11–20 of 50 posts
this is absurd. these people are reactionaries. they should know that false accusations almost never happen and if they act in good faith they'll be fine. instead they're going to professionally penalize women. classic.
Ugh. This is predictable in the age of guilty til proven innocent isn't it? When an accusation is enough to tank a career then yes people are going to feel the need to protect themselves by removing any possibility of that happening. And rather than trying to approach the problem constructively, the article takes a strong tone throughout that puts the blame on men: > That means the many, many women in this world who…
An unsubstantiated accusation is not enough to tank a career. A cross-correlated one, from multiple independent reports is another story. As is one that stands up to cross-examination and scrutiny. Reporting harassment by your manager is just as likely, if not moreso to shit on your career, as it is on theirs. They have all the power in this relationship, and every opportunity to retaliate if you aren't believed.
TFA's only suggestion for a cause is because these men are "unable to control themselves while talking to a woman in the conference room." Do you believe the problem is really that 60% of men are unable to control themselves?
There's a problem here, a real problem, but perpetuating ideas such as this really isn't a good way to start solving that problem.
I realize this is a bad situation here, but this is an incredibly uncharitable take. Yes, that is probably true for some men, but others are probably worried about things looking bad even if nothing happens, or about false accusations.
this is absurd. these people are reactionaries. they should know that false accusations almost never happen and if they act in good faith they'll be fine. instead they're going to professionally penalize women. classic.
For something as serious as rape it's 2% to 10%, for something less serious it would likely be higher.
this is absurd. these people are reactionaries. they should know that false accusations almost never happen and if they act in good faith they'll be fine. instead they're going to professionally penalize women. classic.
It doesn't need to be a false accusation. It just needs the accuser has lack of objectivity and a high level of paranoia. Very common in 50% of the population.
Just to be clear here, you're asserting that lack of objectivity and paranoia are particularly common in women? If so, that's...really really sexist.
> That means the many, many women in this world who are just trying to do their jobs and make progress in their careers are being stymied by men who are terrified of being, I dunno, unable to control themselves while talking to a woman in the conference room. I realize this is a bad situation here, but this is an incredibly uncharitable take. Yes, that is probably true for some men, but others are probably worried ab…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't need to be a false accusation. It just needs the accuser has lack of objectivity and a high level of paranoia. Very common in 50% of the population.
> Very common in 50% of the population. Just to be clear here, you're asserting that lack of objectivity and paranoia are particularly common in women? If so, that's...really really sexist.
Ugh. This is predictable in the age of guilty til proven innocent isn't it? When an accusation is enough to tank a career then yes people are going to feel the need to protect themselves by removing any possibility of that happening. And rather than trying to approach the problem constructively, the article takes a strong tone throughout that puts the blame on men: > That means the many, many women in this world who…
An unsubstantiated accusation is not enough to tank a career. A cross-correlated one, from multiple independent reports is another story. As is one that stands up to cross-examination and scrutiny. Reporting harassment by your manager is just as likely, if not moreso to shit on your career, as it is on theirs. They have all the power in this relationship, and every opportunity to retaliate if you aren't believed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Very common in 50% of the population. Just to be clear here, you're asserting that lack of objectivity and paranoia are particularly common in women? If so, that's...really really sexist.
Will it still be sexist if I can demonstrate it?
> That means the many, many women in this world who are just trying to do their jobs and make progress in their careers are being stymied by men who are terrified of being, I dunno, unable to control themselves while talking to a woman in the conference room. I realize this is a bad situation here, but this is an incredibly uncharitable take. Yes, that is probably true for some men, but others are probably worried ab…
Calling it merely "uncharitable" and not "overtly bad faith" is a very charitable interpretation on your part. :)