Chris Matthews’ creepy, on-air misogyny

Chrissy channeling Howard Stern?

I’m surprised that he didn’t ask her if she was wearing a thong. Or zipped himself up after that interview.

There is a time and a place to be a damned professional about it.

“It’s 2007, for crying out loud. I don’t know Burnett, but I suspect she, and many women like her, often have to work extra hard to be taken seriously.”

Matthews is a disgusting jackass who has serious problems. He owes this woman an apology, and really should be terminated from MSNBC. And this issue is an extremely important one, laid bare in its ugliness (regardless of how nonthreatening Tweety’s conduct was in this particular instance–but this type of conduct can and often is much worse, consider Bill O’Reilly, for instance). That said, Ms. Burnett’s comments on Friday included the following: “A lot of people like to say, scaremonger about China, right? A lot of politicians and I know you talk about that issue all the time. I think people should be careful what they wish for on China — you know, if China were to revalue its currency, or China is to start making, say, toys that don’t have lead in them, or food that isn’t poisonous, their costs of production are going to go up. And that means prices at Walmart, here in the United States, are going to go up too. So, I would say China is our greatest friend right now.They’re keeping prices low, and they’re keeping prices for mortgages low too.” http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/13/14039/0932

So sexual harrassment isn’t the only hurdle Ms. Burnett faces in her attempt to be taken seriously.

My comment in 6 above was supposed to read: “I guess it shows that Tweety Matthews is just a regular Republican misogynist. If he were a Family Values Republican he would have been doing that to a young male reporter.” I guess it was a Freudian slip showing that I really think of Matthews as an it.

You were doing great ***bubba*** on getting to the point and keeping the discussion focused on where it should be. Then you had to bring up some reporting she’s done in the past which has nothing to do with what happened to her here.

What a jerk Mathews shows himself to be, the kind of restaurant “did you see the knockers on that broad?” guest you try to avoid. It would have been nice to see Erin slap that stupid grin off his face. I hope she sues the pants off Mathews for that national insult. I was so embarrassed for her and Mathews was too ignorant to even know how insulting he was being, thinking he was being funny instead of pathetic.

No one can top Glenn Beck for on-the-air stupidity. But this comes close. Unprofessional as hell.

This isn’t the type of thing you could sue for at all, and the comments suggesting that’s a serious possibility are a little weird. But it is this:

Maybe Matthews is overcompensating for all his “man-crush” gushings over Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney. The guy is certifiably weird in any case and obviously suffers from Attention Deficit Disorder.

I definitely would believe Chris (or whoever gives him suggestions) has realized how fucking dumb he made himself look with his attempts to psychologically manipulate the nation into falling in love with his favorite GOP candidates, and Chris is trying to redeem himself in the eyes of all the curmudgeonly old men he’s won over my adopting a tough tone and a fleeting, occasionally revealed, conservative stance.

Either that or he just wants to make men/women feel like its ok for men to push women around.

oops, redressability, not ‘resdressability’- sorry

Fonzie isn’t the only one who has “jumped the shark.”

Maybe after the show ended Matthews went off to find the “incredible prostitute”.

It’s had me baffled for a while how a cartoon character like Matthews could get a job on national or worldwide news broadcasts. Surely his minutes are running short. He always reminds me of the obnoxious superfan at a ballgame that can never shut up with the gushing.

Poor Ms. Burnett gets the same type of treatment from GOP Joe on Morning Joe on MSNBC. If any male in any office or shop floor did this, they would be charged with sexual harassment. Or, rather would have been charged. Since this is the Bush Administration, we don’t have to worry about these rules actually being enforced.

I can’t believe it was *Scarborough* who got canned. I used to always watch his opening panel discussions after Countdown. They were good. Now Dan Abrams is sliming around on a shamelessly awful, tabloidish show. At least Joe left the ratings-pandering crap until later on.

never mind, I just checked msnbc.com and saw that Joe is now in in the morning. What I said about Dan’s show stands.

I watched the exchange live and I was reminded of something I read in this month’s Psychology Today–

“Sexual harassment cases of the hostile-environment variety result from sex differences in what men and women perceive as “overly sexual” or “hostile” behavior. Many women legitimately complain that they have been subjected to abusive, intimidating, and degrading treatment by their male coworkers. Browne points out that long before women entered the labor force, men subjected each other to such abusive, intimidating, and degrading treatment.

