An interesting trip into dangerous waters. But it’s not clear from the info set-up that the babysitter was actually groped; you float that later. A purely verbal come-on would be less urgent and could conceivably call for a slightly different response. In any case it’s ultimately a deal-breaker any way ya cut it. It says a lot about Anne Landers’ mentality that a babysitting gig could be potentially worth negotiating or finessing over even when one of the customers is a sketchy creep. Given your penchant for looking backwards, perhaps you’ll agree: having been around then - it was the year I graduated from high school - I think she was blinkered by the waning shadow of the Depression. After subsequent decades of relative prosperity hardly anyone would consider a crap teen job worth the possible consequences.
I imagine you’re right about Landers’s Depression background—certainly I knew people of that generation with strange (to me) long-term habits of thrift. I’ve gotten the impression that in 1978 receiving a pass, or even dealing with an “octopus”—was never supposed to be traumatic—that a smart gal kept mad money in her shoe if she had to bail on a date gone bad, but that was considered an inconvenience, so I’d assumed that was more of a consideration. As I mentioned in a different comment, Landers always came down really hard on gossip, which also informs her advice.
Groping: I was trying to imagine how a 1978 swingin’ dad would proposition a teenager in a car, and I figured he’d start at the knee. Ann does say “hands off!” which might imply a “hands on” at some point?
Obv. the idea of casually propositioning a tween now seems enough of a power imbalance to be violence per se, and I would have thought it weird that Ann gives no lower bound for her advice. How young could kids babysit in 1978?
Anyway, I’ll admit I rushed this one. I didn't even reach a real conclusion!
It was a different era but it’s impossible to measure...so who knows if it’s more or less common now? A basketball coach at my high school - I’d had him for PE when I was a freshman - fathered a child with a student. I found out 3rd hand and well after the fact.
I dunno. The Ann Landers advise seems tactical in nature. That is, given the context, the best a 16 yo could do for herself was ensure her immediate safety (not being alone with the groppy adult) and gently blackmail him. Similarly, not warning other babysitters is (and was) morally wrong but it was (according to Landers and I don't disagree) the best way for that sitter to protect herself because warning others would open the whole can of worms and the sitter would catch a life destroying amount of flak, regardless of what happened to the adult.
In today's environment of "believe all women", MeToo etc, the advise can be significantly different and the sitter can pursue a far more morally correct course of action without risking nearly as much as she would have in '78. Progress.
Interesting. Do you think Landers would have given the same advice ten years later (i.e. long before metoo)?
I assume myself that it would have been low-risk to rat on the gropy father, not to the police (who would presumably give a teenager Landers-style advice and not care beyond that) but to one’s parents (who would presumably give a teenager Landers-style advice and also be annoyed). But perhaps there’s no profit in doing so? The parents would only worry?
Landers (and her sister) often put a real emphasis on not gossiping, which is probably usually good advice, but here fails to warn future babysitters via that whisper telegraph that used to label certain boys as handsy, so the girls could be prepared on dates etc.
I’m not sure there was a believability crisis in 1978 (anyone could say, “that married man propositioned me!” without calling scandal on herself) so mush as a myob (as Ann would say) crisis.
But I can’t second guess Ann Landers! She’s right by definition!
So by 1988? I was 14 at the time and raised by morally upstanding parents in a pretty sheltered environment so I dunno. I still feel the young woman would be blamed/tarred by association. This was still a time when rape victims were routinely condemned (inthe court of public opinion) for having somehow brought it upon themselves... and that her reputation would suffer would not be incompatible with the man getting into hot waters/divorced from his wife etc. i.e. I do think that the believability crisis/the dislike for victims of sexual harassment was quite real both in 1978 and 1988.
Telling the parents would be risky inasmuch as they might decide to make a public scene and see the above. Not every father could pull off having "a quiet word" with the groper and "explain" to him that things would go badly for him if he ever tried again. You have to have a certain cool (for wanting to solve that discreetly) and a certain menacing air (to make the threat credible).
Failure to warn other babysitters stems from the same source : Would you trust 15 teenage girls to keep juicy/scandalous information to themselves? One would spill the beans to the parents and see above. The likelihood of ensuing problems is high, the benefits purely moral. Not a good pay-off. It's different from "hey, that jock is a bit handsy, careful on dates". No one back then would bat an eyelid about a boy being a bit "persistent". Boys will be boys and all that. My parents, without really saying anything, made sure that I knew this was not acceptable behaviour but I do remember a girl telling me she was essentially assaulted by her boyfriend/date and basically rolling her shoulders about it and blaming herself for putting herself into that situation. The boy/young man was essentially innocent coz, well, what else was he gonna do but try and take advantage? I was aghast but I don't think her attitude was rare. And, in a way, it's not a bad way to cope. But she shouldn't have needed to.
