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

No, of that I'm innocent

scobleizer.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 190 posts

Re: No, of that I'm innocent

#61

Post by detaro »

klint wrote: post #36

Does anyone else find it bizarre that he writes "Quinn Norton, by her own account, physically accosted me[...] While it is admirable that Quinn wanted to defend the honor of another woman and the sanctity of marriage, perhaps she should have done so using the resources of the conference, or at a minimum in a manner that didn’t lead to her assaulting me," given that Norton's actual account is that he struck him becaus…

Yes, that he totally glossed over that part really stood out. Doesn't even said he didn't grab her, just acts like that wasn't even a thing, and makes up claims about her account that just don't make sense. Not even about what happened, about what she wrote about it, which everyone can just go re-read and see that it's not true. How can he expect that to be taken seriously.

Re: No, of that I'm innocent

#62

Post by joshuaheard »

TarpitCarnivore wrote: post #15

> I don’t have employees, I don’t cut checks for investment. None of the women who came forward were ever in a position where I could make or break their careers. Sexual Harassment requires that I have such power. This is an incredibly disgusting and miss-guided view of sexual harassment.

Not really. I'm not an expert on Sexual Harassment law, but it is my understanding there are 2 general kinds of sexual harassment. One is where there is such pervasive harassment of a sexual nature that it constitutes a "hostile work environment". For instance if firefighters put up centerfolds throughout the firehouse. This does not seem to be alleged here.

The other is where a person in a superior position uses that position in order to gain sexual favors from a subordinate. This is like the Weinstein allegations where he demanded they shower with him or they would never work in Hollywood again. That seems to be the type of harassment he is defending against. After reading the article, I didn't find anything in there that fit either of these definitions.

Re: No, of that I'm innocent

#63

Post by DanBC »

Invictus0 wrote: post #18

Without making any moral judgments here, the guy has a valid point in that it's important to make a distinction between cheating in a relationship and sexual harassment. The former is a non-illegal, personal matter, and the latter is a criminal matter. I think most people probably aren't interested in making this distinction and would prefer to indiscriminately shun either kind of person, but this the importance of t…

Lots of sexual harassment is not criminal. (It's still, obviously, no acceptable).

Re: No, of that I'm innocent

#64

Post by vkou »

ajross wrote: post #29
DiabloD3 wrote: post #13

I think this can be best described as "sinking the boat just to kill the captain." In the interest of being the devil's advocate: if he is telling the truth, this looks very bad for several of the women that accused him of sexual harassment, and tried to inflate his cheating on his wife into something much worse. I mean, this sounds a lot like how some women accuse guys of rape just to cause harm to them, instead of…

> I mean, this sounds a lot like how some women accuse guys of rape just to cause harm to them, instead of a rape actually having occurred. It was deliberately crafted to be so. So if we want to apply some science to our guessing: what is the fraction of real harrassment incidents to fraudulently reported ones in our society? You can "some women" and "because he disgregarded" your way around the disembling, but the t…

> what is the fraction of real harrassment incidents to fraudulently reported ones in our society?

If I were to believe the personal experiences of all the women I know, most women have, at some point in their lives been harassed. I've had 20 #mee_toos on my relatively small Facebook feed.

Not a single one of them ever mentioned reporting the harassment they experienced to authorities, filing a lawsuit, writing a blog post on Medium, calling out the harasser on social media, or anything of that nature.

For another anecdote:

Two months ago, though, one friend has been tip-toeing around how to deal with a serial rapist in their friend circle. They didn't go to the police, because nothing would get done, and they didn't call that person out in public. They weren't looking for attention, or to ruin the rapist's life. They were practically tip-toeing around the issue of how to warn other women about him.

Unsurprisingly, of the many responses to that thread, three people knew exactly who she was talking about.

Re: No, of that I'm innocent

#65

Post by hartator »

csydas wrote: post #47
hartator wrote: post #16

> Every act of infidelity, every time I have watched an adult video online, How watching porn equates to cheat on your wife? Very weird moral compass.

I believe you're misreading that part of the post, as it goes on to list these as actions which wrong women in general. The writer is equating his viewing of porn to wronging women. It's kind of a strange mea culpa, to be honest, as even in the most socially progressive of circles, pornography is a very divisive topic, with many finding it degrading and many finding it liberating. edit: added a comma after "circles"

I don't think I've misread. I think his moral compass is broken and he doesn't know the difference between evil and harmless browsing.

Re: No, of that I'm innocent

#66

Post by oh_sigh »

Anderkent wrote: post #27
oh_sigh wrote: post #19

I have no knowledge of this issue specifically, but more generally, if you're even a somewhat public figure, I think the best course of action is to have a discreet 24/7 bodycam rolling to record all of your interactions. We're at a point where your career and social network can be torpedoed by anyone merely making a claim on social media. No police, no day in court, just allegations are enough.

Just people finding out you have a bodycam is likely enough to get a harassment bandwagon going against you. It's creepy.

You don't need to tell anyone.

Re: No, of that I'm innocent

#67

Post by arkades »

asdfasfhretwt wrote: post #22
Mz wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since it was originally addressed to me and you claim it is an honest question: Mostly not in work settings or work related settings, and much more carefully than in the past when dating norms hinged on the assumption that men were providers and women were destined to become homemakers. You have to consider how this impacts both your career and hers, not just yours alone. To give an example that I hope elucidates som…

-

It slams doors shut because:

If things don’t work out into a very long term relationship, entering his department would likely involve significant tension, if not hostility. How many people can work in close quarters with an ex? How many interactions can it bias - with him, with his current departmental colleagues? Will he handle it ending maturely? So many people don’t, and it’s a career at stake.

And if it does work out, or for as long as it’s working, she will be undermined as the recipient of nepotism rather than making her career transitions on merit alone. Running the risk of being seen as someone who sleeps their way to the top is also likely to have detrimental long-term career effects.

His asking closed doors for her just because she has foresight, not because he said “on the bed or on the road.” These are the sort of consequences that guys ignore when they whine about not being able to hit on women at work.

The irony is: guys with more foresight/maturity get this, so they don’t ask. It’s the guys asking who are -also- more likely to be a fucking problem, because they’re exhibiting bad judgment to begin with.

This isn’t some new over-sensitive ultra-feminist whatever whatever thing. “Don’t shit where you eat” is old advice, and always appropriate.

Re: No, of that I'm innocent

#68

Post by [deleted] »

Invictus0 wrote: post #18

Without making any moral judgments here, the guy has a valid point in that it's important to make a distinction between cheating in a relationship and sexual harassment. The former is a non-illegal, personal matter, and the latter is a criminal matter. I think most people probably aren't interested in making this distinction and would prefer to indiscriminately shun either kind of person, but this the importance of t…

[deleted]

Re: No, of that I'm innocent

#69

Post by [deleted] »

Mz wrote: post #34
asdfasfhretwt wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

-

He was high up in a department I wanted a job in. I was not in the IT department, but I have a Certificate in GIS. He knew that and never wondered if I might be an asset to the IT department, nor if I might want to move to an IT position, which would have paid better than what I was doing. I really don't like your second question for a long list of reasons. I don't really see that being a constructive dialogue.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN