Here’s an interesting story.
A while ago, comedienne Katherine Ryan admitted that she once offered her boss (obviously in her pre-comedienne days) a sexual favor to be able to quit work early. Apparently, she had a crush on him — as she puts it, he wasn’t just “some guy” — and he seems to have quite liked her too Anyway, he agreed, she gave him the BJ and went home early. No problem, right?
Don’t be stupid. Needless to say, the Outrage Industry went full steam ahead. Even though this happened when she was very young — some twenty years ago, methinks — this made no matter to the wokescolds, who excoriated the unnamed boss for all the usual capital crimes: using his position of influence to get a BJ from a subordinate, sexual harassment, conduct unbecoming; you name it, they were indignant about it. Some even suggested that he was abusing his position of power, but of course he wasn’t. Had he made the BJ a precondition of her leave of absence, perhaps that would be the case — but it wasn’t anything like that.
Of course, none of that matters, because our Katherine has always been quite unapologetic about the whole business, and good for her. Clearly, she really (really) liked the guy, so let’s just grant the fact that she got two benefits from the BJ: getting off and getting off early.
As one commenter succinctly [sic] put it:
“She didn’t have a problem… he didn’t have a problem… where is the problem??”
Precisely. The real issue here is that nowadays, total strangers can have a problem with this, and they’re given carte blanche to vent their indignation about it as though their opinion actually matters. It doesn’t, nor should it.
Hence the title of this post. And by the way, our Canucki chick isn’t that bad-looking nowadays:
…so twenty years ago? Small wonder the guy was interested in her proposition.
Here’s the full story, if you’re interested. Also, she’s now happily married — about to pop her fourth sprog, as it happens — and so clearly the whole long-ago BJ business is not a big thing in her life, nor should it be.
Everyone has done shit in their past that may not pass the baleful scrutiny of today’s wokescold culture, but FFS: ancient history is just that, and the sooner we leave it alone, the better for everybody.
Why does she find it necessary to tell everyone about this?
Remember when whatever people did in their bed or at the desk was private?
She was just having an intimate chat with a buddy.
On his podcast. Which has hundreds of thousands of viewers.
Which she later posted on her Instagram account.
Ah; so it was mentioned in confidence. Got it.
“intimate chat” and “with hundreds of thousands of viewers” don’t really go together well.
And “she later posted on her Instagram account” only makes it worse.
The boss had some poor judgment assenting to the tet-a-tet, but this is squarely on her.
On a personal level, it is just between the two people involved, I don’t care. Although I agree, why tell anyone.
On a professional level, I am old fashioned about such things. I treat the people I manage with respect but I keep the relationship completely business. Even when I genuinely like someone who works for me, I will not hang out with them outside of work. I do not want even the appearance of favoritism.
An important aspect of the whole wokescold phenomena that people miss is the fact that the wokescolds are fraudulently taking up the mantle of the aggrieved. It is, in many ways, “stolen grievance”.
In the woke framework, there is a hierarchy of oppression that brings power and respect. A person who is actually aggrieved can take up that mantle, and thus attain the power that goes with it.
In these scenarios, other parties, who really have no standing in the matter at all, are acting allegedly on behalf of, and in the interest of the actually aggrieved parties. This is a fraud.
Of course, their framework has all sorts of justifications for this, ranging from citing the victims so called “false consciousness”, to the theory that the oppressed fear to act on their own behalf, and therefore stealing their grievance is a virtuous act of “rescue”. In short the so called victims are presumed to be incompetent to advocate their own interests, as if they were children or mentally damaged adults.
This even started getting traction in our own legal system in the 1980’s, as it was observed that victims of domestic abuse rarely pressed charges, and would actively defend their abusers, and therefore the agency of the abuser would be transferred elsewhere.
This transfer of agency is at the rotten heart of the progressivist/woke swindle, and it is soaked into their framework.
So what we have is really stolen valor where young “men” dress up with medals and ribbons. and a more acceptable stolen grievance, where anyone can see something in the media and despite having no connection at all to the people involved, immediately have an opinion that likewise has to be spread like spores in the wind.
Once I achieved a few things myself I became more cognizant about stolen valor. I won’t even wear military-pattern camouflage or those sharp Marine covers with the (six?) corners on top.
I’ll say this before the wokescolds can even think of it: “O Tempore! O Mores!
I was stationed in Key West, circa BA (Before AIDS), 1977-1980. Tan like a Cuban pool boy, in the best shape of my life, lived in my Flight Surgeon’s house while he was stationed overseas, worked part-time at a liquor store/topless bar.
I had more fun in those three years than I had in the rest of my life, combined.
Sorry, hit send before the money quote:
And I tell everyone I know about those Magical Times, if for no other reason than to encourage the same behavior in others, when the opportunity (and the risk quotient) is there.
As one who played in a rock band from about 1974 till 1985, I know whereof you speak, and I do likewise.
Could this have been part or most of the reason she didn’t keep it a secret? Carpe Diem, rather than spending your day carping? (sorry, old habits die hard)
Democrats. Fuck ’em if they can’t take a joke.