Here's Joe's "Funemployment" post: http://objo.com/2013/06/01/taking-some-time-off/
Someone has already posted a comment on there about this situation. Why not contact Joe directly and ask him for his account before applying guilt by hearsay.
Because it needs to be said
561–570 of 635 posts
Re: Because it needs to be said
#562The story is heart wrenching, but the fact is, it may not be true. Anyone can literally say anything they want about someone and the internet will believe it without a moment's hesitation. It is downright scary. If you were the accused and the story was contrived, you would not have much recourse.
There are two men, one of whom stopped it, who corroborate her story: http://theotherzach.com/writes/2013/10/9/events and http://blog.matt-darby.com/essays/i-am-the-other-developer
Hardly. Matt Darby clearly describes a situation that there was ample time for her to walk away. AND I QUOTE (Darby's Account):
"At first it was a hug, or an arm around the shoulders; friendly, drunken comraderie that they both were engaged in. Friends.
Joe started to get a little more familiar and was running his hand down her back and patting at her butt (she was seated). I noticed, and I watched. It was getting creepy, but Justine didn't move, or slap him. She was laughing, I figured it was nothing huge.
This continued for a few moments, then Justine got up on the bar, laid down in front of him, and the bartender poured a shot into her navel area. Joe slurped it up, then kissed her up the stomach until he got to, and chomped down, on her shirt-covered left breast. I was standing two feet away. I don't know who's idea this was.
Justine sat down, and Joe picked up the pace. He was really rubbing on her, and it got to the point where I felt uncomfortable for both of them. This lasted for about two minutes. His hands were admittedly all over her.
I was talking with Zach and Mike Eaton, who had just come over to us, and I said "I'll be right back" and walked over to diffuse the situation."
There was plenty of time for her to make up any excuse to leave the situation.
Re: Because it needs to be said
#563I don't want to comment on the post itself or the comments. But one thing confuses me.
Please help me to understand: Is it a custom thing in the US that legal issues like this are handled by an HR department within the company instead of the legal system?
The blog post states that she reported it to HR. Over here, if something like this came to their knowledge, they would be required to forward this to the proper authorities.
She can recount the whole incident and has at least two witnesses that confirm her story (more might show up during a police investigation). No authority (at least in this part of the world) would refuse to investigate this case and bring it in front of a court. Is this different in the US?
Re: Because it needs to be said
#564Earlier quoted context omitted.
> based on the one-sided account of one person's blog post. ... as well as corroboration by two other witnesses.
Can you point me to this please. I would like to read their corroboration of this event. It would help my opinion much more. This situation is so grey area that another perspective would help. Please link, thank you so much.
I'm on mobile, so I'll paste this comment which had both links: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6538644
I don't agree with the comment, but they're both there.
Re: Because it needs to be said
#565Re: Because it needs to be said
#566Earlier quoted context omitted.
Last time I checked there was this thing called "due process". There were two witnesses to the alleged assault and I say alleged because in the eyes of the law it is alleged until tried in a court, and you are an idiot if you don't know this. You don't even know if the assault happened and you are judging this man without a trial. You are a a goddamn imbecile. There were two witnesses, that's pretty clear cut. His bl…
Exactly. All this guilt mobbing absurd. This is someones life we are talking about. If you really care about this situation you would want this to be handled properly and not through an internet website with a bunch of strangers that have no connection this is account other than it was posted here.
There are three accounts of what happened all supporting her account of what happened. There is absolutely no guarantee that the courts are a safer, or better way for her to make her accusation. It might be the opposite. Or the police won't care.
Re: Because it needs to be said
#567Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And I somehow can't shake off the feeling that all it does is promote the victim mentality in the the author and the audience. So it's not so much that it doesn't accomplish re-introducing trauma, but that it has other negative effects? I am legitimately curious. > Also good job white knighting your pants off in this thread. /me rolls his eyes
He has a point, though. Between you, sneak, and wilkie, I can see why people are hesitant to discuss this topic openly. It's almost like the three of you are looking for a fight on this topic and ready for all comers. Like if it weren't for you three, we would all be woefully misinformed about sexual assault. There are opinions on this topic that differ from yours and in almost every one, I can find two or more of yo…
> let other people speak.
How do my comments prevent anyone else's speech?
Re: Because it needs to be said
#568Earlier quoted context omitted.
> without all informations Which more information would you need? There are two other people that corroborate her story, and Joe says he's not saying anything.
Where is this, I would like to read the other two accounts.
Re: Because it needs to be said
#569Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And I somehow can't shake off the feeling that all it does is promote the victim mentality in the the author and the audience. So it's not so much that it doesn't accomplish re-introducing trauma, but that it has other negative effects? I am legitimately curious. > Also good job white knighting your pants off in this thread. /me rolls his eyes
He has a point, though. Between you, sneak, and wilkie, I can see why people are hesitant to discuss this topic openly. It's almost like the three of you are looking for a fight on this topic and ready for all comers. Like if it weren't for you three, we would all be woefully misinformed about sexual assault. There are opinions on this topic that differ from yours and in almost every one, I can find two or more of yo…
Have you seen this thread? Not only are people misinformed about what constitutes sexual assault, but on top of that they are ignorant of what constitutes consent. It's quite honestly TERRIFYING.
Re: Because it needs to be said
#570Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hope you never get accused of rape.
Same here. But it seems that it will be unlikely, given they have shown pretty clearly they understand that a. if you are the boss, don't make advances on underlings, and b. they are unlikely to make an advance until they are sure thy have communicated clearly with the other person.
Which only asserts that these guys have never been intimate with a woman. These things develop and often it is very vague when things should progress or not. When you as male are allowed to drink alcohol from a belly and allowed to kiss the fore head and wrap your arms around the suspect, at which point should you communicate? In a blink the momentum could be lost and all is left will be uncomfortable positions (she laying on the bar, Joe half on top) and awkward silence. He was passionate, she invited him because she did not actively took measures to let him know he is not welcome. It would have taken one word. "Stop". But she, intoxicated as she were, threw all her responsibilities away and expected the male in question to regulate access to her own body.
Which brings me to my final observation: at any point in time women seem to be able to give, not give but also revoke consent. For the latter: even after actions by both parties have taken place.