This world is getting so fucked up. We can't crucify people for "hitting on" or other somewhat tame behavior because we have nothing left to throw at the real offenders.<p>Conversely, people benefit on both sides of the equation; using sex to their advantage or weaponizing allegations like this.<p>Sexual assualt is REAL and should be punished. We need to focus on a balance between being human and being a predator. People are fucked up. You have rapists, liars, sociopaths and ladder climbers and guys and girls who get overwhelmed by greed, desperation or just stupidity and break their otherwise decent character. The media makes it fucking impossible to tell people apart.<p>Great example was the 500 startups thing. I am prepared to believe that there was some dodgy ass shit going on and he was being a scumbag; but it leaves a bad taste in my mouth not knowing the full extent of what happened and watching the accuser ride the publicity to raise a round.<p>This is so messy. Is this just how the game is played? Leverage on both sides used as a weapon instead of just treating humans like humans.<p>Sad to see false accusations. Sad to see real ones. Sad to see people capitalizing on this climate, and the most sad:<p>People who really really hurt (either reputation or physically) just getting killed in the crossfire on top of the horrible events.<p>This is sick.
<i>Sonya Smallets, another San Francisco employment attorney, called the Fenox case “very unusual.” Nevertheless, the threat of defamation suits can stifle women from coming forward, even if they have legitimate accusations of sexual harassment, she said.<p>“Obviously you don’t want people to be able to make up things about other people and harm their reputations,” Smallets said, “but there’s also obviously a concern that if you have women who are accusing powerful, wealthy men of sexual harassment, that a defamation lawsuit can have a chilling effect.”</i><p>This is just a ridiculous and offensive thing to say, and way to end the article, given the circumstances and evidence. It would be akin to commenting on a case with blatant evidence of harassment that "obviously there's a concern that a harassment lawsuit can have a chilling effect on office interpersonal relationships."<p>A situation where a man was blatantly lying to abuse the law and defame a competitor isn't the moment to make the "chilling effect" argument.
That's right, no one would ever abuse an online system for blacklisting VCs accused of sexual harassment...smh<p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14773434" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14773434</a>
Honestly, this doesn't surprise me; seems fairly indicative of the culture. Yes, this is an extreme case, but who hasn't seen things like leaving 1-star reviews of competitors, or frivolous complaints to consume competitors' resources?<p>This is what happens when a culture encourages people to use any opportunity to get ahead - and it's those with real claims that suffer from this crying wolf.
The problem with this whole debate that follows stories about sexual harassment is that no matter how it is being sliced, it always leads to a skewed image of reality.<p>The reality, in my eyes, would be something like this:<p>- People walk around looking more or less intelligently, but almost all have primal sexual urges that they are frequently seeking or at least thinking about to fulfill. That applies to women and men.<p>- Society is built in a way which only allows people to make subtle hints about this desire. It is unacceptable to display too much sexual desires in most contexts of public and professional life. There is an animal in everyone but it must not come out.<p>- The dynamics that play out during the process of finding a mate are complex, happen in parts unconsciously, and are the result of evolutionary biology and psychology. Meaning, everyone does things to attract a mate which he/she might not be "aware" of - and which sometimes appear extremely stupid in hindsight (Bill Clinton or Dave McClure anyone?!).<p>- There is a gender difference in the heterosexual mating process. Men impress women with power, status (often = money), display of dominance, achievements, and often make the first approach (sometimes after they think they saw a behavior from her side which correctly or wrongly suggested them that she might be interested). Women select the men who they go on a date with. This does not apply always, you can find different variations of this and also the occasional woman who takes pride in having been the one who did the approach. I also don't make a statement about whether this behavior is learned or innate, or both; but based on the current information I have I feel comfortable enough to generalize this dynamic. I suggest that one can even see this behavior in apps like Tinder where most women let a man write first after a match (sadly I don't have a scientific study about this - it is just personal observation, own experience, from talks with friends and observations of cultural norms) - therefore, I am curious about how Bumble will do on the market. If it becomes a big hit with the current concept to require women to write first after a match, what I wrote in the last sentences will prove to be wrong.<p>- If we want awareness and a change of behavior, everyone needs to learn to understand these dynamics, and needs to understand that regardless of gender, he/she also operating to some extend outside of the normal rational and reasonable thought procedure.
Wow. Hill reportedly posted the false allegations on Hatena from his actual Comcast IP address. That was just so stupid. Not even using a bloody VPN service, let alone Tor.
How can an <i>anonymous</i> online accusation <i>without any evidence</i> even get considered a thing? Are we back to 16th century witch-hunts?<p>Whoever gives publicity to accusations like this for the clicks, without checking their sources at all, should rightfully be persecuted for defamation.
For anyone curious, I hunted down an archive of what appears to have been the original (Japanese, now deleted) blog post:<p><a href="http://archive.fo/6MU5K" rel="nofollow">http://archive.fo/6MU5K</a>
What's interesting is that seeking a court order to unveil the IP of an anonymous accuser can be seen as attempting to uncover the identity of a whistle blower and would leave the person trying to defend himself in hot water in certain companies. This is a minefield.
For those curious, here is the accused rival's about page - <a href="http://btrax.com/en/about-us/" rel="nofollow">http://btrax.com/en/about-us/</a>
Profiteers always exist, seeking for loopholes and sneaky tactics to attain their goals.
The system should punish offenders and protect victims, but MUST ensure that those who sneakily use that as a tool to achieve other goals MUST be punished 10x harsher.
Ugh, now I am starting to understand those men that are dropping out of society - one such a claim and they are done; it must be dire if they decided it's better to minimize risk and segregate from society... We all are probably going to wear mini cameras/mics and record every single moment of our lives for protection, and won't trust a single human being. Scary...
If the burden of proof is on the prosecution then, similarly, why isn't the burden on the victim to prove they were actually sexually harrassed? This isn't victim-<i>BLAMING</i>. This is simply an accuser having to prove their case and <i>there is nothing wrong with that</i>.
I would simply put a law in place that if it can be <i>proven</i> that the sexual harassment accusation is completely fabricated, then the accuser must serve the exact jail time that a person would serve who acted out all the accusations. That would stop all the shenanigans instantly.
> Nevertheless, the threat of defamation suits can stifle women from coming forward, even if they have legitimate accusations of sexual harassment, she said.<p>The accused must usually be given the benefit of doubt in cases of anonymous allegations without any corroborating evidence. But cases like these should not be used to cast doubt on the motive/credibility of women brave enough to risk their identity and careers to come out.