May 12, 2004

Sexual Discrimination

Today, I'm studying for my Employment Discrimination Law exam tomorrow, and I've been chewing my way through sexual discrimination since 10am (I got a late start). Like other areas of law, sexual discrimination law is full of all kinds of seemingly contradictory laws and policies... but it's hard to imagine a world, let alone a legal system, without such contradictions. Case in point:

"Where 'sex or vicarious sexual recreation is the primary service provided' such that 'the employee's sex and the service provided are inseparable,' the [Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's] regulation would permit employment of a female as a 'social escort or topless dancer'." Wilson v. Southwest Airlines, 517 F. Supp. 292 (N.D.Tex. 1981) Meaning that it's not a violation of Title VII to only hire women (or men) for such positions.

However, this is the policy noted in the introduction of the "sexual harassment" section of the book: [T]he right to be free from unwanted sexual attention is fundamentally important, and answers to the relevant questions must be found. Nothing is more destructive of human dignity than being forced to perform sexual acts against one’s will. I realize that sex workers are technically "willing" and the world (well, many, many men) would cease to function without the sex industry, but basing anti-sexual harassment laws on the denigration of human dignity when the EEOC has an express exception for sex workers just seems kinda... interesting.

0) $paginate_current_page = 0; $paginate_sections = array( 0 ); $paginate_top_section = $paginate_sections[$paginate_current_page-1]+1; $paginate_bottom_section = $paginate_sections[$paginate_current_page]; } else { $paginate_top_section = 1; $paginate_bottom_section = 0; } $paginate_self = '&' . $_SERVER['QUERY_STRING'] . '&'; $paginate_self = preg_replace("/&page=[^&]*&/", "&", $paginate_self); $paginate_self = substr($paginate_self, 1, strlen($paginate_self) - 1); if($paginate_self == '&') $paginate_self = ''; else $paginate_self = htmlentities($paginate_self); $paginate_self = basename($_SERVER['PHP_SELF']) . "?${paginate_self}page"; ?> Posted by Kristina at May 12, 2004 01:55 PM

I really don't see how one contradicts the other...

Posted by: Renee at May 13, 2004 08:23 AM

They don't really contradict each other, since they're addressing different things. I just think it's interesting that there's an express exception for sex workers in employment discrimination law but also some lofty policy about preserving human dignity.

Posted by: Kristina at May 13, 2004 10:24 AM

I don't find that law particularly lofty sounding; can you think of anything more degrading than forced sexual activity?

And how could there NOT be an exception for sex workers in employment discrimination laws? Women cannot be dildo models...

Posted by: Renee at May 14, 2004 11:26 AM

i'm confused. why can they not be dildo models? i should think they could both model how much they like them (personal use) and also how much they like to wear strap-ons (for use on others). i'm pretty sure i've actually seen women modeling dildos in both these scenarios in print ads.

Posted by: michele at May 14, 2004 02:23 PM

I was confused by that too, until I realized that she probably meant they can't be the original from which you cast the shape and make the dildos. I've been trying to come up with counter-arguments, but they're kind of reaching at this point.

Unless she really did mean that women can't model the use and wearing of dildos, in which case she's full of it.

Dildos, I mean. Clearly they're distracting her too much for her to make her point clearly.

Posted by: Dianna at May 14, 2004 02:42 PM

you obviously were not there that day in college when jason, ...jacob?, and i (maybe others) watched a documentary on a dildo making company. they totally used males and females to make sex products. so even though women can't be used to make normal dildos, they are used to make plaster casts of "dildos" for men to use. (is there a different word for those?) hoo boy, that was an exciting show.

wait. am i making this up? did they just make casts of her breasts?

Posted by: michele at May 14, 2004 02:47 PM


although something tells me using an actual vadge to make a fleshlight would be a little counter-productive. they probably just eye-ball it.

i think there's also a service where you can have a dildo made from a cast of your own wang, so your girlfriend/wife/life partner/fuckbuddy can experience sex with your wang without you in the room.

don't as me why i know these things.

