Live data from Hacker News

Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

mercurynews.com

121–130 of 359 posts

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#121
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" Succesful defamation lawsuits usually get multi-million dollar damage awards" [citation needed]. It's actually fairly rare for such awards in the US, according to all data i see. (certainly, they get highlighted by the media, but seem to be uncommon, since the average is something Where are you licensed that the usual is multi-million?

Well, I should have been more specific. I was referring to cases such as these which play out publicly and not disputes between two neighbors. One hundred thousand dollar sounds right in the ball park for General damages in usual cases though it'll increase depending on how much publicity the accusation got or if business reputation was harmed. That's just general damages. There's also attorneys fee in two countries…

There are successful defamation lawsuits, even for public figures. For instance, radio host Art Bell succesfully sued Gunderson and Michael Savage for Libel/Slander though these lawsuits were settled out of court.

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#122
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> people need to understand the rules. 1. Be attractive. 2. Don't be unattractive. Two simple rules to not commit sexual harassment.

While the construction of this old joke is admittedly good, using it as an argument advertises the fact that you view women as prizes rather than as people. It is complaining that they have a say in who they enter into relationships with. Or it's complaining about the fact that humans are more attracted to attractive people, which is how we define the word "attractive" in the first place. I'd avoid it generally, as y…

"...using it as an argument advertises the fact that you view women as prizes rather than as people."

That's an interesting and incendiary interpretation. Do you know for a fact that this person views women as prizes to be won or are you perhaps ascribing more meaning to the comment than can reasonably be inferred?

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#123
post #36

This world is getting so fucked up. We can't crucify people for "hitting on" or other somewhat tame behavior because we have nothing left to throw at the real offenders. Conversely, people benefit on both sides of the equation; using sex to their advantage or weaponizing allegations like this. Sexual assualt is REAL and should be punished. We need to focus on a balance between being human and being a predator. People…

OK, this is not that hard, people need to understand the rules. First, the heuristics. If it would be extraordinarily awkward and/or conceivably career impacting for someone to decline a romantic advance then that advance should not be made, period, because it represents exploiting a power imbalance (even if unknowingly!) and throwing sex and romance into the situation. The only time in any scenario related to the wo…

> OK, this is not that hard

Actually. It really is. It really is. You can't brush the enormous complexities of life, human perception, self-image, misunderstanding, varying life experiences and social norms under the carpet with a wave of the hand.

It really, really is hard for normal decent human beings to get this right even if you don't throw bad actors and out-and-out sociopaths into the mix.

The problem is that sexual harassment does exist. But so does horrific misunderstand or outright false accusation. The latter two are probably an order of magnitude less common than the former but they are potentially life-destroying and shouldn't be brushed aside.

Also - it fuels the crazy men's rights types and lends credence to their sense of persecution. If you vacate the center of the debate then the other side will claim it.

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#124
post #108
post #36

This world is getting so fucked up. We can't crucify people for "hitting on" or other somewhat tame behavior because we have nothing left to throw at the real offenders. Conversely, people benefit on both sides of the equation; using sex to their advantage or weaponizing allegations like this. Sexual assualt is REAL and should be punished. We need to focus on a balance between being human and being a predator. People…

> Conversely, people benefit on both sides of the equation; using sex to their advantage or weaponizing allegations like this. Yes, but the two sides aren't equal. If you have a knife and we have a nuclear weapon, that we can both hurt each other does not mean that there is a balance, or that both sides need equal protection. Women get sexually harassed or assaulted much more than they fabricate allegations for perso…

> Women get sexually harassed or assaulted much more than they fabricate allegations for personal gain (and note that this is not what happened in this case), as a woman rarely gains from making allegations, either true or false.

I don't understand the logic here, are you saying that men gain more from sexually harassing women than women gain from falsely accusing men? I think you would have a hard time finding a man who would be in a better position if he just started sexually harassing women.

Edit: Note that I believe that honest accusations are far more common than false ones, I am just criticizing this explanation.

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#125
The problem with this whole debate that follows stories about sexual harassment is that no matter how it is being sliced, it always leads to a skewed image of reality.

The reality, in my eyes, would be something like this:

- People walk around looking more or less intelligently, but almost all have primal sexual urges that they are frequently seeking or at least thinking about to fulfill. That applies to women and men.

- Society is built in a way which only allows people to make subtle hints about this desire. It is unacceptable to display too much sexual desires in most contexts of public and professional life. There is an animal in everyone but it must not come out.

- The dynamics that play out during the process of finding a mate are complex, happen in parts unconsciously, and are the result of evolutionary biology and psychology. Meaning, everyone does things to attract a mate which he/she might not be "aware" of - and which sometimes appear extremely stupid in hindsight (Bill Clinton or Dave McClure anyone?!).

