Ignacio, sex by itself on the job is generally believed to constitute a pattern of misbehavior by the person in the position of power, under workplace law in America. I certainly respect your opinion, but it does not seem relevant here. Even if the sexual relationship seems reciprocal, and voluntary, it creates an environment where an employee is implicitly being treated differently than other employees, which is discriminatory and also just creates horrible morale and myriad general management problems.
When you say that the law should never have allowed the prosecution to interrogate the president about Lewinsky without some reasonable expectation that harassment may have been involved, I wonder if you are forgetting that at least two other women had testified they were harassed, which would reasonably open up the depositions to questions about Lewinsky. It is the judge in the case who allowed the discovery to continue, Ignacio, not the prurient interests of the titillated public.
The Paula Jones case will not address whether Lewinsky received special or unfair treatment of some sort as a result of her relationship with the president, incidentally.
Sexual appetite itself is not a crime. No one is arguing that it is!!! Sexual conduct may be, when it exists within a power relationship in the workplace, or is by force. |