Posted by: holohan at May 14, 2004 03:03 PM

nah, i'm with you, i knew about the personalized making of dildos too. although, i am also not sure why.

if i'm remembering the dildo/fleshlight doc correctly they did it with a real woman to give their advertising that special personal touch (ie "created with a REAL vagina! it doesn't get any more real than this, folks! unless you have a flesh and blood vagina walking around at the apex of someone's thighs to use. disregard that last sentence and buy our specially made fleshlight which simulates, and improves on, the real deal!) i'm pretty sure it was a famous porn star and so they sold the boxes with her picture on them too.

Posted by: michele at May 14, 2004 03:11 PM

They have dildo-making kits at Good Vibes.

Posted by: Kristina at May 14, 2004 03:38 PM

Yes, I meant women can't be the actual models for the dildo molds, and I maintain my point that they can't--no penis, no mold.

I think it's time y'all step back and consider why you're trying to find a hole in that point (no pun intended) in the first place. Has it really gotten to the point that you're so obsessed with arguing that even a FACT (i.e. women don't have dicks) is something to challenge?

Posted by: Renee at May 18, 2004 09:58 AM

Actually, no. Not in my case, anyway. It's just that I want to be a world-famous porn star with an enormous cock that's spawned thousands of silicone imitations, and I'm trying desperately to think of a way in which the universe can make that possible.

Please help. Donations of spare anatomy can be sent to Dianna Woolsey, c/o Tom of Finland.

Posted by: Dianna at May 18, 2004 10:36 AM

first off, i think it's beautiful that this comment string will now pop up anytime someone puts dianna's full name into a google search.

secondly, i will never forgive myself for being wherever else i was when you all watched that dildo-making special.

lastly, i think it's amazingly hilarious that, compared to all the other disputers that have been popping up on cementhorizon, renee's basic tenet is, "no penis, no mold." simple, concise, to the point. i salute you, my friend. at the same time, i'm afraid no one really cares about the original dispute anymore, we're just all caught up in the glory of fleshlights. let's all have a fleshlight making party! it'll be good, old-fashioned girly fun! and dianna, if you've received a cock from which to fashion a dildo by that time, you're more than welcome to join us. there will be no sexual discrimination in THESE circles!

Posted by: erica at May 18, 2004 12:05 PM

Here here!

Posted by: Renee at May 18, 2004 12:54 PM

Erica, you forgot the other great thing, which is that my name is now inextricably linked to, of all things, Tom of Finland. Which will also pop up whenever someone googles my name.

I should have put a link, but finding an appropriate URL while at work could raise a few eyebrows and/or porn filters.

Posted by: Dianna at May 18, 2004 01:08 PM

This is belated, and probably only going to make things worse, but I really can't help myself.

Why, when there are giant hostile bitchfests going on in other comment threads, would someone choose this one to enter and accuse people of being obsessed with arguing? Nobody here but us chickens, and we're just talking about sex toys. Other people in other threads are talking about metaphors and each other's mental inferiority. Mote, beam. Beam, mote. Is anybody with me here?

Posted by: Dianna at May 18, 2004 07:10 PM

First of all, no accusations here.

Second of all, I love Kristina and I just hate to see her get so unnecessarily bent out of shape arguing with idiots like Geoff. I don't know the rest of you (unless we've met and I was intoxicated, which is possible) but after reading many of the comment strings on Kris's page and part of the obscenely long one on Kati's I felt that someone should at least point out the futility of the bickering in the hope that maybe it'd release everyone from the need to start/win fights with strangers, but it looks like that's not gonna happen--yes, the challenge to argue about the right to argue has been lobbed.

Luckily I'm not interested in changing anyone's mind. I made the suggestion that everyone might have something more worthwhile to do than just disagree but it looks like that's the preferred activity around here and that's fine with me. Go forth, lob, challenge, quote books. I promise I won't say a thing.

Posted by: Renee at May 19, 2004 06:36 AM

I really don't know what got into me. I was studying for finals and bored, I guess. Being mean to Geoff was a random diversion from reading and outlining that felt vaguely productive. Bickering has never been one of my favorite passtimes, but I guess that just doesn't apply to random dudes from the internet abyss.

Posted by: Kristina at May 19, 2004 10:25 AM

Yeah, well he WAS a fucking bitch...

Posted by: Renee at May 19, 2004 11:24 AM