- There is a gender difference in the heterosexual mating process. Men impress women with power, status (often = money), display of dominance, achievements, and often make the first approach (sometimes after they think they saw a behavior from her side which correctly or wrongly suggested them that she might be interested). Women select the men who they go on a date with. This does not apply always, you can find different variations of this and also the occasional woman who takes pride in having been the one who did the approach. I also don't make a statement about whether this behavior is learned or innate, or both; but based on the current information I have I feel comfortable enough to generalize this dynamic. I suggest that one can even see this behavior in apps like Tinder where most women let a man write first after a match (sadly I don't have a scientific study about this - it is just personal observation, own experience, from talks with friends and observations of cultural norms) - therefore, I am curious about how Bumble will do on the market. If it becomes a big hit with the current concept to require women to write first after a match, what I wrote in the last sentences will prove to be wrong.

- If we want awareness and a change of behavior, everyone needs to learn to understand these dynamics, and needs to understand that regardless of gender, he/she also operating to some extend outside of the normal rational and reasonable thought procedure.

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LOL a leader of YC once threatened to ruin my career and prevent me from ever being hired because of a comment I made on an article that was linked here. Now I know why.

It is crazy to use your real name to comment on stuff. I limit my real name to GitHub, and even there I always try to comment on stuff like a robot would.

You may be right from the practical perspective. As a matter of principle I refuse to cower and slink around the internet. If I am judged, maligned, or inconvenienced by people's opinions of what I say, then so be it. At least I can say I didn't spend every day in moral retreat as the loudest people get their way.

I am Aaron Muir Hamilton and I'm not afraid of words.

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not an excuse. Stop. Just stop. An acquaintance is not a coworker, period. It's not even a question. Most of the time an acquaintance is fully empowered to tell you to fuck all the way off if you make an unwanted advance. And their life goes on as normal afterward. The equation is vastly different if people are coworkers, especially if there is any sort of difference in authority, seniority, connectedness, or…

I read a recent account on the net in a NSFW forum written by a woman who wanted to have casual sex with a co-worker on a business trip. She gave several very obvious hints to the guy she was interested in with no response. She finally had to resort to flashing her boobs at the guy to get him to acknowledge and fulfill her desires. Me personally, it would take that level of chutzpah from a female co-worker before I'd…

If the genders were reversed then that would be sexual harassment...

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#128
post #36

This world is getting so fucked up. We can't crucify people for "hitting on" or other somewhat tame behavior because we have nothing left to throw at the real offenders. Conversely, people benefit on both sides of the equation; using sex to their advantage or weaponizing allegations like this. Sexual assualt is REAL and should be punished. We need to focus on a balance between being human and being a predator. People…

False accusations should be punished with the same penalty as the accuser tried to put upon the innocent. Until that happens, people will see no reason to stop false accusations that they think will help them.

That's a terrible idea. It would mean that people would fear to report genuine crimes because they are then harshly punished if the accused is acquitted.

The fact is that the justice system is not perfect. Occasionally a guilty person will be acquitted, and it would really be best not to also punish an innocent as a result of that.

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#129
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, this is not that hard, people need to understand the rules. First, the heuristics. If it would be extraordinarily awkward and/or conceivably career impacting for someone to decline a romantic advance then that advance should not be made, period, because it represents exploiting a power imbalance (even if unknowingly!) and throwing sex and romance into the situation. The only time in any scenario related to the wo…

> People should not be inviting themselves into the room or home of a coworker, period. People should not be trying to get cozy, let alone try to date, people they have only casually met, especially if there is a power imbalance between them or if there is absolutely anything at stake in the professional relationship. Yet the majority of marriages after college are formed exactly that way - a guy asks an acquaintance…

[deleted]

Re: Lawsuit: Sexual harassment ‘victim’ was San Francisco business rival in disguise

#130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not an excuse. Stop. Just stop. An acquaintance is not a coworker, period. It's not even a question. Most of the time an acquaintance is fully empowered to tell you to fuck all the way off if you make an unwanted advance. And their life goes on as normal afterward. The equation is vastly different if people are coworkers, especially if there is any sort of difference in authority, seniority, connectedness, or…

I read a recent account on the net in a NSFW forum written by a woman who wanted to have casual sex with a co-worker on a business trip. She gave several very obvious hints to the guy she was interested in with no response. She finally had to resort to flashing her boobs at the guy to get him to acknowledge and fulfill her desires. Me personally, it would take that level of chutzpah from a female co-worker before I'd…

Indeed. I think the likelihood is high that if I were given obvious hints by a female coworker, I would probably not pick up on them, because to me, coworkers are off limits[1]. If a coworker were interested in me, she would probably have to actually say it to me outright or I'd brush it off as a joke/over friendliness/me misinterpreting the situation or something like that.

[1] I don't like the idea of coworkers dating because if they break up, it can be messy and cause all sorts of problems for them and for their other coworkers. Having said that, if I really liked a coworker and she was interested in me, I probably wouldn't let that stand in my way either, but it is something I'm conscious about. If she were on my team, I would at least ask to move to another team.

Post reply on HN