Abuse, intimidation, and degradation are all part of men’s repertoire of tactics employed in competitive situations. In other words, men are not treating women differently from men—the definition of discrimination, under which sexual harassment legally falls—but the opposite: Men harass women precisely because they are not discriminating between men and women.”
http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20070622-000002.xml

I think Matthews was unkind to Burnett (I’m sure afterwards a suit told him to lay off) but I don’t think it was sexual harassment, he was just picking on a lower level employee who didn’t have the job status to pick on him back. Sort of like how Bush comes up with demeaning nicknames for all of his aides. I got the sense he did it make Burnett look silly by moving to close to the camera and the compliments on her looks was his way of saying, just kidding. Which reminds me, he once introduced Andrea Mitchell with, “she’s been covering politics since I was a kid… just kidding”. Since Mitchell isn’t of lower status than Matthews (she could certainly call him a jerk on air without fear of job security), that one was actually kind of funny.

So my vote is, jerk but not a pig. :o)

As someone who just sat through a “Harassment Free Workplace” training session (from the same parent company as Chris Matthews). I would have to say that Matthews has violated Federal Harassment and Discrimination laws as well as company policy.

(Continued) from Emil T.

Understanding Workplace Harassment

Workplace Harassment is a Form of Discrimination

Unlawful harassment is a form of discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other federal authority.

Unwelcome verbal or physical conduct based on race, color, religion, sex (whether or not of a sexual nature and including same-gender harassment and gender identity harassment), national origin, age (40 and over), disability (mental or physical), sexual orientation, or retaliation (sometimes collectively referred to as “legally protected characteristics”) constitutes harassment when:

The conduct is sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a hostile work environment; or

A supervisor’s harassing conduct results in a tangible change in an employee’s employment status or benefits (for example, demotion, termination, failure to promote, etc.).

Hostile work environment harassment occurs when unwelcome comments or conduct based on sex, race or other legally protected characteristics unreasonably interferes with an employee’s work performance or creates an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment. Anyone in the workplace might commit this type of harassment – a management official, co-worker, or non-employee, such as a contractor, vendor or guest. The victim can be anyone affected by the conduct, not just the individual at whom the offensive conduct is directed.

Examples of actions that may create sexual hostile environment harassment include:

Leering, i.e., staring in a sexually suggestive manner

Making offensive remarks about looks, clothing, body parts

Touching in a way that may make an employee feel uncomfortable, such as patting, pinching or intentional brushing against another’s body

Telling sexual or lewd jokes, hanging sexual posters, making sexual gestures, etc.

Sending, forwarding or soliciting sexually suggestive letters, notes, emails, or images

Other actions which may result in hostile environment harassment, but are non-sexual in nature, include:

Use of racially derogatory words, phrases, epithets

Demonstrations of a racial or ethnic nature such as a use of gestures, pictures or drawings which would offend a particular racial or ethnic group

Comments about an individual’s skin color or other racial/ethnic characteristics

Making disparaging remarks about an individual’s gender that are not sexual in nature

Negative comments about an employee’s religious beliefs (or lack of religious beliefs)

Expressing negative stereotypes regarding an employee’s birthplace or ancestry

Negative comments regarding an employee’s age when referring to employees 40 and over

Derogatory or intimidating references to an employee’s mental or physical impairment

Harassment that results in a tangible employment action occurs when a management official’s harassing conduct results in some significant change in an employee’s employment status (e.g., hiring, firing, promotion, failure to promote, demotion, formal discipline, such as suspension, undesirable reassignment, or a significant change in benefits, a compensation decision, or a work assignment). Only individuals with supervisory or managerial responsibility can commit this type of harassment.

A claim of harassment generally requires several elements, including:

The complaining party must be a member of a statutorily protected class;

S/he was subjected to unwelcome verbal or physical conduct related to his or her membership in that protected class;

The unwelcome conduct complained of was based on his or her membership in that protected class;

The unwelcome conduct affected a term or condition of employment and/or had the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with his or her work performance and/or creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment.

What is Not Harassment?

The anti-discrimination statutes are not a general civility code. Thus, federal law does not prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not extremely serious. Rather, the conduct must be so objectively offensive as to alter the conditions of the individual’s employment. The conditions of employment are altered only if the harassment culminates in a tangible employment action or is sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a hostile work environment.

Report any incident of harassment immediately to your supervisor, any member of management and/or to the Director of the Office of Workplace Diversity.

Note:

Any employee wishing to initiate an EEO complaint arising out of the alleged incident of harassment must contact an FCC EEO Counselor or other EEO official within 45 calendar days of the date of the incident. For information on how to contact an EEO Counselor, visit http://www.fcc.gov/owd/counselors.html. The employee should not wait until the agency’s internal harassment inquiry is completed to contact a counselor if waiting will allow the 45-day time limit to expire.