4 ms·

> He also brings up that drinks were involved, but practically every company/vc sponsored event in the valley has alcohol involved So... he's not lying? > Tha

> He also brings up that drinks were involved, but practically every company/vc sponsored event in the valley has alcohol involved So... he's not lying? > That doesn't make it okay to proposition an attendee you talked to about an open job position afterwards over FACEBOOK and bring up said job as part of your come-on. I mean this is literally the textbook definition of sexual harassment. Everyone knows that, including the one who did it (at least, now he does). > McClure of course doesn't bring up this level of detail about all the other instances where he sexually harassed women, probably because those instances were in even more formal settings and make him look like an even bigger creep. As evidenced by him calling himself a creep and that being the title of his post. > What is truly misanthropic are apologists like yourself who give guys like this a pass Did I give him a pass? No. Did I say that what he did wasn't horrible? No. Isn't it misanthropic to immediately assume those things about me when I hadn't given you even the slightest suggestion on what I thought of his behavior before this very reply, where I'm condemning it? Yes, it is misanthropic. You just want to think the worst of everyone, and It. Is. Awful. > what a good guy he is; and did you know that funded some LGBT initiative! You know? If I were like you, I could easily point out how this poor phrasing can be construed as homophobic, but I won't resort to that. Please. > if you're one of them, you should be outraged. I'm gay, and that I see the failings of the opposing side doesn't mean that I think the harassers aren't appalling. > Assholes like McClure, and yes he is a total asshole -- that's his whole shtick after all -- poisons the well for us all. There are many different types of assholes, the ones like McClure aren't the only ones "poisoning the well." > Apologies, no matter how sincere, don't make up for the years of anxiety, therapy, etc. that stuff like this can cause. Case in point. > Other posters agree with my read on his apology. This was a weird and non-sequitur opener, btw. Were you going for an appeal to popularity or something? For what it's worth, I thoroughly disagree with your read on his apology. --- BTW, none of this answered my question.

