You're quick to judge.BDKJMU wrote:They might not be. I was just being facetious & using a dysphemism from back in the Clinton days..Ibanez wrote: I'm just curious, why are these women "bimbos"? What makes a woman being sexually harassed a bimbo?
They wanted it.........this is on them not OReillyIbanez wrote:Are you serious? You think it's appropriate to call a woman and jerk off (as a married man) b/c she's attractive and showed some leg?BDKJMU wrote:FNC has been accused of having this culture of sexual harrassment. Well, when you only hire hot women, who for the most part only wear tight, cleavage & leg showing business attire, that doesn't come as a shocker. Would probably be similar for any other company that did the same..
WTF is the matter with you?
JFC I never said that..Ibanez wrote:Are you serious? You think it's appropriate to call a woman and jerk off (as a married man) b/c she's attractive and showed some leg?BDKJMU wrote:FNC has been accused of having this culture of sexual harrassment. Well, when you only hire hot women, who for the most part only wear tight, cleavage & leg showing business attire, that doesn't come as a shocker. Would probably be similar for any other company that did the same..
WTF is the matter with you?
But how many companies do you know of that: 
BDKJMU wrote:JFC I never said that..Ibanez wrote: Are you serious? You think it's appropriate to call a woman and jerk off (as a married man) b/c she's attractive and showed some leg?
WTF is the matter with you?
-Don't not hire fugly women (talking the women who are seen)
-Only hire hot women.
-The hot women they hire usually are wearing tight leg & cleavage showing clothing. Their assigments largely consist of reading shit off a teleprompter, or repeating shit that comes through their ear buds, and to ooze sex appeal.
It creates that type of atmosphere. Not an excuse for the alledged behavior of Ailes, O'Reilly, reportedly others at FNC, but it likely is contributing factor....
You eluded it. You're saying they were asking for it because they are attractive. And you don't know that every woman there is hot. You're making an assumption. Even if they were all hot, that doesn't give anyone the right to sexually harass. How can you defend such a position?BDKJMU wrote:JFC I never said that..Ibanez wrote: Are you serious? You think it's appropriate to call a woman and jerk off (as a married man) b/c she's attractive and showed some leg?
WTF is the matter with you?
-Don't not hire fugly women (talking the women who are seen)
-Only hire hot women.
-The hot women they hire usually are wearing tight leg & cleavage showing clothing. Their assigments largely consist of reading shit off a teleprompter, or repeating shit that comes through their ear buds, and to ooze sex appeal.
It creates that type of atmosphere. Not an excuse for the alledged behavior of Ailes, O'Reilly, reportedly others at FNC, but it likely is contributing factor....
No I didn't.Ibanez wrote:You eluded it. You're saying they were asking for it because they are attractive. And you don't know that every woman there is hot. You're making an assumption. Even if they were all hot, that doesn't give anyone the right to sexually harass. How can you defend such a position?BDKJMU wrote:
JFC I never said that..
-Don't not hire fugly women (talking the women who are seen)
-Only hire hot women.
-The hot women they hire usually are wearing tight leg & cleavage showing clothing. Their assigments largely consist of reading **** off a teleprompter, or repeating **** that comes through their ear buds, and to ooze sex appeal.
It creates that type of atmosphere. Not an excuse for the alledged behavior of Ailes, O'Reilly, reportedly others at FNC, but it likely is contributing factor....
You think it's acceptable to call women and jerk off on the phone or exchange sex for a job....that's appalling.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Could you work there without harassing them? I'm hoping yes. But we know Mike Pence couldn't.BDKJMU wrote:No I didn't.Ibanez wrote: You eluded it. You're saying they were asking for it because they are attractive. And you don't know that every woman there is hot. You're making an assumption. Even if they were all hot, that doesn't give anyone the right to sexually harass. How can you defend such a position?
