10 ms·
Should we believe men too when they're victimised by women, or is this a one way deal? What if it's a man and a woman accusing each other, or two men or two wom
by camelite 9y ago
Should we believe men too when they're victimised by women, or is this a one way deal? What if it's a man and a woman accusing each other, or two men or two women. What if the dude is a historically oppressed minority?
- kevinburke 9y agoMost people that report harassment are taking a big career risk (and if they go public like Mrs. Fowler did, inviting abuse from Internet mobs) by doing so, so yes, I'm going to default to believing people that report harassment unless I can find credible evidence it didn't happen.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- dixie_land 9y agoI'm going to default to believing people that report harassment unless I can find credible evidence it didn't happen. I hope to God you don't show up for jury duties.
- odonnellryan 9y agoThere are multiple ways to interpret the phrase "I believe you."
- a_imho 9y agoPlease elaborate, I'm not a native speaker and I don't see how it can be interpreted differently in this context.
- jamesrcole 9y agoI'm a native speaker and I don't think there are multiple interpretations.
- solipsism 9y agoThe fact that the phrase "beyond a shadow of a doubt" exists should make it clear that there after different degrees of belief.
- jamesrcole 9y agoSaying "I believe you" means "I believe what you said is true". There are no interpretations that are contrary to that. Yes, you can modulate the strength of your belief but they're all beliefs that the statement is true. The great-grandparent comment (the one whose meaning this discussion was about) was implying something other than belief in the truth of the statement.
- odonnellryan 9y agoReally? US? "I believe you" can mean you believe what the person is saying WITHOUT it meaning you take it to be 100% factual. In this circumstance, it can mean you believe them (as in, trust them) but you're not "convicting" anyone of anything. But you ARE giving them the comfort of "trust."
- hueving 9y agoWhen it comes to an accusation, you can't simultaneously believe the victim and clear the defendant of guilt.
- DanBC 9y agoOf course you can. You can believe the victim while saying that the evidence doesn't meet whatever bar you set - in criminal matters that would be "beyond all reasonable doubt". It's fine for people to say "I think he did it, but the prosecution didn't prove it, and so I found him not guilty."
- odonnellryan 9y ago100% on-point, but I'd caution about bringing judgement into these matters. Believing a colleague when they come to you with ANY complaint does not mean you're going to pass judgement, or you even have to. It means listening and doing that in a way that does not discourage future complaints.
- odonnellryan 9y agoIt's just contextual. It can mean: "I believe what you're saying, so I will follow up." Or, "I believe what you're saying, so I will take immediate action on those persons."
- binocarlos 9y agoAn example (from a case I was involved as a witness in only last week). A jury must be 100% confident that the evidence presented confirms their beliefs. The judge will say "do not decide based on if you believe it happened but instead on the evidence presented". There a world where the jury can believe it happened (and deliberate for 4.5 hours) but still come out with not guilty because the physical evidence is not there. In historical sexual abuse cases (of which this was one) - the CPS (Criminal Prosecution Service here in the UK) will not take on the case if they did not think there was a good chance of winning and yet the only real evidence here was witness testimony and no forensics. It didn't matter that the jury obviously believed it happened - they did their job and realised that was only an opinion and not backed by evidence.
- kevinburke 9y agoDifferent standards should and do apply in criminal trials ("innocent until proven guilty", "beyond a reasonable doubt"), civil trials ("preponderance of the evidence"), and the workplace, where anything goes.
- camelite 9y agoShould "anything go" in the workplace? Your phrasing doesn't make it clear if that's what you believe.
- kevinburke 9y agoI am saying employment is at will (in most US tech contracts) and an employer can terminate your contract for any reason. "Anything goes" = there's no set standards of proof
- camelite 9y agoOK. Should "anything go", or is there a limit to how low the burden of proof should go?
- jamesrcole 9y agoThat is not legally the case in at least some countries.
- dixie_land 9y agoIANAL but my understanding is that employer can terminate you for no reason (as in not giving a reason). But if an employer fires you for cause and that cause is unfounded they can be sued for wrongful termination.
- kevinburke 9y agoThis handy list suggests you have a claim if you report you were harassed and your company fires you (retaliation), but not if you are fired after someone falsely accuses you of harassment. http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/do-i-have-wrongful-termination-claim-california.html http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/do-i-have-wrongful-te...
- hyperdunc 9y agoThe trust of people like yourself is definitely going to be abused by people who want to smear others.
- blackrose 9y agoAnd trusting people to have free speech is definitely going to be abused by people who want to say controversial things. And trusting people to use encryption is definitely going to be abused by criminals who want to commit crimes. And trusting people to own kitchen knives is definitely going to be abused by people who want to stab others. Yes, we can all make factually true, but totally irrelevant arguments that don't change anything.
