From Joe My God:

“Employee rights are said to be valid when employers pressure employees into sexual activity. Why don’t they quit once the so-called harassment starts? Obviously the morals of the harasser cannot be defended, but how can the harassee escape some responsibility for the problem? Seeking protection under civil rights legislation is hardly acceptable.” -Ron Paul, from his 1987 book, Freedom Under Siege.

I thought it would be pretty straight forward that this sort of victim blaming is dispicable. I mean, it’s so easily to instantly find a job, you should be the one who quits when someone else does something wrong, right?! But then I got this comment on facebook:

“The next sentence from the book was “If force was clearly used, that is another story…”. The analogy I’d draw is that if a guy says to you “if I take you out to dinner I expect you to sleep with me”, then you’re welcome to decline the offer. Likewise, for employment, “if you want this job, I expect you to sleep with me”. It comes from a background belief that the right to own and use one’s property (the capital of the employer) as one sees fit is foundational to a free and productive society. You can’t take this one bit and graft it onto a socialistic/liberal world view and expect it to jive in that context. I believe that in a completely free market, this type of sexual harassment would be extremely rare, because it hurts the bottom line to hire based on sex favors rather than on job performance, a.), and b.) in the absence of government civil rights, people would take such issues into their own hands, ie., boycotts, sit-ins, etc.”

Sexual harassment is sexual harassment, whether violent force is used or not, and whether you have the ability to decline or not. My vagina doesn’t become your property because you’re my employer. And the idea that a free market will magically get rid of sexual harassment is probably the most fucking moronic thing I’ve ever heard. Do people recognize how much better the workplace is for woman now that we can actually do something about sexual harassment? Ask a secretary from the 1950s how comfortable she felt in her workplace.

And the idea that the government shouldn’t support civil rights is just fucking terrifying. You know the term “minority”? It generally means there are less of you, and you’re less powerful. No one would give a diddly if you organized a sit-in when your numbers are insignificant to them.

The idea that “hurting the bottom line” is more of a concern than violating human rights is why I hate libertarians.