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

181–190 of 359 posts

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

#181

Post by acdha »

Asooka wrote: post #172
mrkrabo wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I don't know why you're downvoted, this is literally the first thing we were told about the internet - don't put your real name online. Today you kind of have to, for most things, but generally you should try to minimise the stuff you post attached to your real name as much as possible.

People are also told to have their work on github and build their personal brand on social media.

Perhaps it's possible that there's more than one source of advice?

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

#182

Post by b3lvedere »

danmaz74 wrote: post #93

How can an anonymous online accusation without any evidence even get considered a thing? Are we back to 16th century witch-hunts? Whoever gives publicity to accusations like this for the clicks, without checking their sources at all, should rightfully be persecuted for defamation.

Back? We never left it.

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

#184

Post by pbhjpbhj »

vertex-four wrote: post #152
jlebrech wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I said "to the detriment of", not "differently", for a start.

"Detriment" varies and apparently has a strong gender correlation though.

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

#185

Post by yorwba »

ablomen wrote: post #179
etjossem wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately for women who just want to get their work done and go home, we do not live in the world of Mad Men anymore. Since then, we have realized how important it is to strive for work environments that are free from sexual pressure and related favoritism.

"Fortunately for women who just want to get their work done and go home, we do not live in the world of Mad Men anymore" Yes we can all be happy about that, but it's not an either/or situation, lots of relationships start at work and they can work out just fine.

Sure, relationships that start at work/in an uneven power dynamic can absolutely work out, but you only know this afterwards, when everything has run its course.

If someone else had applied for the position as your father's secretary and had been refused, they could have complained about it by pointing to the conflict of interest.

If you want to avoid the negative consequences of mixing work and romance, you'd better not only focus on the best-case result, but also keep the worst case in mind and accordingly tread carefully.

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

#186

Post by TeMPOraL »

Klockan wrote: post #124
pron wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

I think GP is simply implying that, since "a woman rarely gains from making allegations, either true or false", she doesn't have a strong incentive to make false accusations. Which is IMO a fair explanation, though personally I disagree with the assumption here. The way sexual harassment is treated these days, even a vague false accusation is a very powerful weapon. Hell, even a threat of an accusation is a powerful weapon.

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

#187

Post by dahauns »

adjkant wrote: post #58
tepidandroid wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Careful with that kind if talk here. In this kind of social political climate logic does not always prevail. Just go look at some past HN threads regarding sexual harassment. The sheer number of people who react emotionally to allegations of sexual harassment is truly astounding. All rationality goes out the window with men throwing themselves over each other to proclaim "I BELIEVE YOU" instead of asking for the leas…

This is a huge straw man if I've ever seen one (and present in many other posts on this thread). To act as if there isn't any logic in the opposing side isn't going to get anywhere. Because of the very nature of sexual assault, providing evidence up to the standards of the US criminal legal system is very hard to do. It likely means that more harassers get off and very few get wrongful sentences. The logic in support…

>You can disagree with some of the premises of that argument, but it's a valid one (philosophically speaking).

Philosophically speaking, If I reject some of the premises, this would be a classic ex falso quodlibet, so - unless I subscribe to the use of paraconsistent logic - no, it would actually not be valid.

I fully agree that everything should be done to make reporting crimes and presenting evidence as easy as possible and to root out problems preventing this.

But: Loosening the standards of presumption of innocence, one of the cornerstone achievements of human rights, can never be part of this. Especially in the age of social media.

Everything else is a slippery slope (and one that has been written about in every concievable context on thousands of pages over the centuries). It's easy to say "it will help put away many more guilty people" if you simply redefine what it means to be guilty to be slightly more likely than a coin toss (or what do you mean by "pass a 50/50 guilt test"?).

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

#188

Post by [deleted] »

etjossem wrote: post #143
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 wi…

[deleted]

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

#189

Post by TeMPOraL »

strathmeyer wrote: post #49
mbesto wrote: post #16

That's right, no one would ever abuse an online system for blacklisting VCs accused of sexual harassment...smh https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14773434

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.

[citation needed], because you're making a serious accusation now.

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

#190

Post by TeMPOraL »

acdha wrote: post #181
Asooka wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know why you're downvoted, this is literally the first thing we were told about the internet - don't put your real name online. Today you kind of have to, for most things, but generally you should try to minimise the stuff you post attached to your real name as much as possible.

People are also told to have their work on github and build their personal brand on social media. Perhaps it's possible that there's more than one source of advice?

Exactly. I was told the "personal brand" advice, too.

And if you look around - even on HN - there's plenty of people who seem to have got the same idea.

Post reply on HN