- hyperdunc 9y agoYou're talking about the rights of individuals. A person has the right to free speech and a person has the right not to be harassed. A person does not have the right to be trusted, but can expect to be taken seriously on a claim of harassment if they have earned trust or if they provide evidence to back up the allegation.
- kevinburke 9y agoThis suggests that trust isn't or hasn't been abused by harassers at places like Uber. There, Uber HR trusted harassers when they said "I didn't do that," or they just didn't care.
- hyperdunc 9y agoIt is not up to the alleged harassers to prove they did not harass.
- zakk 9y agoGoodbye innocent until proven guilty...
- netheril96 9y agoThat is only for criminal trials. In civil trials you only need preponderance of evidence.
- zakk 9y agoYou are mistaking two different aspects. You can be declared guilty by preponderance of evidence, of course, but still you are innocent until proven guilty.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- ClassyJacket 9y agoHow on Earth can someone possibly provide evidence a crime didn't happen?
- Flenser 9y agoI'm going to default to believing people that report harassment unless I can find credible evidence it didn't happen. The UK police had to back off from a similar policy that the after high profile investigations that were dropped with no criminal charges being made. They now take complaints seriously and try to keep the confidence of the complainant but don't start off with unconditional belief from the outset whilst still proceeding, at first, on the basis that the allegation is truthful but testing the accuracy of the allegations and the evidence with an open mind.
- smt88 9y agoWe should also believe men, but that isn't a historical problem the way it is for women. As an exercise, ask a few men and women you know if they've ever been harassed or attacked at work. If they didn't report it, ask them why.
- Shanea93 9y agoAnecdotally, I'm in the process of being sexually harassed by a director at the company I work for and choosing not reporting it. I plan to leave in a couple of months, my startup is in the final stages of closing a seed round - getting in to a sexual harassment lawsuit right now is the last thing I need in terms of stress and career. The power dynamics are significantly different though, I don't feel at all in danger, I'm a 6'2 man who lifts weights in his spare time, so it's more of an annoyance than anything truly worrying. I understand that this person may go on to harass the next person who fills my role, but I simply have too much personally riding on the outcome of the present to leverage it in that way.
- ruleabidinguser 9y agoMaybe you could post a Glassdoor review in a year or two to help others out on this
- wjnc 9y agoBest interest in mind: sure you want to post this with a partially named account with more personal details in prior posts?
- intoverflow2 9y ago> more of an annoyance than anything truly worrying I'd certainly be pretty worried if someone in a position of power over me was doing anything of the sort. Even if you don't have to worry about the individual literally overpowering you (Which in itself would be a tough thing to prove you were not the aggressor if you are a muscular 6+ footer and had to push off an aggressive advance)
- HarryHirsch 9y agothat isn't a historical problem the way it is for women Any feminist will remind you that sexual harassment isn't about sex, it's about power. With more women in positions of power these days expect the number of harassment cases where men are the target to rise.
- matthewmacleod 9y agoI don’t know why you would think otherwise. Yes, if a man of any background complains of victimisation, then take those complaints in good faith and investigate them.
- xutopia 9y agoListen to victims.
- camelite 9y agoMeaningless rhetoric which skips the part where you determine who the victims actually are.
- creepydata 9y agoSexual harassment in all it's forms should be taken seriously.
- blackrose 9y ago> or is this a one way deal? FFS, dude. Men hold the vast majority of power in our society. No cards are stacked against them. No old fashioned norms are still levied on them everytime a woman speaks to them. They aren't constantly reminded by our culture to be gentlemen or look handsome or bring home the bacon or do anything they don't want to. To say "think of the men!" here is either willfully ignorant or just being a dick.
- xor1 9y ago>Men hold the vast majority of power in our society. Power isn't based on gender, it's based on wealth. Do you think abuse of power will suddenly end once the majority of wealthy individuals are women instead of men?
- blackrose 9y agoPower is enacted through multifarious means, with wealth being one of them. Wealth isn't a requisite for power. Generally in the US, positions of power are held by men, because of (or in spite of) an interconnected system of laws, norms, and a history of (generally) men telling people what to do. And those gender-based ideas enacted in laws and norms and our culture have percolated through our society to affect everyone in ways we often can't detect. The point is that yes, for these reasons and many others, we should "believe women when they report harassment in the workplace."
- xor1 9y ago>Power is enacted through multifarious means, with wealth being one of them. Wealth isn't a requisite for power Name the other sources of power in the United States in the year 2017. Whatever you can come up with, none of it is as significant as wealth. >The point is that yes, for these reasons and many others, we should "believe women when they report harassment in the workplace." You did not answer my question. Do you think abuse of power will suddenly end once the majority of wealthy individuals are women instead of men?
- 9y ago
- dang 9y agoWould you please not take HN threads on ideological tangents and into flamewars? We're trying to avoid those things here. You also crossed repeatedly into incivility in your comments, which is not cool. We ban accounts that do these things repeatedly, so please don't. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14600895 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14600895 and marked it off-topic.