171–180 of 245 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not aware of a study - but that doesn't mean you default to bad math.
I'd use "better" math if it were available. Until then, I'm going to use the best tool for the job, even if it's "bad". To that end, I refuse to make perfect the enemy of good.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Err, I was using the term "Violation of a woman's integrity". According to you, both 1 and 2 can be described that way. Listen you are right in part. Like when people talk about drugs being ba-a-a-a-d. Is cocaine bad? Yes Is the war on drugs justified by this? No Same here. You are talking about a real problem. You are suggesting solutions that hurt everyone involved and then acting like if someone doesn't agree with…
You can’t swing a cat without finding a victim of sexual harassment who felt violated by harassment even if it wasn’t physical. Your physical body isn’t the only part of you that exists, if you are harassed to the point where you don’t feel safe living your life because of the threats posed to you wouldn’t you feel violated? Your life has been compromised. If you mean “physically violated” then sure, you cannot be ph…
...
You are the reason for the article above. Congrats. Now celebrate your victory.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah. That's good advice ... because (#metoo movement aside) WHO HAS "BUSINESS" DINNERS ALONE WITH MARRIED PEOPLE? This is something completely different than having dinner with a group of people.
> WHO HAS "BUSINESS" DINNERS ALONE WITH MARRIED PEOPLE? Would you give it a second thought if it were two men or two women?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The result is that women live in a state of _perpetual fear of men_. And that's current state. Hyperbole does not help at all, and this statement is several levels beyond hyperbole. A bit of nuance, please.
It's not hyperbole. Some easy ways to check IRL: Do the women in your life not check their routes when walking when it's dark out? Do the men? Do women try to bow out gracefully from relationships even if the onus shouldn't be on them, sometimes from fear of men potentially harming them? Do men do this at all? Do you tell your daughter to watch out for predators before college? Do you tell your son the same thing, or…
Do women try to bow out gracefully from relationships even if the onus shouldn't be on them, sometimes from fear of men potentially harming them? Do men do this at all?
That's what the entire Bloomberg article is about! Yes, men apparently now routinely bow out gracefully from relationships with women, because they fear the woman will harm them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Duke Lacrosse might be “doing fine” now, but while it was happening they certainly weren’t doing fine. Kavanaugh made it to the court, but for the rest of his term, he’s under a cloud. What happened to Kavanaugh was brutal. Just because someone survived the ordeal does lessen the fact that it happened at all.
Just to be clear, you know he almost certainly did it right? Dr. Ford came forward before he was nominated. Also he has full time security guards now and gets welcomed with standing ovations, whereas Dr. Ford keeps having to move because of all the death threats and hasn't been able to go back to her job.
The last I heard about Kavanaugh he'd been totally exonerated. There's no reason to believe he did anything to this woman.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And herein lies the problem with #MeToo. NDT thought he was being curious and pointing something out, the woman thought she was being sexually harassed. This is the problem, that any action can be construed as sexual harassment.
> NDT thought he was being curious and pointing something out, the woman thought she was being sexually harassed. If he did in fact physically touch her, then this isn't an ambiguous "he said/she said" problem, this is a violation of her personal boundaries.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Numerous? Well-documented? I don't mean to be inflammatory -- but I must reading different news that you are. Can you please cite your sources? To be clear: Numerous (to me) means approaching 20% of all accusations. That's only 1 in every 5 accusations. Does numerous mean something else to you?
Can you please cite your sources? There is no serious, solid research on this question. "News" is certainly not where you can get serious figures on this matter. Even the very definitions of what counts as sexual harassment / assault / rape / hate speech etc are deeply controversial. A most prominent example are radical feminists like Dworkin who essentially say that all heterosexual intercourse is rape.
In the UK, official government research put the figure at 10% of all (rape) accusations being false. But if you read the reports, you'll see that the true figure must be much higher, as the methodology reclassifies lots of data points to avoid them being considered false.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Duke Lacrosse might be “doing fine” now, but while it was happening they certainly weren’t doing fine. Kavanaugh made it to the court, but for the rest of his term, he’s under a cloud. What happened to Kavanaugh was brutal. Just because someone survived the ordeal does lessen the fact that it happened at all.
Just to be clear, you know he almost certainly did it right? Dr. Ford came forward before he was nominated. Also he has full time security guards now and gets welcomed with standing ovations, whereas Dr. Ford keeps having to move because of all the death threats and hasn't been able to go back to her job.
You know that Kavanaugh was shortlisted by Romney during the 2012 presidential campaign? Predating Dr. Ford's timeline for documenting the alleged abuse during therapy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is possible in the US. Imagine someone rapes a nun, and she testifies to it. She identifies the defendant, and in his testimony he denies it. If the jury finds her testimony more credible — to the extent that there is not a reasonable doubt as to his guilt — they can convict him. Of course, it helps if there is corroborating evidence, but there is no rule that says one cannot be convicted (in the US) based on a…
So, it is no different than for any other sort of accusation lacking corroborating evidence? Is there evidence that this is more likely in sexual assault cases than others? Your post here [1] (and the post you are replying to) seem to suggest that it is actually less likely in these cases. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18590977
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd use "better" math if it were available. Until then, I'm going to use the best tool for the job, even if it's "bad". To that end, I refuse to make perfect the enemy of good.
Our difference of opinion is that I think you are refusing to make bad the enemy of good