A Pence for your thoughts

Ok, all, I’ve been seeing much to-do about VP Pence, his wife and their agreement to not have a meal alone with a person of the opposite sex, nor to attend functions where alcohol is featured without the other also in attendance. I do not support Pence’s politics in any way, shape or form. I, also, see many of my liberal friends trash talking the Pence’s decision for their marriage. And, I find myself so very sad to see such lack of understanding for such a decision. But, also find myself asking how far is too far?

Here is where I am at on this topic. Every actual professional lunch or dinner Mindless has attended, included more than one other person. When a lunch or dinner invitation was given by a colleague, it was not because work was needing to be done, but more to build a social connection. And, after all we’ve been through, that is not a pertinent enough reason to go to lunch or dinner alone with a colleague of the opposite gender. Surely, there are one or two more colleagues that can be invited, or spouses could be included?

Thoughts anyone?


18 thoughts on “A Pence for your thoughts

  1. I can’t really recall the last time I was out anywhere, one on one, with a woman that wasn’t my wife. Be that friend or co-worker. It’s not that I’m anti such things, I suppose. It’s more a case of it just never really happens. It isn’t something I ever think about. It seems a bit 1950’s for the veep to say something like that, while being out there as ultra conservative. Like Ward Cleverish. I get that. But the actual concept of not hanging out with members of the opposite sex, just the two? If it became a habit, I’d begin to question it, I think. And I’m not even the jealous type.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I see myself as very liberal but am not at all upset about what the VP said on this topic. If I hadn’t been through all that I have, I may have thought differently as I love my freedom and love the company of men and can be with them without cheating. I do think it’s important to leave the alcohol out of the equation as it does tend to lower inhibitions I think.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. It’s just not a situation I’m ever in. I do have female friends, but it’s rare that it’s just me and one of them, alone. Plus, I’m not available and I don’t give off that vibe, I guess. In the 25 years my wife and I have been together, I’ve been “hit on” maybe 10 times. And a couple of those were by guys. This is a topic I’ve never really given much thought to until I read her post here.

        Liked by 2 people

    2. I think any spouse seeing a pattern develop should be concerned. Coming from Pence, with his ultra-conservative agenda, doesn’t play well. I do wonder if the Clintons had ever come out with a similar statement, after all they’ve been through as a couple, if it would have been received more kindly? Context, perhaps, makes a difference. Of course, the Clintons derided this idea, which makes me wonder just how much remorse Bill Clinton has shown to Hillary Clinton. Not about party at all, but definitely about context.

      Liked by 4 people

  2. Besides family? I don’t. I *have* and it felt awkward.

    For me, it’s about boundaries and respect. Human beings are not perfect; creating boundaries and insisting that others respect your boundaries is healthy behavior.

    Colleagues often spend more waking time together than they do with their families. Real life happens every day and it’s easy to share frustrations you have while working with those around you. “I’m just venting.” And that’s okay sometimes… but boundaries keep emotions in check. There is no one immune to temptation and no one so good that they don’t need boundaries/structure to keep them healthy in moments of vulnerability. This is true for more simple things like diet, fitness, and education… why not have boundaries for marriage as well?

    Liked by 5 people

    1. Having boundaries is important.

      If Nunes met Trump privately for a meal, we would question it. Not for illicit sexual behavior, but for illicit political behavior. If a boss met privately for lunch or dinner with a subordinate, no clients and no spouses involved, it would appear questionable. And, for colleagues to go to lunch alone together, as SonofaBeach mentioned, seeing a pattern of doing so does raise legitimate red flags. How often are private lunches and dinners between only two people needed to discuss business?

      Liked by 3 people

  3. I did like the onion article about him having to scramble when a bottle of Mrs Butterworth was on the table before his wife had arrived. My wh had an affair with his subordinate. The more one on one time they had, the worse decisions he made. If he told me he was having a lunch meeting with 3 women (possible in one of our businesses, more women than men) I wouldn’t be concerned. It’s the consistent one on one “important and necessary” meetings that are a red flag. I’m a liberal btw. I also worked in a man’s world and the one on one lunches etc were not always professional. It’s sometimes an invitation to be intimate and to discuss personal things and digress…. any alone time allowed the conversation to turn unprofessional. As her boss, wh knows exactly when he should have shut it down, but he made the choice to allow it to continue. Huge regrets, huge fallout, not worth it. He told me he would not be alone with a woman professionally again, not for his sake but for my comfort.

    While I’m not a fan of pence’ policies or him, I’m not sure why this needed to be news. I think anything he’s decided with his wife that has nothing to do with policy is their business. I also think he could just always make sure secret service are right there and not make a big deal. I’m more worried about his boss being left alone with a woman other than his wife.

    Liked by 3 people

  4. Hi TL,

    I just read the article by Joanne L. Grossman (March 31st, 2017) Available from: http://www.vox.com/the big idea/

    …and saw “Men shouldn’t worry about being led into temptation because, well, it is entirely within their control whether to harass a subordinate or initiate an affair” (end of quote).

    There is something wrong with this statement. True, in an ideal world people do not need law, (office) policies and other rules (bible etc.) in order to behave within the boundaries as discussed above.
    Unfortunately, many do not have that inner voice that leads them to actions based on integrity, ethical behaviour, conscienctiousness, honesty, openness, respect and leading by example.