ithinkinstereo 9y ago
I'd rather not turn this into a pedantic argument where we parse every word, sentence, and phrase. But I'll respond because I think we prob agree more than disagree and trust that you have good intentions and want a dialogue. > So... he's not lying? Yes, but my argument is that's besides the point; it's an irrelevant detail entirely to whether or not his actions were totally inexcusable. > Everyone knows that, including the one who did it (at least, now he does). Yes, which is why it's completely indefensible. > As evidenced by him calling himself a creep and that being the title of his post. Agreed, McClure is a big creep, but him admitting it doesn't buy him many brownie points in my book. He's admitting it because not doing so will make things even worse for him. He really has no choice in this regards. I'd like to believe he is genuinely sincere, but given his own admitted history of this type of behavior, and awareness of his own actions (which notably did not prevent him from curtailing his creepiness), my default is he is only trying to save face until proven otherwise. > Isn't it misanthropic to immediately assume those things about me when I hadn't given you even the slightest suggestion on what I thought of his behavior before this very reply, where I'm condemning it? Yes, it is misanthropic. You just want to think the worst of everyone, and It. Is. Awful. Pot meets kettle. What you are accusing me of doing, is what you are doing yourself to me, no? Like you, I don't want to think the worst of everyone, because that's not a very fun world to live in. On the contrary, and like I've said repeatedly, I think McClure is the exception rather than the norm. The majority of men in SV and elsewhere don't behave like him and are not serial sexual harassers. > You know? If I were like you, I could easily point out how this poor phrasing can be construed as homophobic, but I won't resort to that. Please. I brought up the LGBT comment, because people are using 500 Startups's historical support of women, POC, and LGBT initiatives to support McClure. I'm pointing out how glib that line of defense is; that it is actually irrelevant; and makes his behavior look all the worse, especially because his actions are so textbook creepy -- not something you would expect from someone who sincerely believes in enfranchising those who have been historically marginalized. > I'm gay, and the huge amount of false or exaggerated accusations is one of the many reasons I'm glad I am. And (because I know you're going to try to pull this thread), I'm not saying that the accusations against McClure were unfunded; he clearly admitted his blame. That's great, and I'm a person of color, but that's irrelevant. His behavior is objectively shitty and must be called out if we want to progress to a better, more equal and civilized society. This is a legitimate issue in our society; I don't think you can go too overboard calling out this type of predatory behavior. It's a real issue with very real consequences for those who are victim to it. Also, you mention "huge amount of false or exaggerated accusations", but by your own admission, and by McClure himself, all these accusations of him being a serial creep are true. So not false, and not exaggerated. > There are many different types of assholes, the ones like McClure aren't the only ones "poisoning the well." Here is where I disagree with you. There might be more more poisonous apples, but McClure is a real scumbag just by looking at what we know so far: 1) Serial history of this type of behavior 2) Self-awareness that his behavior is bad. 3) Admission that his intent was to take advantage of others. 4) All his accusers are women of color (according to Sarah) > Case in point. I don't know what you're trying to imply here. > This was a weird and non-sequitur opener, btw. Were you going for an appeal to popularity or something? For what it's worth, I thoroughly disagree with your read on his apology. Huh? You made the claim that my view was off-base and misanthropic. I disagree and cite similar views from others to back that point. > BTW, none of this answered my question. Let me be more clear then, he tried to delegitimize the harassment by bringing up irrelevant details (there were drinks involved, it was a small group of people, that he thought it was a social event, etc.), that are designed to water down the accusations, or at the least, are designed to give him some sort of cover to "explain" his terrible behavior.
- julianmarq 9y ago
  > I'd rather not turn this into a pedantic argument where we parse every word, sentence, and phrase. But I'll respond because I think we prob agree more than disagree and trust that you have good intentions and want a dialogue. I have no interest in a dialogue with you. First, I only really wanted you to clarify the "deligitimizes" claim, but I now know that that isn't going to happen. Second, you called me an "apologist of sexual harassers", any possibility of rational dialogue died at that point, you knew that, and your trying to downplay it now with your poor attempt at presenting yourself as rational and open to discussion isn't changing that. Hell, you'd probably have been better off owning up to the baseless accusation. So, I'm mostly going to ignore this reply, except for the three most glaringly misguided claims: > What you are accusing me of doing, is what you are doing yourself to me, no? I didn't accuse you of being an "apologist of sexual harassers" so... no. > I don't think you can go too overboard calling out this type of predatory behavior You know that "having them killed" would fit this statement, right? You really ought to phrase yourself better or drop the misanthropy, people aren't as terrible or as incorregible as you think they are. > Also, you mention "huge amount of false or exaggerated accusations", but by your own admission, and by McClure himself, all these accusations of him being a serial creep are true. So not false, and not exaggerated. So, because the ones about McClure were true, all of them are true. Again, don't you see how that could be easily turned against you? If someone tomorrow were to accuse you of harassment, you can't possibly defend yourself without displaying some hypocrisy regarding these statements.

