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

411–420 of 535 posts

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

#411

Post by atchoo »

throwaway5674 wrote: post #351
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 consent…

I am very sorry to hear that. Both false accusations and becoming an unprovable victim are terrifying.

I don't see how this all doesn't end with near total personal surveillance of one's life - audio & video.

Will culture change to accept everyone wearing body-cameras? We've made that step for law enforcement. Will there be next step? I wonder if those in charge of children will be next - teachers, priests, scout leaders etc. Healthcare workers? Politicians? And finally, everyone.

I can imagine encrypted systems that only give access to recordings in response to court orders. I can imagine a lot of people would opt-in without coercion just for self-preservation.

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

#412

Post by sokoloff »

bratbag wrote: post #281
sokoloff wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

At what percentage risk would you change your mind on that?

Not sure. Probably 5% or so, at which point I’d pass on a leadership role rather than discriminating against some employees.

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

#413

Post by vkou »

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?

Oh, it's a still thing, it usually happens when you submit a complaint against your boss to HR, are assured that it will be confidential, and next thing you know, your boss is retaliating against you, because of course the first thing HR does is to go to him, and the first thing he does is to hit you back.

Happens all the time, FAANG firms are constantly getting in trouble for it.

One difference between a courtroom and a workroom, is that a boss can often ruin his accuser's life in the latter. The justice system works because it treats all people as equal. In the workplace, you are not the equal of your manager.

Fortunately, you can always escalate your complaint into a courtroom. Unfortunately, proving retaliation is next to impossible.

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

#414

Post by roarcher »

GauntletWizard wrote: post #406
roarcher wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is there any law to protect personality rights in the US? Not really. Ever see those "Florida Man" memes? The reason that's a thing isn't because people in Florida are particularly crazy. It's because public records are exceptionally easy to access in Florida, and those include police reports. And anything that's public record is fair game for the media. In some states (I believe Georgia is one), there are regular…

Those places are far healthier in terms of trust, because if you fuck up and end up in the drunk tank, everyone knows the sordid details. Everyone takes a piss at your dumb mugshot and moves on. In the societies where those records are hidden, you never know what skeletons someone has in their closet.

I'm talking about arrests, not convictions. You are aware that it's possible to be arrested for a crime you didn't commit, yes? And for far more reputation-destroying things than landing in a drunk tank for a night? How would you like for everyone to "know" about the skeletons in your closet that don't actually exist?

Also, if you have any evidence whatsoever that "those places are far healthier in terms of trust", I'd be keen to see it.

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

#415

Post by hdjjhhvvhga »

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…

> I'm still a bit jaded that there are absolutely zero repercussions of making false claims.

Well, you should be. The reputation of the other party should be completely destroyed. How can you attempt to break someone's life and just get away with that as if nothing happened?

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

#416

Post by noobermin »

lambdasquirrel wrote: post #147
shycha20 wrote: post #60

In all honesty, if these things had happened to me, I would've kept quiet since most people won't believe a 20-something male. I was in high school when two of the girls (who were considered hot in our class) grouped me and rubbed their breasts against my back. When I told one of the lady teachers about the issue, she thought I was crazy and making things up.

I’ve had similar issues, getting people to believe that I’ve been continuing to deal with stalking / harassment issues in dance. So I get you ;). I mean in dance, you hear about higher-level male dancers getting unwanted attention despite being in long-term monogamous relationships. Maybe in a hundred years, we’ll realize that people are people, and will weaponize / abuse sexuality according to their role / gender.

> Maybe in a hundred years, we’ll realize that people are people, and will weaponize / abuse sexuality according to their role / gender.

What does this mean exactly? That you hope that in a hundred years people will still abuse each other sexually but due to a social role based view of gender?

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

#417

Post by PedroBatista »

caminante wrote: post #86
kodah wrote: post #18

Probably worth noting this story was first published by the New York Post. Take that for what you will. That said, this is a pretty wild turn of events. From the initial and continued sexual harassment/assault to the racism, and subsequent retaliation. More curious is the very direct "your team is too male" and the encouragement to fire someone. I've heard this hinted at before, but never said out loud for obvious re…

> Probably worth noting this story was first published by the New York Post. Take that for what you will. Instead of an ad hominem dogwhistle, please describe how the paper's political leanings could bias its reporting here. At face value, it's workplace sexual assault allegations with a power imbalance.

The OP said previously he wasn’t talking about political leanings.

I’ll would add he was referring to the positioning of paper’s history of being more “low street”, sensationalist with lower journalistic standards as opposed to the high standards gold standard harbinger of Truth publications like the NYT. The reason this description looks so out of place now, it’s because the others suck so much and the Post continues being the Post.

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

#418

Post by koonsolo »

defrost wrote: post #390
koonsolo wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You claim that STEM discriminates women today because of something that happened in 1890. I would like to see some evidence of that related to today, not something from 1890. And not your empty statement of "what was once a pattern still persists to a lesser degree". Maybe here is something you should read, which refers to the state as it is today : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-equality_paradox#:~:tex... .

> You claim that STEM discriminates women today because of something that happened in 1890. No. You claim that I made that claim. I made no assertation of causal linkage, I merely pointed out a historic fact about the roots of modern education in the UK and US.

Your words:

> and what was once a pattern still persists to a lesser degree.

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

#419

Post by super256 »

jb1991 wrote: post #400
pb7 wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. It added important context.

[flagged]

I hope someone will make a study about a possible correlation of hair styles and borderline personality disorder. Coincidentally, the only girl who ever sexually harassed me also had blue hair and BPD.

Happened in a psych ward, so escalating that issue was fortunately very easy and handled professionally.

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

#420

Post by defrost »

koonsolo wrote: post #418
defrost wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You claim that STEM discriminates women today because of something that happened in 1890. No. You claim that I made that claim. I made no assertation of causal linkage, I merely pointed out a historic fact about the roots of modern education in the UK and US.

Your words: > and what was once a pattern still persists to a lesser degree.

. . . and you read that as evidence of a causal relationship then?

And you'd like me to defend something that you see there?

This is your thing is it, framing what others say and then demanding they defend your reading?

Post reply on HN