3 ms·
Sorry, I’m on mobile so I may not be reading the thread correctly, but is the logic here that there needs to be laws against public backlash to admitting sexual
by SolaceQuantum 8y ago
Sorry, I’m on mobile so I may not be reading the thread correctly, but is the logic here that there needs to be laws against public backlash to admitting sexually assaulting people (louis ck)?
Edit: what I took literally here is that if you knew someone admitted to sexually assaulting their direct reports within the past year or two, and you didn’t hire them, you are personally on the hook unless you can prove you didn’t hire them for another reason?
- kstenerud 8y agoNo. What I'm referring to is systematic pressure brought to bear upon organizations such that they are afraid to hire someone who has been designated a pariah (for whatever reason). In a tangentially related issue, as I've stated before, there is a definite problem in America with regards to ex felons who are treated like second class citizens for the rest of their lives. But that's a more complicated social attitudinal problem to solve.
- SolaceQuantum 8y agoRight, but in this case we're talking about louis CK, not a felon, recieved no jail time for sexually assaulting people. Should the origanizations who did not hire him be charged? Should it be illegal to crow 'how dare XXX company hire lous CK' on Twitter or the general blogosphere? I'm trying to understand your exact point that there should be laws against this phenomenon where someone has been designated a pariah. Who should be punished, and for what behaviors should they be punished for, and what is the appropriate punishment for it?
- SamReidHughes 8y agoLouis C.K. didn't admit to, and wasn't accused of, sexually assaulting anybody.