You think it's acceptable to call women and jerk off on the phone or exchange sex for a job....that's appalling.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You did. You're just too stupid to understand your position. You're blaming the company for putting these women in the position of being harassed. What about men being men and keeping their hands to themselves, their dicks in their pants and maintain a professional attitude?BDKJMU wrote:No I didn't.Ibanez wrote: You eluded it. You're saying they were asking for it because they are attractive. And you don't know that every woman there is hot. You're making an assumption. Even if they were all hot, that doesn't give anyone the right to sexually harass. How can you defend such a position?
You think it's acceptable to call women and jerk off on the phone or exchange sex for a job....that's appalling.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nope it's not. It's nature, climate change boyIbanez wrote:You eluded it. You're saying they were asking for it because they are attractive. And you don't know that every woman there is hot. You're making an assumption. Even if they were all hot, that doesn't give anyone the right to sexually harass. How can you defend such a position?BDKJMU wrote:
JFC I never said that..
-Don't not hire fugly women (talking the women who are seen)
-Only hire hot women.
-The hot women they hire usually are wearing tight leg & cleavage showing clothing. Their assigments largely consist of reading shit off a teleprompter, or repeating shit that comes through their ear buds, and to ooze sex appeal.
It creates that type of atmosphere. Not an excuse for the alledged behavior of Ailes, O'Reilly, reportedly others at FNC, but it likely is contributing factor....
You think it's acceptable to call women and jerk off on the phone or exchange sex for a job....that's appalling.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ibanez wrote:You did. You're just too stupid to understand your position. You're blaming the company for putting these women in the position of being harassed. What about men being men and keeping their hands to themselves, their dicks in their pants and maintain a professional attitude?BDKJMU wrote:
No I didn't.
You're post appears to be placing the blame on Fox for hiring beautiful women and putting them near men who can't keep their dicks to themselves.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's right....you can't defend your position.BDKJMU wrote:Ibanez wrote: You did. You're just too stupid to understand your position. You're blaming the company for putting these women in the position of being harassed. What about men being men and keeping their hands to themselves, their dicks in their pants and maintain a professional attitude?
You're post appears to be placing the blame on Fox for hiring beautiful women and putting them near men who can't keep their dicks to themselves.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There's no need to defend against drama queens..Ibanez wrote:That's right....you can't defend your position.BDKJMU wrote:
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And....still can't.BDKJMU wrote:There's no need to defend against drama queens..Ibanez wrote: That's right....you can't defend your position.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Don't you have a mayoral race in Tehran to cover?∞∞∞ wrote:It's Fox News' fault that Bill sexually harasses women because the network hires beautiful woman?
Same people that claim the GOP is the party of personal responsibility.
Whatever you say. You think there are no personal or ethical violations with quid pro quo or sexually harassment. That's very telling.BDKJMU wrote:There's no need to defend against drama queens..Ibanez wrote: That's right....you can't defend your position.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Neither party is.∞∞∞ wrote:It's Fox News' fault that Bill sexually harasses women because the network hires beautiful woman?
Same people that claim the GOP is the party of personal responsibility.
Wrong, never said that.Ibanez wrote:Whatever you say. You think there are no personal or ethical violations with quid pro quo or sexually harassment. That's very telling.BDKJMU wrote:
There's no need to defend against drama queens..
Your position is simple: It's Fox New's fault. They created a culture where women are sexually assaulted and provided quid pro quo for career advancement. That position is asinine and you make it with no apologies. You are quick to make sure blacks are held accountable, but when Papa O'Reilly calls up a woman and jerks off or offers a job for sex, you blame the company for hiring the woman.
I don't say this to many people, but thank God you haven't procreated. Society doesn't need that backwards thinking being passed down.
FNC did contribute to the atmosphere there, but if O'Reilly is guilty of what he has been accused of then he needed to go. Ibanez wrote:That's right....you can't defend your position.BDKJMU wrote:
Yep.ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:He doesn't have to, you are wrong and sound like you might want to start one of those vagina marches. It's sickening to listen to for real men.... trust me