The President's Club Annual Gala - "Men Behaving Badly"

Why would they sue for PTS? They could however sue for sexual harassment.

jura2 - no, of course it does not mean that because it has gone for ever it is right. That's not what I meant. What I did mean is why is everyone so shocked and horrified as if they'd never heard of it before? It's a bit like saying 'Sex goes on at rock festivals? Well, how disgusting, who knew?' I think the word schadenfreude might fit. Hope I've spelled that right.

Have you read the FT article, Annie?

I don’t think that’s what is being said Annibach.

So women want to take away a woman's right to choose if she wants to be an escort, a hostess, a page 3 girl, a stripper , any work where there are men only because it's not done these days.

If the reporter isn't sued for breaking the agreement she signed then not one of the girls will be.

Wonder how many may sue for PTS

Ahh that’s good news Durhamjen .

Oh, got it now!

That's good djen
What happens to all the money pledged now?

Jalima ,sorry perhaps I should have put P- -s ?

Great Ormond Street Hospital has received more in donations because of this publicity than it handed back, so it's not losing out.
The woman who told all is backed by the FT's not inconsiderable legal department, just in case anyone at the club wants to sue her for breaking her agreement. After all, isn't this how tax fraud and wikileaks get exposed?

I don't think all of the employees knew what it would be like, although some of them did as they'd worked for the agency before.

Ur--e
trying to work it out

Yes, auctions are a well-established way of raising money for charity, the DS's school used to hold one to fund raise for the school and I think DGC's schools do that

But of course if all of the woman involved were actually conversely extracting the Ur—e out of these sad men , then that puts a different spin on it. Mostly I find it sad that this was a successful way to raise money, for such a worthwhile cause, but not good bed partners imho no pun intended!

Ahh I didn’t realise that, Jalima , if that’s the case I think she is many times worse than the seedie men !

Do you mean the agency boss Bridgeit?
Because I think she is totally complicit and knew exactly what she was letting them in for.

I have no criticism of the woman ,it is the behaviour of these sad old male munters that that I find repulsiv !

Sorry their , not there

In the 70s and early 80s I used to do promotion work at trade fairs etc. We also had outfits provided, some skimpy, some not and were always "chatted up" and leered at and occasionally groped. We were warned that some visitors were like that and how to handle it. If it got too bad the boss would escort them off the stand. It was often unpleasant but the money was good at a time when I was hard up and my day job was poorly paid. I'd do these jobs during my annual holiday so I got holiday pay plus promotion work.

How many ladies on here would be happy if it was there husband, sons behaving this way ?

Yes it is very sad that GOS is rejecting the money, but how could they morally accept it, sometimes people have to stand up & be counted, otherwise it is a very slippery slope sometimes lines need to be drawn , & standards maintained or in the words of Dads army ,We are all doomed !!!

FluttERBY - how about the difference between a pat on the bum and a full on grope?

Common sense!

NotTooOld - because most people, men and women, have agreed that NOW is the time for things to change- and thank goodness for that. Surely just because it has gone on for always does NOT meant it is right?!

Doh ! Not a hen party, not a pat on the bum by one person to just one other but a fund raising event for charities, where it was dictated how woman dressed & were expected not to mind being groped by a bunch of sad ‘men’ . would you be happy for your daughters, granddaughters to experience this.? I wonder what the suffragettes would have made of this !, I do not blame the ladies who choose to do this job, & maybe some of them are having the last laugh on these sad old B———ds I do hope so !!

There was a young woman on the tv news last night who had been one of the hostesses at the charity do. There was some rather lewd and sleazy behaviour and she said, having worked at two of these she wouldn't be doing it again. However, she said that another group of 'girls' arrived later on who had obviously been asked to come for reasons other than waiting on and serving drinks.

The agency knew full well what kind of do it was, what would happen and not only failed in their duty of care to the staff they took on, but seemingly openly promoted some of the behaviour that took place. The agency is run by a woman in fact.

I see nothing wrong with all male or all female groups or dinners but this was totally different to a dinner or even a 'boozy do'. It was just sleaze in the guise of charity fund-raising.

My underwear is no one else's business and won't affect my work output so the request to wear black underwear must have had an unspoken agenda.

Men only events are fine if there are only men in attendance. This was 'men only' because, if businesswomen had been included, the groping and verbal abuse wouldn't have been tolerated and it was obviously part of the plan. Incredible in the current climate.

It's all ridiculous. Of course it shouldn't happen, that's without question, but this type of thing has gone on since the year dot, so why all this shock/horror now? And why are the charities giving back the donated money? They say it's 'dirty money' but nevertheless it is money that can be put to a good cause. Keep it, I say, and use it well. And girls - weren't you suspicious when asked to sign a disclaimer and told to wear sexy underwear? Didn't your mothers teach you anything?

A group of well known French women have got together to say that the way things are going men will eventually feel unable to approach women at all. They make a distinction between a pat on the bum and rape. Just saying.