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

211–220 of 359 posts

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

#211

Post by peteretep »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #180
peteretep wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

It cuts both ways. Bias toward cracking down on false accusations, and real victims might be afraid to file charges. Bias toward assuming accusations are always accurate, and you enable weaponizing them - which is the whole point of this story . There needs to be a balance here. Also, note - you mention filing charges . But the problem with sexual harassment cases is, they don't even get to that level . It's usually…

   > It cuts both ways
Yes, so the onus is on the person suggesting changes to the current balance is proving that another balance would be better.

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

#212

Post by peteretep »

adekok wrote: post #195
peteretep wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

So we shouldn't prosecute insurance fraud, because it will put off people who file real claims? Nonsense . Corrupting the justice system should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. How can you have justice when the justice system goes along willingly with abuse? There are cases where claimants are proven beyond any doubt to have lied. Lied knowingly, egregiously, and with malice aforethought. The idea that t…

You lost me at equating bringing an insurance claim with bringing sexual assault charges. I don't believe that axiom holds.

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

#213

Post by peteretep »

spodek wrote: post #203
peteretep wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 n…

    > Why do people not see
    > men as victims?
Why do you think they don't?

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

#214

Post by matt4077 »

mcappleton wrote: post #115
wand3r wrote: 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.

Do you believe that the harm of being raped is about equal to the harm of a false conviction for rape?

I'd actually tend to "yes", but it's probably impossible to answer. People react very different, and the prevalence of suicide is actually higher among rape victims than for people sentenced to long prison sentences.

But the real problem is: The penalty in your comparison would be for rape, whereas the accusation was just a failed attempt. Yes, that is usually harmful as well, but it's no longer comparable.

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

#215

Post by jbmorgado »

matt4077 wrote: post #207
jbmorgado wrote: post #157

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." 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…

Excuse me, how do you know that 7% of all woman are raped if only 14% of those cases go to trial and if only 50% of those cases result in conviction?

The only real data that you provided is that 5.25% of all claimed rapes (1 x 75% x 14% x 50%) are actually proven to be true in a court of law, which means that the only real data you have is that, according to justice only 0.37% of all woman have been found victims of rape. You know absolutely nothing about of what are the real numbers, just that the lower limit is those 0.37%, yet you claim that 7% of all woman have been raped, based on exactly what?

Do you have access to some data that we don't (and that isn't present in the numbers you just provided)? If so, what data is that?

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

#216

Post by peteretep »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #178
notgood wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False accusations are the ones proven to be false; and not every single one that couldn't be confirmed by court or by a jury.

Which suggests an obvious course of action: - true accusation - punish the perpetrator - false accusation - punish the accuser - unable to confirm either way - nothing happens I still don't understand why some people have so much trouble with this concept and want to bias towards "guilty until proven innocent" thinking. And yes, I know that in civil cases in the US, it's "preponderance of the evidence" and not "presu…

    > suggests an obvious
    > course of action
Do you not think people already get jailed for claims that are probably false?

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

#217

Post by sidlls »

peoplewindow wrote: post #140
freshhawk wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 How? There's no connection between what was said and the conclusion you drew from it. arkh's post observes that women often apply different standards to men's behaviour based on whether they find them attractive or not. That's not really in dispute, it's the origin of the "hot women being attracted to asshole boyfriends"…

It isn't in dispute? In what sense?

I'd dispute it in this sense: women, like humans of any gender, are more likely to apply different standards based on pre-existing status (e.g. whether they're friends already or not) but not to the degree that as a rule they'd welcome a sexual advance from one co-worker and not an identical one from another based simply on attractiveness, or that they'd consider the unwanted one harassment.

This isn't hard: women are humans and capable of rational thought, just like men. Your comment diminishes them.

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

#218

Post by Chris2048 »

spodek wrote: post #205
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 innoc…

"The real victim is X" isn't semantically the same as saying "Y isn't a real victim".

The former implies there was greater harm/effect to X, the latter that Y isn't really a victim.

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

#219

Post by matt4077 »

While you're all hate raging on women, please note that the false accuser was actually a man.

Sucks to be woman, I guess. First you're raped. And then Hacker News will probably tell you to go take a hike and stop being a man-hating SWJ. Because other men have started using false rape accusations to get their startup off the ground.

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

#220

Post by matt4077 »

wand3r wrote: 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.

Did you notice that the false accuser is also a man?

Because it appears that there are simply no women anywhere in your "equation".

Post reply on HN