Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

nypost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 535 posts

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#351

Post by throwaway5674 »

grapehut wrote: post #72

These stories leave a bad taste in my mouth. It hasn't yet gone to court, so the guys allegations could be really be anything from the God's honest truth all the way to a complete fabrication. Yet there is a huge amount of irreparable damage by public stories like this. I was once personally on the receiving end of a complete false sexual harassment allegation from a coworker almost at random (someone I had almost no…

A throwaway account...

I am a male who was sexually assaulted by another male. Strictly speaking I was raped, but I prefer not to use that term because of the emotive nature of it.

There is not much you've said I disagree with, but I do want to show that this goes both ways. I have never made a public accusation about the individual involved in my case because I do not have irrefutable evidence that it wasn't consentual. If I was in the jury of his court case I would find him innocent, so how could I reasonably go accuse him of anything?

Really I think we need to have two serious conversations as a society:-

* Individuals should not be able to weaponise sexual assult/harassment claims in public to the extent they do now. If anything, stories like yours make it even more difficult for legitimate victims to tell their story because the idea of destroying the life based off an accusation I cannot prove is really frightening to me. I would like someone to sit him down, privately, and educate him on consent (leading onto my next point) and to never ever do that to another individual again. That isn't an option though, it is a life destroying public circus or nothing.

* Consent, consent, consent. From as early an age we're willing to give children sex education, we should teach them about consent. Certainly in my time at school I was not once taught the legal definitions or importance of it.

Edit: Minor typos

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#352

Post by djtriptych »

notrealme1234 wrote: post #260
djtriptych wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was my question too. Pretty sure banks just never do background checks just to hold accounts.

Hold account sure, debit card, easy. Credit cards, loans or mortgage good luck getting. Actually murder or financial crimes, and many other types of crime is tolerable by banks

yeah not credit cards either. What did you mean when you said you lost your banks?

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#353

Post by default_png »

gggggg5 wrote: post #342
notrealme1234 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't want to post from my main account to avoid any references and trails. It goes beyond just sexual harassment at work. I was accused by my ex wife. Even before any trials or anything: I lost my job, banks, housing and pretty much anything that requires a background check. I fought this for a year, and everything was dropped, because her friend came as witnesses and explained how she and my ex wife planned on set…

How would background check services get hold of this information before trial? Were you arrested? I'm sorry, but based on my experience with these systems, this sounds like a fake story. Even the detail about your bank accounts being closed doesn't add up at all.

Look at the whole Adam Savage thing from a few years ago, All the court documents have the plaintiffs claims attached to them..

It adds up..

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#354

Post by default_png »

Fire-Dragon-DoL wrote: post #153
notrealme1234 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't want to post from my main account to avoid any references and trails. It goes beyond just sexual harassment at work. I was accused by my ex wife. Even before any trials or anything: I lost my job, banks, housing and pretty much anything that requires a background check. I fought this for a year, and everything was dropped, because her friend came as witnesses and explained how she and my ex wife planned on set…

Couldn't you sue for damage after that? It seems like you got a great damage and it was proven in court that it's been caused by a lie

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_proof

In the context of contract law, debt collection and civil litigation, the term judgment proof is commonly used to refer to defendants or potential defendants who are financially insolvent, or whose income and assets cannot be obtained in satisfaction of a judgment.[1]

Being "judgment proof" is not a defense to a lawsuit. If sued, the defendant cannot claim being "judgment proof" as an affirmative defense. The term "judgment proof" instead refers to the inability of the judgment holder to obtain satisfaction of the judgment.[1]

If a plaintiff were to secure a legal judgment against an insolvent defendant, the defendant's lack of funds would make the satisfaction of that judgment difficult, if not impossible, to secure.[2]

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#355

Post by fidgewidge »

jxf wrote: post #277
ShredKazoo wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>More curious is the very direct "your team is too male" and the encouragement to fire someone. My friend who still lives in the Valley says this kind of sentiment is incredibly common there nowadays, e.g. advertising an open position and having discussions internally that a man won't be hired for the role. It's pretty surprising to me, because statistics show that most major careers have a gender imbalance in one di…

> My friend who still lives in the Valley says this kind of sentiment is incredibly common there nowadays, e.g. advertising an open position and having discussions internally that a man won't be hired for the role. Your friend (and your friend's HR organization) should be aware that this is extremely illegal.

