Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

mercurynews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 359 posts

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

#141

Post by nopatternhere »

irb wrote: post #128
mcappleton wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Occasionally a guilty person will be acquitted, and it would really be best not to also punish an innocent as a result of that.

That's not how it works, is it? it is not a battle where someone has to be guilty - either the accused or the accuser. Someone can be acquitted without anyone lying, or making false statements, or anything else. Just a few examples: insufficient evidence to prosecute, contradictory timelines.

It is bizarre that anyone thinks that this could be the system - get a conviction or suffer a conviction yourself.

There is a spectrum between provable accusations and demonstrably false claims that includes uncertainty, doubt and poor evidence. It isn't like going all-in in poker!

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

#142

Post by nl »

Dude2018 wrote: post #84
thereare5lights wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh stop spewing bs about sexual harassment as "hitting on" people. The accusations against the VCs McClure and Pollock involved groping or worse.

What about using lipstick to emulate sexual arousal? Why did they use make up doing business?

Or maybe they do it because it looks good? Like how some people wear clothes that look good on them.

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

#143

Post by etjossem »

imartin2k wrote: post #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 me…

How about instead we just agree not to hit on each other within a power-imbalanced professional relationship?

Seriously, I don't get how this is hard for folks. It's unbelievably simple. Be aware that you may have professional power over other people, and if you do, make an active effort not to flirt with them. Have the self-restraint not to mix an investment/supervisory relationship with romance or sex. Either it will feel coercive, or it's a conflict of interest waiting to happen.

Avoiding trying to sleep with your subordinates is not rocket surgery.

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

#144

Post by [deleted] »

irb wrote: post #128
mcappleton wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

[deleted]

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

#146

Post by cm2187 »

What's interesting is that seeking a court order to unveil the IP of an anonymous accuser can be seen as attempting to uncover the identity of a whistle blower and would leave the person trying to defend himself in hot water in certain companies. This is a minefield.

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

#147

Post by vertex-four »

jlebrech wrote: post #139
prawn wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"are you feeling well?" I've witnessed this: (concerned) Is x OK? Huh? Is she upset? She looks like she's been crying. (realising) No, she's just not wearing any makeup. You normally see her with makeup on.

that's where not giving a shit comes into play. you don't accidentally sexism.

Sure you do. If you behave to the detriment of one gender but not another, that's sexism. You then say "sorry, didn't mean that", and change your behaviour now that you know.

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

#148

Post by narrator »

gjjrfcbugxbhf wrote: post #127
narrator wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

This is actually an interesting legal problem. How would two * willing * co-workers initiate casual sex on a business trip? Certainly this situation has cropped up before! Neither would want to risk their careers on making an unwanted advance toward the other!

Presenting a coworker with a long legal document giving consent to be propositioned, signed with a notary present of course, wouldn't work. It would be sexual harassment to even present the contract for consideration!

They would have to use something like Tinder where they could be both unaware of the others interest until both parties had signed the legal agreement consenting to be propositioned by the other. They would then be directed to do some sort of custom secret society hand sign in the others presence to verify that they had actually consented. The hand sign would be innocuous when seen by someone who hadn't actually signed the contract via the app and seen the secret hand sign the other would display to acknowledge they had signed the contract.

The next billion dollar startup idea?! A cross between Linkedin, LegalZoom and Tinder. The idea would at least make for a hilarious episode of "The IT Crowd" or "Silicon Valley".

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

#149

Post by supremesaboteur »

irb wrote: post #128
mcappleton wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It can be structured so that an accuser does not automatically become guilty of false accusations because the accused was found 'not guilty'. In other words, sexual harassment cases can have 3 verdicts : 'guilty', 'not guilty' and 'other'( technicalities, not enough evidence etc). Then, you will still need to prove that the perpetrator knowingly accused someone of sexual harassment for some gain. Looks fairer to me

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

#150

Post by jlebrech »

vertex-four wrote: post #147
jlebrech wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that's where not giving a shit comes into play. you don't accidentally sexism.

Sure you do. If you behave to the detriment of one gender but not another, that's sexism. You then say "sorry, didn't mean that", and change your behaviour now that you know.

sure, assuming someone has been crying is dumb. noticing a change of appearance is something women want you to do when it's a positive thing ie. new haircut. but if it's negative it's probably best to reword what you're saying in a more positive way.

but you can talk to men how you want, they won't care.

so yes you have to behave differently to both genders.

Post reply on HN