Next you're gonna say that if a girl goes to a shady street at night and gets raped it's her fault for going there and no the fault of the criminal
It's 100% not her fault, but no one should never go to a shady street at night.
Next you're gonna say that if a girl goes to a shady street at night and gets raped it's her fault for going there and no the fault of the criminal
that doesn't sound very twitter-like tbh. it'd be nice if it was
He basically blackmailing her with "either sleep with me or sleep on the street" is more than enough grounds for sexual harassment, what's your point?
I agree with all of you, he has no one but himself to blame. She had no obligations to have sex with him, but he was obliged to care for her once she had taken the first flight. It's something that happens quite often with people meeting on the internet and socially awkward loners who think that spending money will guarantee love in return.
My point is that sexual harassment is, as far as I know, illegal and being a douchebag is not. It is not clear to me that the guy sexually harassed her which is why I wondered the extent to which someone is responsible towards another adult.
I don't think this is as black and white as you're making it out to be. I think that context matters. This is not a clear cut grooming case were a pederast lures a minor with promises and then coerces her into sex.
We're talking about 2 adults that made plans to be intimate with each other and then one of them decided not to be intimate and another one decided not to be in the same place as the other. Now as adults the REASONABLE thing to do here would've been to find a middle ground that would satisfy both parties. Clearly the dude is far from a grownup but I ask again, to which extent are you responsible for another adult? What are you guilty for here? Being an asshole? Willingly endareging someone? or sexual harassment?
I fail to see any explanation for what he did that isnt sexual harassment. By his own admission, he kicked her out of a hotel room for refusing to sleep in the same bed with him. If your choices are "sleep with me or be stranded with no where to sleep in a distant city," that's coercion, which is a form of harrassment.
I guess there is a chance, however tiny, that he didn't even give her the first option and wasn't attempting blackmail. Meaning he would have kicked her out no matter what she did or said after that because he felt it was over. Which makes him still a giant asshole ofcHe basically blackmailing her with "either sleep with me or sleep on the street" is more than enough grounds for sexual harassment, what's your point?
Reminds me of that guy who made The Room. If a woman doesn't want to be with him, she must be in the wrong.
???This thread got the reaction that I thought the Blizzard employee being racially abused to the point of suicide would have gotten.
What a fucking scumbag.If you needed any more evidence that this guy is a piece of shit here he is deliberately dead naming a trans person:
Workplace sexual harassment is a civil crime. What he did is probably not illegal, but that's not the standard being discussed. What he did is certainly enough to merit a lifetime ban from GDQ and could potentially see him facing a civil suit from the victim.
The tool is open source and totally documented, anyone can make it, anyone can fork the source code too. Zero already disassociated with him. Stopping the use of an item he already paid for doesn't serve any purpose. He already paid for the thing, the "damage" is done and it's not his fault, all he has to do now is stop advertising it and link to the DIY process if someone asks how to get it.What a fucking scumbag.
Hopefully this shit get's him blacklisted from the entire community, not just *GDQ. It'd be great if people like Zero stopped using his tools.
will read. tyvmEx-Blizzard employee sees their new Soldier 76 story and facade of inclusiveness which triggers him and he goes on to detail his experience of constant racial abuse by a co-worker-turned-superior that drove him, at its crux, to plan his suicide with lasting mental health issues.
Ex-Blizzard Employee Details His Terrible Time At Company
I know this is OT so maybe I'll get warned or something but I was disappointed with the lack of coverage of it, as some of us expected this type of reaction from Era on that thread.
From what I read, his way to responding to the situation wasn't to say "sleep with me or get out" it was "since you don't want to sleep with me I don't want you here". I think that after he was rejected he was going to kick her out not matter what which is why I think he's an asshole and not a sexual harasser. Again, my interpretation, no one here knows them, no one knows what he's really capable of which is why I'm not so fast in passing judgement.
Ok, so it feels weird to talk about it this way because its hard for me to place myself on that situation as I don't think I'm an asshole and I would've acted differently but: My understanding is that the dude kicked her out because she didn't want to sleep (as in actual sleep) with her. He was OK with not having sex, he "needed" someone to sleep next to him because of his insommnia (if this is true or not, I've no fucking way to know, seems he has people that can corroborate this but who knows). From what I read, his way to responding to the situation wasn't to say "sleep with me or get out" it was "since you don't want to sleep with me I don't want you here". I think that after he was rejected he was going to kick her out not matter what which is why I think he's an asshole and not a sexual harasser. Again, my interpretation, no one here knows them, no one knows what he's really capable of which is why I'm not so fast in passing judgement.
The situation you've made up here and what has actually happened are not comparable.
