4 ms·

It's about power and the abuse of that power. It's probably thrilling to them, and this provides plenty of opportunities "right in front of them", instead of sa

by mtgx 8y ago

It's about power and the abuse of that power. It's probably thrilling to them, and this provides plenty of opportunities "right in front of them", instead of say traveling the world to find similar experiences.

totalZero 8y ago
Or maybe they're nerds with zero game and they don't get out much.
- csomar 8y ago
  It had the total opposite effect on me. As a nerd who got richer with time; it made me much calmer toward the opposite sex. It also made the rule of not engaging in any external relations with professional people I work with much easier to follow.
  - totalZero 8y ago
    Not all nerds have zero game. It's easy to imagine someone who is not socially oriented and spends almost all of his time at work, thus not surrounding himself with an alternate circle of people with whom to have nonprofessional relationships, resorting to making a pass at a coworker. Those of us who studied or work with CS types are 100% aware that there are some people in those circles who have trouble controlling inappropriate manifestations of sexual desire. It's more "metoo" to think that all wealthy people who have relationships with subordinates are trying to exploit a power relationship for sexual gratification. But I think that just gives such people too much credit. The reality is sex is a basal drive and people often follow the path of least resistance. No food? Stealing bread starts to seem appropriate. No social life or game? Dating a subordinate starts to seem appropriate. I see it more as incompetence than malice. (And personally I think all mentally able adults should take responsibility for their own conscious and consensual decisions, instead of trying to blame the underlying dynamics of the situation.)
    - jakelazaroff 8y ago
      > And personally I think all mentally able adults should take responsibility for their own conscious and consensual decisions, instead of trying to blame the underlying dynamics of the situation. Taking that logic to the extreme: what if an on-duty police officer orders someone to perform a sexual act? What if they're being held at gunpoint? Should we expect them to take responsibility for their "conscious and consensual" decision to perform, or can we blame the underlying dynamics of the situation?

by mtgx 8y ago

totalZero 8y ago

Or maybe they're nerds with zero game and they don't get out much.

csomar 8y ago
It had the total opposite effect on me. As a nerd who got richer with time; it made me much calmer toward the opposite sex. It also made the rule of not engaging in any external relations with professional people I work with much easier to follow.
- totalZero 8y ago
  Not all nerds have zero game. It's easy to imagine someone who is not socially oriented and spends almost all of his time at work, thus not surrounding himself with an alternate circle of people with whom to have nonprofessional relationships, resorting to making a pass at a coworker. Those of us who studied or work with CS types are 100% aware that there are some people in those circles who have trouble controlling inappropriate manifestations of sexual desire. It's more "metoo" to think that all wealthy people who have relationships with subordinates are trying to exploit a power relationship for sexual gratification. But I think that just gives such people too much credit. The reality is sex is a basal drive and people often follow the path of least resistance. No food? Stealing bread starts to seem appropriate. No social life or game? Dating a subordinate starts to seem appropriate. I see it more as incompetence than malice. (And personally I think all mentally able adults should take responsibility for their own conscious and consensual decisions, instead of trying to blame the underlying dynamics of the situation.)
  - jakelazaroff 8y ago
    > And personally I think all mentally able adults should take responsibility for their own conscious and consensual decisions, instead of trying to blame the underlying dynamics of the situation. Taking that logic to the extreme: what if an on-duty police officer orders someone to perform a sexual act? What if they're being held at gunpoint? Should we expect them to take responsibility for their "conscious and consensual" decision to perform, or can we blame the underlying dynamics of the situation?