I have sometimes enjoyed Camille Paglia's pieces in the past even though I find her somewhat uneven. What I find almost humorous about this particular piece is the way that she decries the "sickening, pointless slaughter in Iraq-- massacres of untold tens of thousands of civilians and a rising toll of American and coalition soldiers" (one of Rosie O'Donnell's most frequent topics) then turns around later in the article to call Ms. O'Donnell a "solipsist, clod and yahoo".

Donald Trump is little more than a bully. I am beyond amazed that Ms. Paglia would defend him in any way. Where the heck was her editor?

It has occurred to me that Ms. Paglia is doing what many, many other reporters and journalists are doing: basing her comments regarding Ms. O'Donnell on the misrepresentation and absolute lies published by other media outlets. If Ms. Paglia actually watched "The View" and read rblog, she would realize -- much to her embarrassment after this article, I am sure -- that she shares many of the same opinions.

Ms. Paglia, did you know that Ms. O'Donnell is a Dennis Kucinich fan? I didn't think so.

Donald Trump did in fact file bankruptcy for one or more businesses. That is public record. In order to be considered slander, Rosie O'Donnell's comments must be untrue. I believe all other statements made by Ms. O'Donnell regarding Mr. Trump would be considered opinion.

I am a former HR manager for a small manufacturing concern employing about 60 percent male, 40 percent female. Previous to that I held a similar position in a manufacturing facility where 80 percent of the employees were male and 95 percent of the employees on the plant floor were male.

What I find interesting about the two different situations is the amount of sexual harassment I dealt with in the two facilities in a comparable amount of time was about the same. In my personal experience, it seemed that the weakest employees were preyed upon rather than those who did or did not conform to gender roles.

The most heinous offender at either company was a man who had no regard for anyone else, male or female. He regarded the new female employees as conquests and new male employees as targets. His general attitude toward other people was that of a bully. This man was an equal opportunity offender and he was only after one thing: power. He was a bully, pure and simple. He bullied men with words and intimidation and he bullied women with words and intimidation. Most interesting to me was that he directed sexually demeaning comments at both genders. The sexual content was always higher when a woman was his target but it was always present.

Men harass women, men harass men, women harass women and women harass men. In every experience of my twenty-five year professional career, the sexual harasser has been your basic bully. The most common by far is men harassing women. But all of the other categories are far from unheard of. I am sure there are many incidences of harassment that is motivated by sexual desire but I have never dealt with one.

I think that the victim's behavior has much less to do with harassment than the offender's behavior. These kinds of offenders prey on someone they perceive as weak, someone they think will take it, something they think they can control.

Take my anecdotal evidence for what it is and what it's worth.