Wall Street Rule for the #MeToo Era: Avoid Women at All Cost • Hacker News Board

Re: Wall Street Rule for the #MeToo Era: Avoid Women at All Cost

#111

Post by YorkshireSeason » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 5:49 PM UTC

danesparza wrote: post #61

YorkshireSeason wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't these men just learn Look what you have not said: "Why can't these women just learn ..." Somewhow you only seem to require men to do things? Are you arguing that it's acceptable for women falsely to accuse men? Ask yourself: what have you done to ensure that women not falsely accuse men? Have you had "the talk" with your daughters about false accusations?

The men are in a position of power. Side note: How many women have been accused of sexual harassment?

So you have not asked your daughter to avoid falsely accusing others. Why? Does the law say, "false accusations are acceptable if the false accuser is in not in a position of power"?

In my experience, the "position of power" reply is a canned response that is being used to deflect a question. It is in my experience never accompanied by a substantial understanding of what power actually means, and of an awareness of the long tradition of difficulties of defining the concept of power.

In order to help you get away from this naive position, let me invite you to consider reflecting on the fact that the ability falsely to accuse others of heinous crimes and get away with it might be a power in itself. (Cf how the Khashoggi murderes are likely to get away with it -- would you or I get away with murder?)

Re: Wall Street Rule for the #MeToo Era: Avoid Women at All Cost

#112

Post by neaden » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 5:49 PM UTC

gsich wrote: post #64

neaden wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, can you show me some of these well documented instances? The Duke Lacross case gets brought up a lot, but all those guys were exonerated and as far as I'm aware doing fine. Kavanaugh just got appointed to the Supreme Court and Lois C.K is popping up to do comedy sets, so I'm curious to see these many well documented cases you refer to.

A case in Germany: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B6rg_Kachelmann Alice Schwarzer (german feminist) accused him even after he was found not guilty. Had to pay a fine because of that. Again Germany: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gina-Lisa_Lohfink The matress stuff: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia_University_rape_contr... But we know of those only because they were public figures or have been carried out in…

From your wikipedia link on the Columbia case. "Three other complaints have been alleged against Nungesser: a second woman accused him of emotional abuse and nonconsensual sex during a months-long relationship, a third student accused him of non-consensually kissing her and touching her at a party, and a fourth accuser emerged in early 2015, a fourth-year male student who said Nungesser sexually assaulted him after an emotional conversation." Oh yeah, this guy sounds like a real peach whose life was turned upside down by a false accusation.

Also people here really seem to be assuming any case where someone is found not guilty means the accusation was false, which is not how it works. Just ask OJ Simpson.

Re: Wall Street Rule for the #MeToo Era: Avoid Women at All Cost

#113

Post by CiPHPerCoder » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 5:49 PM UTC

YorkshireSeason wrote: post #81

danesparza wrote: post #23

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.

> A most prominent example are radical feminists like Dworkin who essentially say that all heterosexual intercourse is rape.

That's a stupid argument. Can we please not equivocate exceptionally dumb arguments with serious ones?

(Also, while we basically live in a post-satire society, I still like to call Poe's Law on exceptionally dumb arguments.)

Re: Wall Street Rule for the #MeToo Era: Avoid Women at All Cost

#114

Post by pmastela » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 5:49 PM UTC

falcolas wrote: post #2

Personal opinion - the lack of a "innocent until proven guilty" judicial system when it comes to sexual harassment claims is what has caused much of the fear of women. Colleges, businesses, and online communities almost always simply believe the victim, and even if a trial should occur and the accused is vindicated, the accused has already been fired, expelled, or crucified by public opinion. The records of the accus…

> Colleges, businesses, and online communities almost always simply believe the victim, and even if a trial should occur and the accused is vindicated, the accused has already been fired, expelled, or crucified by public opinion.

Colleges don't almost always simply believe the victim. It's quite the opposite: “Alarmingly, many universities are compounding this trauma by failing to support survivors and, in some cases, actively seeking to silence them.” [1]

Businesses don't almost always simply believe the victim. In fact, "often employees fear that human resources will help the company lash out at the accuser rather than punish the accused." [2]

Online communities don't almost always simply believe the victim. Take Twitter for example and how a chunk of that online community turned against Christine Blasey Ford. [3]

In the last case involving the accuser and the accused, the accuser had to move several times, hired her own private security detail, and continued to receive death threats [4], all the while the accused got the promotion of a lifetime. Hardly the case of — as you put it — "the accused is vindicated, the accused has already been fired, expelled, or crucified by public opinion."

I know that what you said is personal opinion, but as far as the data supporting that opinion, I just didn't find it.

1: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/feb/27/unive... 2: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/12/business/sexual-harassmen... 3: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/conservative-rea... 4: https://www.npr.org/2018/11/08/665407589/kavanaugh-accuser-c...

