91–100 of 135 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do people ever like being asked out by people they are not attracted to? Isn't that always an imposition, regardless of the venue?
If too many bros hit on you at the bar, you can leave and go to the bar next door. If too many bros hit on you at work, sure, you can quit, but that's rather more disruptive to your life.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your case in point is not in fact on point. Lewinsky described what happened to her as a "gross abuse of power", just a few months back. Moreover, what happened to Lewinsky served to corroborate the stories of several other women, most of whom have stories about WJC far darker than hers.
Monica describes it as "consensual" and a "consequence of my own poor choices." http://time.com/5130921/monica-lewinsky-now/ Monica's story doesn't "corroborate" anybody else's story about affairs with Clinton. She's not a witness to any of those others.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If too many bros hit on you at the bar, you can leave and go to the bar next door. If too many bros hit on you at work, sure, you can quit, but that's rather more disruptive to your life.
I've seen many coworkers have passionate love affairs and marriages. Are they monsters? Would you deny them?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I said my defensive stance on this "probably" hindered the careers of "some" of them. I never said I intentionally hindered the careers of any of them. When facing a choice of going above and beyond to help develop a female employee's career and risking my own career (and my family's well-being) by exposing myself to the very real and well-known risk of being accused of sexual harassment, I have chosen selfishly. (He…
> the very real and well-known risk of being accused of sexual harassment Right there - that's the sexist part. Do you believe there's an epidemic of vengeful women running around falsely accusing men of sexual harassment? Because there isn't - but I'd love to hear your stories.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Accusations of sexual harassment are commonplace at many work places. False accusations are disturbingly common. Don't ask me if you don't believe me -- it's obvious already that you don't anyway. Rather, go make friends with someone who works in HR at a large company that employs lots of men and women. For this experiment, best not to try to befriend someone at your workplace. They may be hesitant to speak freely, s…
If you are intentionally treating men and women differently in a way that "probably hindered the careers of some of the women who were my direct and indirect reports" then it's not only un-American but it's also illegal discrimination. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you are intentionally treating men and women differently in a way that "probably hindered the careers of some of the women who were my direct and indirect reports" then it's not only un-American but it's also illegal discrimination. You should be ashamed of yourself.
I treated the men exactly the same way. It's not illegal discrimination to manage people without having 1:1s with them. It's not illegal discrimination to manage people in such a way as to eliminate any suggestion that you might have sexually harassed them. And it is not illegal discrimination if managing that way has a side effect of possibly not providing every opportunity to develop an individual. That is what I w…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you are intentionally treating men and women differently in a way that "probably hindered the careers of some of the women who were my direct and indirect reports" then it's not only un-American but it's also illegal discrimination. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Please don't perpetuate flamewars.
I'll back off just like everyone else will now that you've stepped in, but there aren't really two sides to this issue; someone said something problematic, and other people responded, perhaps heatedly but not unexpectedly or gratuitously so.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you are intentionally treating men and women differently in a way that "probably hindered the careers of some of the women who were my direct and indirect reports" then it's not only un-American but it's also illegal discrimination. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Please don't perpetuate flamewars.
Mr. Cagney reversed himself after Sullivan & Cromwell told the board there was ample evidence — in emails, hotel receipts and the manifests of private jet flights — that he had used company resources to pursue a romantic relationship with an employee, the people said. Mr. Cagney said he had previously suggested that employee as a promising candidate for chief financial officer.
At Aflac, this would have been a firing offense both because he was her superior and because it was an illicit affair. I am a little weirded out that the company seems kind of okay with it being an illicit affair. The article indicates he wasn't breaking any rules at the time for seeing a subordinate. That rule was added later:
SoFi also instituted an ethics policy that explicitly prohibits intimate relationships between supervisors and subordinates.
I felt I had doors close in my face at Aflac due to the romantic interest of powerful men there, though none of them were breaking any rules or harming their own career. Even without getting involved, in one case just asking me out made me feel like my hopes of transferring to the same department had just died.
I don't have the answers. I'm currently doing freelance work and feeling like everyone in the small town where I live is off limits romantically. Because things get tricky once you introduce that element and it can close doors that you didn't know you might want or need to go through.
He wasn’t sexually assaulting people he just dated someone at work. The article acts like if you break the workplace dating policy you should never work again or have to come crawling back. Would view this as a standard firing for him breaking the rules not really a #MeToo where he’s supposed to go into exile on MeToo island