An interesting trip into dangerous waters. But it’s not clear from the info set-up that the babysitter was actually groped; you float that later. A purely verbal come-on would be less urgent and could conceivably call for a slightly different response. In any case it’s ultimately a deal-breaker any way ya cut it. It says a lot about Anne Landers’ mentality that a babysitting gig could be potentially worth negotiating or finessing over even when one of the customers is a sketchy creep. Given your penchant for looking backwards, perhaps you’ll agree: having been around then - it was the year I graduated from high school - I think she was blinkered by the waning shadow of the Depression. After subsequent decades of relative prosperity hardly anyone would consider a crap teen job worth the possible consequences.
I imagine you’re right about Landers’s Depression background—certainly I knew people of that generation with strange (to me) long-term habits of thrift. I’ve gotten the impression that in 1978 receiving a pass, or even dealing with an “octopus”—was never supposed to be traumatic—that a smart gal kept mad money in her shoe if she had to bail on a date gone bad, but that was considered an inconvenience, so I’d assumed that was more of a consideration. As I mentioned in a different comment, Landers always came down really hard on gossip, which also informs her advice.
Groping: I was trying to imagine how a 1978 swingin’ dad would proposition a teenager in a car, and I figured he’d start at the knee. Ann does say “hands off!” which might imply a “hands on” at some point?
Obv. the idea of casually propositioning a tween now seems enough of a power imbalance to be violence per se, and I would have thought it weird that Ann gives no lower bound for her advice. How young could kids babysit in 1978?
Anyway, I’ll admit I rushed this one. I didn't even reach a real conclusion!
It was a different era but it’s impossible to measure...so who knows if it’s more or less common now? A basketball coach at my high school - I’d had him for PE when I was a freshman - fathered a child with a student. I found out 3rd hand and well after the fact.
I dunno. The Ann Landers advise seems tactical in nature. That is, given the context, the best a 16 yo could do for herself was ensure her immediate safety (not being alone with the groppy adult) and gently blackmail him. Similarly, not warning other babysitters is (and was) morally wrong but it was (according to Landers and I don't disagree) the best way for that sitter to protect herself because warning others would open the whole can of worms and the sitter would catch a life destroying amount of flak, regardless of what happened to the adult.
In today's environment of "believe all women", MeToo etc, the advise can be significantly different and the sitter can pursue a far more morally correct course of action without risking nearly as much as she would have in '78. Progress.
Interesting. Do you think Landers would have given the same advice ten years later (i.e. long before metoo)?
I assume myself that it would have been low-risk to rat on the gropy father, not to the police (who would presumably give a teenager Landers-style advice and not care beyond that) but to one’s parents (who would presumably give a teenager Landers-style advice and also be annoyed). But perhaps there’s no profit in doing so? The parents would only worry?
Landers (and her sister) often put a real emphasis on not gossiping, which is probably usually good advice, but here fails to warn future babysitters via that whisper telegraph that used to label certain boys as handsy, so the girls could be prepared on dates etc.
I’m not sure there was a believability crisis in 1978 (anyone could say, “that married man propositioned me!” without calling scandal on herself) so mush as a myob (as Ann would say) crisis.
But I can’t second guess Ann Landers! She’s right by definition!
So by 1988? I was 14 at the time and raised by morally upstanding parents in a pretty sheltered environment so I dunno. I still feel the young woman would be blamed/tarred by association. This was still a time when rape victims were routinely condemned (inthe court of public opinion) for having somehow brought it upon themselves... and that her reputation would suffer would not be incompatible with the man getting into hot waters/divorced from his wife etc. i.e. I do think that the believability crisis/the dislike for victims of sexual harassment was quite real both in 1978 and 1988.
Telling the parents would be risky inasmuch as they might decide to make a public scene and see the above. Not every father could pull off having "a quiet word" with the groper and "explain" to him that things would go badly for him if he ever tried again. You have to have a certain cool (for wanting to solve that discreetly) and a certain menacing air (to make the threat credible).
Failure to warn other babysitters stems from the same source : Would you trust 15 teenage girls to keep juicy/scandalous information to themselves? One would spill the beans to the parents and see above. The likelihood of ensuing problems is high, the benefits purely moral. Not a good pay-off. It's different from "hey, that jock is a bit handsy, careful on dates". No one back then would bat an eyelid about a boy being a bit "persistent". Boys will be boys and all that. My parents, without really saying anything, made sure that I knew this was not acceptable behaviour but I do remember a girl telling me she was essentially assaulted by her boyfriend/date and basically rolling her shoulders about it and blaming herself for putting herself into that situation. The boy/young man was essentially innocent coz, well, what else was he gonna do but try and take advantage? I was aghast but I don't think her attitude was rare. And, in a way, it's not a bad way to cope. But she shouldn't have needed to.