3 ms·
> men and women are alone in a room > you are literally saying that men need chaperones ("If you find there is only two of you left, then go home."). I wasn't
by jimnotgym 9y ago
> men and women are alone in a room
> you are literally saying that men need chaperones ("If you find there is only two of you left, then go home.").
I wasn't saying that at all, you have removed the context reductio ad absurdum. The context was at the end of an evening of socializing. Now we have two drunk people, boss and sub-ordinate, in a bar together after a night and everyone has gone home but them. Presumably everyone else exercised their good judgment that it was time to leave.
I'll tell you what you can take literally, I literally saw that on a sexual harassment claim. In this case it was withdrawn, and my best guess of what happened is that it was consensual, but lead to an awkward situation which they found uncomfortable in their small team.
None of what I am talking about is relevant to the sexual predator scenario. However strong guidelines on professional conduct do help stop predatory behavior hiding behind 'just being playful'
- tgb 9y agoFrankly I don't know what you are trying to say, given that whatever that is, it's not relevant to the sexual predator scenario. The only thing I can think of is that you are suggesting rules to cover one's ass to prevent being accused of being a sexual predator. This seems like something that's smart to do... but why bring it up in the discussion of this article? It sounded like you were suggesting that "S" should have taken these precautions and then "S" would either not have been accused or perhaps would not have committed these acts in the first place. Obviously this makes it sound like you are siding with "S" against his accuses or are suggesting that it's not really his fault, which would put in you uncomfortable company. See why I am concerned by your posts? It's hard to separate what you are saying from this.