Playboy Sued for Sexual Harassment — Man Gene’s Future Bleak
Here’s the skinny. A Chicago divorce lawyer who posed nude and wrote a legal advice column for Playboy.com (called “Lawyer of Love”) has sued Playboy, claiming that a male executive (not Hef) assailed her with sexually explicit emails and phone calls, groped her, and took away her column when she rebuffed his advances. She’s asking for $4.5 million for sexual harassment, “gender violence,” and emotional distress.
The lawyer, Corri Fetman, had already gained notoriety. She and her law partner once used a billboard advertisement featuring scantily clad men and women and proclaiming: “Life’s short. Get a Divorce.”
Fetman’s lawyer concedes that attractive women get unwanted attention (especially after posing nude I suspect), but he says the executive’s conduct was egregious and devastating . “Everybody has a breaking point. [Fetman] is not an overly sensitive person.”
In my previous posts about The Man Gene, I’ve tried to be honest. Though sometimes ridiculed or chastised, my attempt at honesty continues.
Once most men have seen a photo of an attractive, nude woman, particularly one with whom they work, they’ll always see their female colleague naked. Because of The Man Gene, they’ll probably do more than that. Indeed, if a female colleague wears a low cut top, her male co-workers will think she probably wants to have sex with them. If she poses nude for Playboy, they’ll know for sure. That may be perverse, but it’s the way of The Man Gene.
What the Playboy executive is accused of constitutes sexual harassment under normal circumstances. But do the alleged facts recited above represent normal circumstances? One might argue that if Playboy is liable for sexual harassment in this case, all employers and male employees are toast; scientists should hasten their genetic engineering of The Man Gene; and some men should submit to surgery.








The ol’ “man gene” argument? When I was in my 20′s some guy at the office kept saying he wanted to sleep with me. His reason? A really great take on the “man gene” argument. He said it was because of his nationality. I don’t want to single anyone out here, so let’s just call him “Ravioli.”
Seriously, I think no jury will be particulary sympathetic. . .besides, it’s not like this guy was her supervisor or anything. . .she was for most intents and purposes, a (g)stringer.