ithinkinstereo 9y ago

I'd rather not turn this into a pedantic argument where we parse every word, sentence, and phrase. But I'll respond because I think we prob agree more than disagree and trust that you have good intentions and want a dialogue. > So... he's not lying? Yes, but my argument is that's besides the point; it's an irrelevant detail entirely to whether or not his actions were totally inexcusable. > Everyone knows that, including the one who did it (at least, now he does). Yes, which is why it's completely indefensible. > As evidenced by him calling himself a creep and that being the title of his post. Agreed, McClure is a big creep, but him admitting it doesn't buy him many brownie points in my book. He's admitting it because not doing so will make things even worse for him. He really has no choice in this regards. I'd like to believe he is genuinely sincere, but given his own admitted history of this type of behavior, and awareness of his own actions (which notably did not prevent him from curtailing his creepiness), my default is he is only trying to save face until proven otherwise. > Isn't it misanthropic to immediately assume those things about me when I hadn't given you even the slightest suggestion on what I thought of his behavior before this very reply, where I'm condemning it? Yes, it is misanthropic. You just want to think the worst of everyone, and It. Is. Awful. Pot meets kettle. What you are accusing me of doing, is what you are doing yourself to me, no? Like you, I don't want to think the worst of everyone, because that's not a very fun world to live in. On the contrary, and like I've said repeatedly, I think McClure is the exception rather than the norm. The majority of men in SV and elsewhere don't behave like him and are not serial sexual harassers. > You know? If I were like you, I could easily point out how this poor phrasing can be construed as homophobic, but I won't resort to that. Please. I brought up the LGBT comment, because people are using 500 Startups's historical support of women, POC, and LGBT initiatives to support McClure. I'm pointing out how glib that line of defense is; that it is actually irrelevant; and makes his behavior look all the worse, especially because his actions are so textbook creepy -- not something you would expect from someone who sincerely believes in enfranchising those who have been historically marginalized. > I'm gay, and the huge amount of false or exaggerated accusations is one of the many reasons I'm glad I am. And (because I know you're going to try to pull this thread), I'm not saying that the accusations against McClure were unfunded; he clearly admitted his blame. That's great, and I'm a person of color, but that's irrelevant. His behavior is objectively shitty and must be called out if we want to progress to a better, more equal and civilized society. This is a legitimate issue in our society; I don't think you can go too overboard calling out this type of predatory behavior. It's a real issue with very real consequences for those who are victim to it. Also, you mention "huge amount of false or exaggerated accusations", but by your own admission, and by McClure himself, all these accusations of him being a serial creep are true. So not false, and not exaggerated. > There are many different types of assholes, the ones like McClure aren't the only ones "poisoning the well." Here is where I disagree with you. There might be more more poisonous apples, but McClure is a real scumbag just by looking at what we know so far: 1) Serial history of this type of behavior 2) Self-awareness that his behavior is bad. 3) Admission that his intent was to take advantage of others. 4) All his accusers are women of color (according to Sarah) > Case in point. I don't know what you're trying to imply here. > This was a weird and non-sequitur opener, btw. Were you going for an appeal to popularity or something? For what it's worth, I thoroughly disagree with your read on his apology. Huh? You made the claim that my view was off-base and misanthropic. I disagree and cite similar views from others to back that point. > BTW, none of this answered my question. Let me be more clear then, he tried to delegitimize the harassment by bringing up irrelevant details (there were drinks involved, it was a small group of people, that he thought it was a social event, etc.), that are designed to water down the accusations, or at the least, are designed to give him some sort of cover to "explain" his terrible behavior.

julianmarq 9y ago
> I'd rather not turn this into a pedantic argument where we parse every word, sentence, and phrase. But I'll respond because I think we prob agree more than disagree and trust that you have good intentions and want a dialogue. I have no interest in a dialogue with you. First, I only really wanted you to clarify the "deligitimizes" claim, but I now know that that isn't going to happen. Second, you called me an "apologist of sexual harassers", any possibility of rational dialogue died at that point, you knew that, and your trying to downplay it now with your poor attempt at presenting yourself as rational and open to discussion isn't changing that. Hell, you'd probably have been better off owning up to the baseless accusation. So, I'm mostly going to ignore this reply, except for the three most glaringly misguided claims: > What you are accusing me of doing, is what you are doing yourself to me, no? I didn't accuse you of being an "apologist of sexual harassers" so... no. > I don't think you can go too overboard calling out this type of predatory behavior You know that "having them killed" would fit this statement, right? You really ought to phrase yourself better or drop the misanthropy, people aren't as terrible or as incorregible as you think they are. > Also, you mention "huge amount of false or exaggerated accusations", but by your own admission, and by McClure himself, all these accusations of him being a serial creep are true. So not false, and not exaggerated. So, because the ones about McClure were true, all of them are true. Again, don't you see how that could be easily turned against you? If someone tomorrow were to accuse you of harassment, you can't possibly defend yourself without displaying some hypocrisy regarding these statements.