I won’t watch is the “ick” factor for me. Letterman is nothing more than an entertainer. So he had affairs. I don’t really care. That’s between him and his wife. He’s not a politician campaigning on Family Values or a hippocrital spiritual leader. Woody Allen, on the other hand, did something that I cannot get past and I can’t watch him ever again. I will also never watch a Roman Polanski movie.</p>
<p>I don’t care if he had affairs, many people do and it’s no one’s business. It doesn’t even bother me when politicans do it. The issue I am having with him is having affairs with his staff members.<br>
</p>
<p>To me that’s abuse of power. Similar to 3bm103, it is not the affair itself, but who he’s had affairs with that bothers me.</p>
<p>You know everyone is saying that it the sexual harassment thing that will get Letterman in trouble. But the guy who tried to blackmail Letterman over his affair with Stephanie Birkett was a Producer for 48 hours when Birkett was an intern over there. That’s where they met and began a relationship. So if it is harassment for Letterman to have an affair with her, why isn’t harassement for the blackmailer to have an affair with her?</p>
<p>It is not sexual harrassment if it is consensual, and it is hard to prove sometimes. As stated by other posters, even if it’s not a sexual harrassment it may still create an unfair or hostile working environment for other employees. In the Letterman case, Birkitt wasn’t the only one Letterman had affairs with, according to letterman’s own statement. It is something that he has engaged in repeatedly. This goes beyond the fact the guy just couldn’t keep his pants on. If that was his only problem, he would have been having affairs with women outside of his own staff, and that doesn’t seem to be the case or he hasn’t stated as such yet.</p>
<p>I am probably projecting from my own experience and I am thinking of my own two daughters. They will soon be interning and working for some guy with power over them, and the idea those guys could use their power to try to gain sexual favor from my daughters, just kind of want to make me puke.</p>
<p>Yes, we all have our barometer of what’s acceptable.</p>
<p>oldfort, I had writen a long post and then deleted it. I also stated that so much of how we see this is tied to our own experience in the workplace. I then told stories of various assignations and how they were commmonplace and that no one construed them as harassment even when there were great disparities in power (and looking back I still don’t see them as harassment; stupid, yes, but not harassment). </p>
<p>I ended with how seamy it all seems now and how thankful I am to not have a daughter. I think if I had a dd I would be more outraged.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What bothers you more, his behavior, or the fact that he admitted to it publicly? If it’s the behavior you’re protesting, you may as well sell your television, stop going to the movies, and stop voting. Maybe stop going to church, too. Cuz guess what! This crap goes on all the time; you just aren’t used to someone actually admitting it.</p>
<p>By the way, I doubt that many people are watching his show who didn’t watch it before. It’s just that now, more of them are watching it on the same night, because something’s going on that promises to make it more interesting than usual. I don’t watch The View, and even if Barbara Walters publicly admits to having an affair with Whoopie Goldberg, I’m still not watching.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I have a daughter, and I’m not outraged. This wasn’t rape. It sounds as though their jobs weren’t threatened. It was, I believe, very poor judgment on the part of everyone involved, but that’s not a cause for fatherly outrage. I hope that my daughter would choose not to have an affair with her married boss, and the way my wife and I have raised her, I don’t think she will. But suppose she did. If she’s an adult, that will be her choice, unfortunately.</p>
<p>My outrage wouldn’t be directed at Letterman, just at society in general. </p>
<p>One of the stories I deleted was about being groped by a supervisor while a large group of us was at a bar after hours (this was loooong ago). I slapped his hand, and nothing further happened. He didn’t retaliate, and I didn’t press charges. I wasn’t scarred for life, though I learned not to sit next to him at a bar. But it does bother me to think that a dd of mine (or anyone’s, of course) would be put in that situation for nothing other than being a woman with less power than this man (because I’m sure he wouldn’t have groped a female supervisor). I am quite sure that some women would have returned the “favor” and, voila, office “romance.” </p>
<p>I think Letterman and Birkett were consenting adults and each was getting something from the relationship. That’s why I’m not outraged.</p>
<p>I am outraged by his behavior. We have people at work who behave that way, sometimes we find out and sometimes we don’t. When we do find out, it is dealt with. This type of behavior may go on all the time, but it doesn’t make it right and it doesn’t mean we should give up in trying to change it. </p>
<p>twenty years ago when something like that happened, the woman was always the one asked to leave. It is not always the case any more. It used to be ok to bring strippers to the trading floor, but it’s not acceptable any more. It used to be ok for the “boys” to put up half naked woman poster on the wall, not any more. It is also not ok to send X rated jokes via company emails any more. Things have changed. So I will not accept the fact just because it goes on all the time we should just roll over and play dead, not for our kids.</p>
<p>m.s - I have worked with good old boys most of my life. I have “boys” admit to me what they have done that their wifes would never know about.</p>
<p>I am burnt out on outrage. Everything is an outrage to someone, and it gets old. I find Letterman’s behavior distasteful, inappropriate, unfortunate, sad, disrespectful, immature…but not outrageous. I’m saving my outrage for something like Darfur. Being outraged by who has consensual sex with whom causes outrage to lose its value, and people who are always outraged, especially about private moral issues, start to look pretty silly after a while. Not to mention that people who are outraged by, say, Bill Clinton dropping his pants behind closed doors tend not to be outraged by, say, George Bush approving torture of innocent people and, say, Dick Cheney funneling billions of dollars in government defense contracts to his buddies. Therefore I can’t bring myself to apologize for failing to be outraged by some TV clown’s horny exploits.</p>
<p>I am tired of people posting over and over again about their pipe dreams.</p>
<p>What are you referring to?</p>