Re: Wall Street Rule for the #MeToo Era: Avoid Women at All Cost

#115

Post by phicoh » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 5:51 PM UTC

snackbugs wrote: post #75

phicoh wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a lawyer and not playing one here. In any case, it is my understanding that 'innocent until proven guilty' is part of criminal law. In other kinds of law the burden of proof is lower. Of course these claims have to be investigated carefully. But I think it is wrong to try to copy elements of criminal procedures to civil matters. It is important to strike a sensible balance. We cannot have a situation where wo…

Testimony of lived experiences is evidence. It's enough to convict. When you serve jury duty and the case involves domestic violence, you are explicitly reminded of this because most people will assume it is not. Still, we end up with cases like Brock Turner where he does get convicted not with the victim's testimony but a mountain of corroborating evidence and national media scrutiny. And then receives what is essen…

Of course judicial systems vary with countries, but I'm not aware of a jurisdiction where only the word of the victim is enough to convict somebody (who denies the act).

But maybe there are such places.

Re: Wall Street Rule for the #MeToo Era: Avoid Women at All Cost

#116

Post by songshu » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 5:51 PM UTC

ams6110 wrote: post #17

danesparza wrote: post #5

So as a father of two daughters in their 20's, this makes me sad. Instead of attempting to see women as equals and moving to bridge the gap -- the best solution Wall Street can come up with is to further isolate themselves? Why can't these men just learn to treat women like the humans they are?

Men treating women like humans do (i.e. being attracted to the opposite sex, etc.) is what is now a problem.

The problem is people treating women worse than they treat men. There's sexism at play when people consider which approaches are appropriate when they are attracted to someone.

Re: Wall Street Rule for the #MeToo Era: Avoid Women at All Cost

#117

Post by gnicholas » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 5:51 PM UTC

stevenwoo wrote: post #84

falcolas wrote: post #2

Personal opinion - the lack of a "innocent until proven guilty" judicial system when it comes to sexual harassment claims is what has caused much of the fear of women. Colleges, businesses, and online communities almost always simply believe the victim, and even if a trial should occur and the accused is vindicated, the accused has already been fired, expelled, or crucified by public opinion. The records of the accus…

There's a weird double standard in crime in the USA (probably elsewhere), the conviction rate is greater than 85-90 percent for most crimes except sexual assault/rape, where it's closer to 50%, and the lack of whatever you want to call it leads to less people reporting rape/sexual assault, less investigation, all the way to incarceration, so people might feel that there is an inherent bias in results of the criminal…

This is probably because for most crimes, it suffices to establish that (1) the act of the crime occurred and (2) the defendant is the one who carried out this act.

In many types of sex crime cases, the prosecution must also prove that (3) the behavior engaged in by the parties was not consensual.

People do not generally consensually enagege in battery, theft, or murder. People consensually engage in sexual activities all the time. Also, sexual activities often have no third-party witnesses, which makes proof more difficult.

Re: Wall Street Rule for the #MeToo Era: Avoid Women at All Cost

#118

Post by Dirlewanger » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 5:52 PM UTC

asianthrowaway wrote: post #68

I always wondered, why don't women get very harsh sentences if they get caught making up false rape allegations? I think that would discourage that sort of behavior and sort of balance things out.

Deeply-engrained cultural/societal biases that women can do no harm. You can see it in the trickle of sexual assault cases involving a woman teacher/underage male student; the women often get a relative wrist-slap of days in prison, if that. And let's not even get started on how routinely and holistically fucked men get in family/divorce courts.

You don't hear about these problems talked about though, simply because men are the affected parties.

Re: Wall Street Rule for the #MeToo Era: Avoid Women at All Cost

#119

Post by glbrew » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 5:53 PM UTC

neaden wrote: post #105

glbrew wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not defending their gender policies per se but I am increasingly jealous of societies that actually have a culture other than neoliberalism. Every society has its faults but I'm seriously wondering if ours may be much greater than those we love to attack (like the middle east). At least they have large cohesive families they live close to, share meals with, enjoy traditions with. It seems like most Americans don'…

Yeah, here in America I can't go with my family to a nice public stoning of an adulterous woman. I just have to settle for my wife being allowed to drive on her own and have meaningful rights.

Which is why I specifically said I wasn't defending a specific country's gender policies. And yeah, here in America where we have an economic system that guarantees mass extinction of life, destruction of the biosphere, mass exploitation of humans you can't see in your daily life. Clearly your culture has it all figured out!

Re: Wall Street Rule for the #MeToo Era: Avoid Women at All Cost

#120

Post by closeparen » Mon, Dec 03, 2018, 5:54 PM UTC

falcolas wrote: post #2

Personal opinion - the lack of a "innocent until proven guilty" judicial system when it comes to sexual harassment claims is what has caused much of the fear of women. Colleges, businesses, and online communities almost always simply believe the victim, and even if a trial should occur and the accused is vindicated, the accused has already been fired, expelled, or crucified by public opinion. The records of the accus…

An employer does not need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you missed your target, mouthed off to your boss, or any number of firing offenses. Association is voluntary, on both sides. Unions sometimes win a quasi-judicial system for firing, which this forum usually bemoans as making it too hard to eliminate low performers. With a judicial procedure only for sexual harassment, companies could always fire you “for” something else.