91–100 of 190 posts
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…
> 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.
Eh. I think everyone agrees power imbalance is a crucial part of capital letters Sexual Harassment. We know people can be assholes to each other at any point, but we pay particular attention to people in positions of power over others. Setting aside power imbalances of physical nature (i.e. alone in an elevator), I think he's mostly accurate? Unwelcome advances in a situation where there is little possibility of harm…
No.
here's the EU definition:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CONSLE...
> harassment: where an unwanted conduct related to the sex of a person occurs with the purpose or effect of violating the dignity of a person, and of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment,
> sexual harassment: where any form of unwanted verbal, non-verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature occurs, with the purpose or effect of violating the dignity of a person, in particular when creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment.
Here's the English law:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/26
> 1)A person (A) harasses another (B) if—
> (a)A engages in unwanted conduct related to a relevant protected characteristic, and
> (b)the conduct has the purpose or effect of—
> (i)violating B's dignity, or
> (ii)creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for B.
> (2)A also harasses B if—
> (a)A engages in unwanted conduct of a sexual nature, and
> (b)the conduct has the purpose or effect referred to in subsection (1)(b)
There's nothing in there about power imbalance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, my take away is that mere accusations, regardless of legitimacy, can destroy your career and reputation. Assuming you didn't do these evil deeds, having video or audio proof(if legal in your jurisdiction) is really the only way to counter them. Otherwise, what do you say? "No, I didn't rape/sexually assault this person". The accusation alone is salacious enough that a mere denial isn't going to change anyone's mi…
> Assuming you didn't do these evil deeds, having video or audio proof(if legal in your jurisdiction) is really the only way to counter them. Well, the traditional solution to this is to just cross-examine the accusers about the cut of their skirt, whether or not they had any idea what they were doing when you invited them to the hotel room, how many casual sexual partners they had, and all sorts of other bullshit th…
If you are a public figure, and you never sexually assaulted anyone, yet multiple people were accusing you in public of doing so, how (if at all) would you defend yourself?
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.
-
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is, he is one of the MOST influential people in the tech ecosystem. Yes, he is a "blogger", but in many cases he could make or break a product, a startup or a career. A friend of mine startup was noticed (and acquired) by Facebook because Scoble started blogging about it and that came to the attention of Zuckerberg. This guy leaves and breathes in tech conferences, as he is a regular invited speaker/guest…
Where does this line of thinking lead? I mean it's one thing to limit any attempts at intimacy in the workplace, but if you're just 'influential enough' then you expand this definition to include anyone in the entire tech sector? This seems clearly illogical. Again, if there was assault it's a totally different matter. But sexual harassment is a lower bar specifically because of the idea no one should have to work in…
Quinn's story was not at a 'work environment' so does it have any less impact? Why are you letting him adjust the narrative to define what he feels is harassment?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is, he is one of the MOST influential people in the tech ecosystem. Yes, he is a "blogger", but in many cases he could make or break a product, a startup or a career. A friend of mine startup was noticed (and acquired) by Facebook because Scoble started blogging about it and that came to the attention of Zuckerberg. This guy leaves and breathes in tech conferences, as he is a regular invited speaker/guest…
Where does this line of thinking lead? I mean it's one thing to limit any attempts at intimacy in the workplace, but if you're just 'influential enough' then you expand this definition to include anyone in the entire tech sector? This seems clearly illogical. Again, if there was assault it's a totally different matter. But sexual harassment is a lower bar specifically because of the idea no one should have to work in…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Assuming you didn't do these evil deeds, having video or audio proof(if legal in your jurisdiction) is really the only way to counter them. Well, the traditional solution to this is to just cross-examine the accusers about the cut of their skirt, whether or not they had any idea what they were doing when you invited them to the hotel room, how many casual sexual partners they had, and all sorts of other bullshit th…
Do you have an actual point relating to what I said? Yes, courts were and continue to be sexist. I never argued against that, and I don't see how it is at all relevant to this conversation at this point. If you are a public figure, and you never sexually assaulted anyone, yet multiple people were accusing you in public of doing so, how (if at all) would you defend yourself?
(It's one of the reasons why people think twice about accusing the guilty.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where does this line of thinking lead? I mean it's one thing to limit any attempts at intimacy in the workplace, but if you're just 'influential enough' then you expand this definition to include anyone in the entire tech sector? This seems clearly illogical. Again, if there was assault it's a totally different matter. But sexual harassment is a lower bar specifically because of the idea no one should have to work in…
If you are the keynote speaker of a conference, DO NOT flirt with other attendees or other coworkers, regardless of the line of report. There are code of conduct left and right for a reason. Saying "they were not my employees" does not excuse you from using your influence, in a work-related setting, to approach someone else for sex matters.
Q: Would I do $thing if this were at my office?
A: No.
Done.
I'll preface this with, I don't know who this guy is and this is the first time I heard anything about this, I am unfamiliar with the allegations. I am just absolutely shocked by this >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. JFC, does anyone actual…
I think the implication is that victims would have gone to law enforcement if he has no power over them, i.e no consequences for going to law enforcement. I don't understand why they cant report harassment to law enforcement if its ' unlawful to harass a person '. Thats the only way to get justice in our society.
Yesterday my partner was harassed by a doctor. I asked if she wanted to file a complaint or report it to somebody. She simply looked disappointed and said that no it would be a pain and almost certainly accomplish nothing. Better to not see this doctor again and try to schedule appointments with female doctors when possible. This is because this sort of thing has happened to her dozens of times in her lifetime, reporting it has never worked, and she already has enough on her plate. She didn't want this to be the state of things, but was resigned to it.
Yes, this person will likely continue to be an asshole. But after people try so many times to do the right thing and are rebuffed we cannot keep expecting them to do the same thing over and over. It becomes one more thing to feel guilty about in these sorts of scenarios.
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.
-
His being attractive wasn’t relevant to the career effects. She literally just said, “too bad; I would’ve enjoyed going out with him if not for the career effects.” It’s... actually completely irrelevant to the point of the post, except to say “the career effects are bad enough that they make me say no even to people I’d otherwise like to date.” It’s evidence of the weight of the effect. It doesn’t make the asking-out better or worse, and it’s unclear why that’s the direction of your question.