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

201–210 of 359 posts

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

#201

Post by marvin »

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...

Wow, I'm normally pretty sensitive to "this would look bad if the genders were reversed", but I missed this one even though it is absolutely ridiculous and should be obvious.

"He gave several very obvious hints to the woman he was interested in with no response. He finally had to resort to flashing his muscled chest at the woman to get her to acknowledge and fulfill his desires."

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

#202

Post by matt4077 »

swiley wrote: post #162
vkou wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's suppose that false rape accusations are a wide-spread problem. They aren't, they are far rarer then actual cases of rape, but let's suppose that they are. How exactly do you propose to deal with them, without a chilling effect on reporting real rapes? It is a crime that is notoriously hard to convict, to the point where most victims keep silent.

This is anecdotal, but personally I know just as many people who where raped as where falsely accused of rape.

zero?

In any case, it'd be quite strange to personally know two cases where such a false accusation was proven, considering how rare both false accusations are, and how difficult it is to prove them.

You data would furthermore suffer from the fact that almost no one will tell you they were raped, whereas accusations of rape and a trial are usually widely known.

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

#203

Post by spodek »

peteretep wrote: post #138
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.

This has the side-effect that real victims are put off from filing charges, which is generally thought to be not a good thing.

The man accused of sexual harassment is a real victim, if his accusation is correct.

Why do people not see men as victims? His reputation could be ruined for the rest of his life, even if he is innocent. People take the law into their own hands and could physically hurt him as a result of a false accusation amid a system that disregards due process.

This community -- Hacker News -- is considering creating a list to name people accused of harassment without due process -- in other words, a vigilante system that could lead to innocent people, generally men, being victimized like this man, a real victim.

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

#204

Post by Chris2048 »

whiskyant wrote: post #134
irb wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

A false accusation is different from an accusation that wasn't provable. There have been many cases of false accusations in which it was proven that the accuser was intentionally lying in order to get revenge or reap some reward. There have even been cases in which the accuser later admits to having lied, but with zero legal consequences.

> There have even been cases in which the accuser later admits

"admits" can be a loaded word. The accuser claims. Hopefully, their accusation was not the only evidence in the first place.

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

#205

Post by spodek »

jmcgough wrote: post #8

Incidents like this and that Rolling Stone article do so much damage to real victims of sexual harassment/assault.

Let's not forget that there is a real victim here: the man accused of sexual harassment, if his counterclaim is correct.

How would you feel if someone fraudulently accused you of something you didn't do that could ruin your career, open you to violent attack, the majority of people didn't believe you, even those who did still wondered what you may have done to provoke the accusation (even if you were completely innocent), that stuck with you for the rest of your life...

and then someone on line implied you weren't a real victim?

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

#206

Post by nopatternhere »

Banthum wrote: post #176
irb wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, that's fair, I was being a bit over dramatic. However, I still think that the kind of 'eye for an eye' approach proposed by the comment I was relying to would have a non-trivial, negative impact on the reporting of crimes. Just as guilty people can be acquitted, innocent people can be found guilty (even if it's not automatic), and this means that the accuser is exposing themselves to risk. Fundamentally, no one s…

>no one should ever have to worry about the consequences of reporting a crime The rub is, they should have to worry about the consequences, if they're making a bad-faith false report. They should have to worry a lot, because they themselves are committing a wrong by reporting a false crime in such a way. It's an incredibly hard problem, though.

> because they themselves are committing a wrong

I think you mean crime, not wrong.

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

#207

Post by matt4077 »

jbmorgado wrote: post #157
vkou wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's suppose that false rape accusations are a wide-spread problem. They aren't, they are far rarer then actual cases of rape, but let's suppose that they are. How exactly do you propose to deal with them, without a chilling effect on reporting real rapes? It is a crime that is notoriously hard to convict, to the point where most victims keep silent.

> "Let's suppose that false rape accusations are a wide-spread problem. They aren't, they are far rarer then actual cases of rape, but let's suppose that they are." Can you provide a source for that?

This is the most detailed and recent study, where they went through all rape cases in the UK with a fine comb. It puts the most likely figure of false accusations at 3%, within a range of 1% to 9%.

Other numbers:

- 7% (of all women) had been raped,

- Around 75% of those cases were reported to police

- only 14% of cases resulted in a trial

- less than half of trials resulted in conviction

- Police officers guess that 30% of reported rapes are false accusations when asked in general terms, even though these same officers came to such a conclusion in only 9% of specific cases they handled.

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218141141/htt...

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

#208

Post by Chris2048 »

vertex-four wrote: post #131
Dude2018 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Mostly because women often get pulled into meetings with their bosses/HR and told to wear makeup if they don't. Seriously. Even if they don't, they get accused by work colleagues of not looking good enough, and clients comment on it. This isn't something women do to be manipulative - it's something that's enforced as part of a woman's dress code by the company. Or, in other words, if you think makeup is intended to r…

Then campaign against it. Until then, "corporate expectation" is a convenient excuse, despite the fact that many corporations will fold in the face of any social pressure.

Like how "men" are claimed to be responsible for pressuring women into unrealistic body images, despite the fashion industry being run, and chosen by women.

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

#209

Post by sidlls »

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...

I consider it sexual harassment as it is written. The victim's gender matters in the sense that harassment is more likely against women due to the patriarchal character of our culture, but men can still be victims of sexual harassment. They just very rarely ever are.

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

#210

Post by 5555624 »

gkya wrote: post #196
jlebrech wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

clearly sexual harassment is continued advances, one rejected advance shouldn't be considered harassment, but it would make a working relationship awkward. so it's best to not do it anyway. but also if merely (awkwardly trying) being nice is considered harassment bosses will be less willing to hire (attractive) women.

Well it depends on the advance itself, no? It's quite a way from "You look really nice today" to groping.

It is a long way; but, groping is not sexual harassment, groping is sexual assault.
Post reply on HN