371–380 of 613 posts
It seems it's better to stay away entirely from certain sensitive topics. No matter your intentions, no matter what you actually think, it just takes a bit of misunderstanding or bad faith and the whole thing explode.
> better to stay away entirely from certain sensitive topics Yeah... but the world would be a better place if we didn't have to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The original complaint claimed that he was a groper. That's sexual harassment. It's illegal. It's incredibly toxic and creepy , and people who do it are out of touch cretins who make everything worse. Citing that no one officially lodged a criminal complaint isn't a counterpoint. Most sexual assault isn't pursued. Serial creeps are plying their trade right now. But yeah, if he's associated with a brand and he's going…
> Citing that no one officially lodged a criminal complaint isn't a counterpoint. Most sexual assault isn't pursued. Serial creeps are plying their trade right now. Actually it is a counterpoint. If someone accuses me of a crime, then refuses to pursue any prosecution of that crime, and then expects me to suffer consequences for that crime, that's a gross injustice. That's why we have a justice system.
You can lose jobs, friends, and clients simply for being a jerk. There's nothing illegal about being an asshole, but plenty of people refuse to work with assholes.
There has to be room among the woke for the awakening or we never make progress. I think this is the essence of any legitimate criticism of cancel culture. The lack of nuance and the lack of room. Do I ever want to see Bill Cosby or OJ Simpson in a new role? No. Some levels of horrible are unforgivable. Cancel away. Woody Allen. Same. Louis C.K.? Maybe? Unlikely. Certainly not until he makes some kind of real effort/…
>There are a lot of Noah Bradley's in the world, do they deserve a second chance? A second chance to make art? Absolutely. A second chance to be in a position where they have any influence whatsoever over other artists and their careers? I'd have a tough time getting onboard with that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey man - be careful reading stuff alright? Probably best to just take a breather from reading stuff about yourself, it can't feel good. Humans weren't designed to be yelled at by more people than you can fit in a room.
Public apologies are the new porn and bullying people into providing them is a real addiction for some. These depressed people use "consequences" as a brief hit of superiority, allowing them to escape the reality of their own failed lives. ...and as quickly as it picks them up, it is gone again, and they then need to search for that next dose of "justice". Complexity, self-reflection, nuance, are all distractions fro…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you read the comments in this topic by him, it’s clear that the accusations do not line up with what he felt he did wrong.
The people who cut their ties with him only have his interactions from the time to go on, not what he's saying here. But I think we're going around in circles here. I'm just pushing back on the invocation of "puritanism".
Honestly, I find your comment chain here very irrelevant to the point I was making.
It's disappointing how many people say "apologies don't work". The purpose of an apology isn't to salvage your reputation, it is to help victims move forward.
> It's disappointing how many people say "apologies don't work". The purpose of an apology isn't to salvage your reputation, it is to help victims move forward. Well, if the "victims" don't move on after the apology, then the apology didn't work, did it? :-)
An apology that admits the wrong lets the victim stop doubting or blaming themselves. So the anger comes after it is acknowledged that what was done to you is wrong. In that way, anger after an apology actually means it may have worked.
What he's supposed to have done: “I was terrible to women. I preyed on them. I ceaselessly hit on them. I pressured them into sex. I got too drunk and did all manner of dumb things.” None of which is illegal. It's not even a matter for civil litigation. He was not accused of doing this as a boss in an organization. Or in a workplace context. There were apparently no criminal charges. No EEOC complaints filed.[1] No a…
There is a specific set of things for which you cannot be legally fired - "wrongful terminations" - because terminations are by default rightful. And there are a specific set of things for which you effectively must be fired if the organization doesn't want to be seen as approving of your behavior, which is what the abusive workplace stuff is about. Note that the links you provide are about laws that apply to companies, not to individuals.
Between those two extremes, there's a whole lot of stuff for which you can be fired. Reflecting badly on the company and making their customers unhappy, while breaking no laws and exposing the company to no legal risk, is an extremely common case.
It is pretty unfair that people lose their livelihoods because of their employers' whims, and it happens to a whole lot of people who have not even done anything worth apologizing for, and I think our society needs to address this problem in general.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never groped anyone.
I don't think anyone is inclined to believe one way or the other. It is a gray area and with the way you described what you did, it certainly seems plausible. You even say you were drunk and did stupid things. It is plausible that you wouldn't even remember doing it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All that happens if you voice your opinion in the opposite direction of an internet mob is you get piled on too. Anyone who has been on the internet must have experienced this more than once. Introducing some facts or measure (which is hard with twitters very tiny character limit that squashes nuance and debate) in a response is just the same thing. The internet mob is a mob and acts like a mob and its best to get ou…
You also have to blame companies/hr for being so reactive and possibly our governments for not taking action to insulate society against the impacts of internet mobs on peoples’ pursuit of happiness. The fact that 100 people on Twitter can get somebody fired just by calling them a rapist with absolutely no proof is a social/societal failure. I highly suspect ending this person’s contracts cost the companies more mone…