It's not actually illegal. For it to be actually illegal, governments would have to enforce the laws but they don't. Left wing governments can't get rid of the laws but they can easily appoint woke allies to enforcement positions, to ensure the law is only enforced in one direction.

I've been in a company all hands, which was broadcast to the whole multi-office company via video link, where the CEO himself announced that the next person to fill a very senior executive role had to be a woman and it would remain empty for as long as it took to do that. Did he care that he just admitted the company would break the law, on video? No because it's not illegal, it's outright encouraged.

Fundamentally, you cannot have left wing people in charge of enforcing equality rules, whether it be legislation or company policies. They point blank will not do it because they think that handing women or racial minorities unique powers is the most morally virtuous thing they can do, and that the system they're tasked with enforcing is immoral.

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#356

Post by fidgewidge »

bbojan wrote: post #290
vkou wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just asking questions, here, but if, hypothetically he actually did do it, and they did tell him, do you think he have been honest with you about it? It's entirely possible that everyone involved knows what's going on, and he's just trying to save face. People do that sometimes, after they misbehave.

So facing your accuser is not a thing anymore?

Nope. I had that happen to me at least twice. If you get accused of something unwoke then the accusers identities are always protected, and if the accusation is proven to be false, nothing ever happens. It's a part of how the woke take over institutions.

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#357

Post by lynx23 »

peaky_blinder wrote: post #300
ShredKazoo wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I posted these links elsewhere in the thread, but I'll post them again. Pretty much every job has a gender imbalance to some degree or another. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/E... https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/data/software-deve...

Gender imbalance on it's own doesn't say everything. You should actually talk with women in STEM. Many of them shared their horrible experiences so far.

Source?

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#358

Post by bluecalm »

defrost wrote: post #179
koonsolo wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> STEM is 100% historically discriminatory to women So that women prefer to pick other fields is STEM's fault?

[flagged]

Or you know, "the classes" have nothing to do with real life performance as per usual in our school/academia world.

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#359

Post by largepeepee »

qikInNdOutReply wrote: post #335
machina_ex_deus wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real issue is that people stopped caring about whatever the justice system is going to decide. There's a new religion of social justice, and this religion is harsher than even the old religions. The old religions you were at least judged by an omnipotent being who could see the whole picture. This new woke religion have you judged by a dumb mob. Everyone's playing the judge and everyone's responsible to punishing…

Its a synthetic religion, alright, but it wouldnt have spread that much, if people were happy with the old religions. At the core is the same mechanism working in other religions. Get the sexual different to provide matrimonial contract security (aka a proto law version), which now is replaced with a provide social security. I suspect, this is one of the reasons of record numbers of men dropping out of working societ…

I am far more afraid of this synthetic religion.

Old religions were already on the decline for decades as information became mainstream.

Once the initial purpose was done, this lynch mob religion seems to be have continuted with malicious intent of stepping on others without the need for reason, just a target is enough, no need for any process.

At least old religions had the excuse of being ignorant in ancient times, what does the current one have?

Immature bloodlust for anyone considered "others".

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#360

Post by marvin »

sokoloff wrote: post #268
HideousKojima wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Billy Graham/Mike Pence rule is your best bet: don't let yourself be in any situation where a false accusation could arise. Of course you'll be accused of being a sexist/misogynist/whatever instead but that's easier to ignore or overcome than false accusations of sexual harassment.

Hard disagree. If I decide I can have a closed-door 1:1 or a lunch 1:1 with some of my direct reports but not with any that are female, I’m inherently discriminating against them. I’d way rather treat all employees fairly and fade a <1% chance of a false accusation than to treat employees unequally and cut that chance in half.

That’s game theory for you. It pushes the world to shitty equilibriums like this one.
Post reply on HN