    My H did not harass a subordinate, the subordinate from day 1 onward was after a relationship with anyone at the office in a higher position than herself. Married with kids, or not!
    From day 1 onward the subordinate displayed questionable behaviour, and of course, no one did anything. “That would be discrimination” or so. E.g. The subordinate had huge fake tits she made sure these were displayed for all to see. The subordinate wore tight fitting clothing to show off her fat arse. But of course, no one can say anything as “women can wear what they want and it is not the clothing but the behaviour of those who lust after the displayed flesh that is wrong”. The subordinate invited per work-email only men to have a cold beer at her place to celebrate that she was “settled” in town within 2 weeks of her starting day. PER WORK EMAIL!
    Of course no one said or did anything. I am sure some went.

    We all know what there is something inherently wrong about the above picture.

    Yep, we need rules. As lots of people do not get it, or are too scared to speak up!

    By the way, there is no rape crisis on campus. Women and men both have a responsibility to keep themselves safe. Alcohol does lower inhibitions and makes people vulnerable.

    …and for all the women out here….you and I know exactly how to get attention from others. I know how to dress, so that every heterosexual man will have a second look. I also know how to catch that look and give that little smile.

    There is no common sense…do not rely upon people to get it. People need rules. I so wished I had married someone who did not need these rules (from me).

    I am exhausted…

    Liked by 4 people

    1. Oh E! How I wish our husbands had been ruled by love instead of lust, ego, external validation, entitlement, self-pity and whatever other lowly pursuit they deemed worthy. How I wish there were not those who would work that angle every chance they get, regardless of the cost to others, even to themselves. In an ideal world we are ruled by rational thought, by values instead of emotions, by being a good person because it is who we want to be not because some external force requires it of us, by finding ways to recognize the humanity of others instead of ways to dehumanize them. Oh, how I long for such an ideal world. Alas, here we are in the world we live in and because of that reality we have to have mechanisms of safety in place. There is just no way around that fact, sadly.

      I think one of the saddest things from all of this is that I’ve lost my optimism in life and for the world around me. Even through all the childhood shit I experienced, I never lost my optimism, not until this shit hit the fan. I think one of the things that really kills me, also, is that Mindless was unable to be happy for the right reasons during our marriage while I was a person with such optimism. It is only now, with my view of the world changed forever, that he is finally happy with the right things!

      Liked by 5 people

        1. Oh E, sending you support from a far! It is so very exhausting and, so, given that fact, what path is going to bring you the most peace, the most safety? I know it is not as good as in-person, but know that whatever path you take, we are here, supporting you.

          Liked by 1 person

      1. Me too, TL. I was always one of life’s optimists. Always thinking the best of everyone. Now I am doubting and mistrustful of everyone’s motives and agendas. Not sure if I will ever be back to being.”me”. So utterly exhausted by the last 3 years. Much love. X


        1. I’m not sure I ever see myself having such blind optimism again. I’m thinking one day not so pessimistic, perhaps just a realist eventually. At least, that is my goal. It is exhausting.


  5. Re: Mike Pence, while I see the need for boundaries (and this makes me wonder if Mr SqueakyClean has boundaries because of previous actions?), the truth is…If they are going to act out they don’t need dinner to fuel the fire. My H never once shared a meal with his AP. In my opinion, this action is putting the blame on women. “he would never have done it, if she hadn’t accepted/made an invitation for dinner.” In today’s busy world, sometimes lunch/dinner is not just a time to continue/do work, it is also a time where power is shared, where a personal connection can benefit two equal candidates vying for the same position. Especially in Washington. If Mr. Pence wants to honour this boundary, then next of two things should also be at play…he is either not in a position where he can elevate someone to a higher position, OR he makes the same rule with men.


    1. Rad, sorry to not respond sooner. You are definitely correct, “If they are going to act out they don’t need dinner to fuel the fire.” I think for me, however, I know that MC sought out opportunities/excuses to be alone with a woman. So, there is a difference between a work lunch/dinner that occurs because it must and one that occurs because someone is attempting to create an opportunity. And, sadly, I’m not sure I could tell the difference. At the least, meals alone are a bit of a trigger for me. He really has no need for work lunches/dinners alone with any one person. That being said, I did just recall that he had one occasion that really didn’t bother or worry me at all recently and one from a year ago that did bother me. Trying to understand the difference.

      We have two occasions where he has been alone with a female colleague since d-day.

      One was impromptu, when he ran into a female colleague at the airport, heading to the same location on a different airline. She asked him to join her for lunch while they both waited for connecting flights. After lunch, she asked for his cell so they could meet up for dinner at their final destination too. Though he gave her his business card, he did not join her for dinner. But, a few days later she sent him a “friend request” on FaceBook, which he ignored. The whole thing left me uneasy. Mostly because we both knew, in the past, this is exactly they type of situation he would have used to create opportunity. To his credit, he did tell me about it all right away.

      Two, a female colleague came to town for two days. While here, MC took her around to meetings and helped her find her way around town to buy some local products for which our area is known. He told me ahead. Everything was very scheduled, including the one hour shopping trip. He invited me to join them for this part of the scheduled day. I declined to join. And, felt no unease in this situation at all.

      So, perhaps, context is everything. Perhaps it is about knowing ahead, talking about it ahead and being included if I wanted to be. I don’t know?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s