Workplace sexual harassment is a civil crime. What he did is probably not illegal, but that's not the standard being discussed. What he did is certainly enough to merit a lifetime ban from GDQ and could potentially see him facing a civil suit from the victim.
This is a good post. I agree with thisThere are a couple of things here that I'm going to try to give you benefit of the doubt on, because you legitimately might not know.
1. Sexual harassment doesnt have as high a bar to cross as you seem to think. He used his relative power in the situation to coerce her into a position she didnt want to be in.
2. Theres no functional difference between "sleep with me or get out" vs "you didnt sleep with me, so get out". In both situations, there was retribution for refusing him.
3. Sexual harrassment doesnt require sex. So if the story about him just wanting her to sleep next to him is true, it doesnt matter. It was still an intimate and vulnerable position that she didn't want to be in.
And even if EVERYTHING up to that point wasnt harrassment, his behavior afterwards, including posting intimate chat logs and threatening to cancel her plane ticket home absolutely constitute harrassment.
I'm not sure he legally has any obligation though. From a law perspective, he agreed to give something (the plane ticket and pay for the room). But giving is not trading. You're free to give something, but you're also free to cancel what was supposed to be a gift. It's not like a trading agreement. It must depend on the country, but I'm not sur he has legally any obligation.
Edit: it doesn't apply to a situation in which a person would be in danger, but if that person has the resources to come back home by himself/herself, there's no obligation from what I understand.
I'm not sure he legally has any obligation though. From a law perspective, he agreed to give something (the plane ticket and pay for the room). But giving is not trading. You're free to give something, but you're also free to cancel what was supposed to be a gift. It's not like a trading agreement. It must depend on the country, but I'm not sur he has legally any obligation.
If you needed any more evidence that this guy is a piece of shit here he is deliberately dead naming a trans person:
Jesus Christ this is a bad understanding of the law. By paying for someone's ticket and accommodation you've created something in law called a "duty of care". You can't just abandon someone and if you abandon them because of reasons of sexual coercion it's kind of double not good.
For starters, in your made up situation, kicking the person out of your house isn't going to leave them stranded in a strange city.Well, that's what I understood from the OP. What did I miss? Honest question.
i hope the guy drowns in embarrassment once he realizes just what the fuck he did and what the hell he just publicly broadcast for the world to see
He seems to have mentioned previously being autistic. I wonder if that has anything to do with explaining his behavior?
Obviously he handled everything incredibly poorly, especially if he claims complete innocence.
At the very least he didn't cancel the flight according to his most recent tweets so she has a means of getting home.
Um, no?
He is just a horrible person, not really much to dissect.
I wasn't offering it as an excuse to absolve him of what he did, as if he commuted sexual assault he's entirely in the wrong, I am merely wondering if he didn't truly grasp how he was handling things.
Lots of dudes here upset at the idea that women don't owe you sex 🤔
I wasn't offering it as an excuse to absolve him of what he did, as if he commuted sexual assault he's entirely in the wrong, I am merely wondering if he didn't truly grasp how he was handling things.
Duty of care implies a significant economic harm. It depends on the victim's resource, but I'm not sure a plane ticket can be considered as significant. It depends on her resources.
this whole situation looks like this
I didn't know Dennis was into modding and shit.
For starters, in your made up situation, kicking the person out of your house isn't going to leave them stranded in a strange city.
Secondly, the only reason they came your place was to have sex, so when that isn't happening there's no need for them to stay. Which is not the case here, as the primary reason was to attend the event, and also, you know, not be sleeping on the goddamn street.
Thirdly, you aren't in control of that person's ability to get home in the situation you made up. Whereas here we have someone who threatened to prevent them getting home.
And those are just a few. There's so many differences I'm baffled that you think they're comparable.
Although considering you replied to me instead of one of the other posts which were already explaining why you're wrong, maybe you aren't arguing in good faith.
Oh god yeah, I thought you were the guy who made the initial weird defence that I responded to. My bad.Erm, are you sure you're commenting the right poster? I never said any of these things. When did I say kicking someone out of your house won't leave them stranded? When did I mention the part "since you came to have sex and that isn't happening, no need to stay", etc. Requesting sex from anyone for any reason is wrong. Putting people in a difficult situation because they refuse to have sex is wrong. Very wrong.
My one and only comment was this: expecting sex and punishing people for not offering it is wrong. Also, never let anyone but someone really close (or your company for a business trip) pay for your travels. I am not a fan of her decision making.
Ultimately, I'm not blaming her, it's 100% her right *not* to have sex with anyone. Also, stranding her away from home - not cool. But, again, I do think she made a mistake of accepting him pay for anything and putting herself in a position where she could be coerced into something she doesn't want to do. That's it. The only thing. You literally made up the things I said - or confused me with someone else.
At the end of the day - the blame is on him and only him.
"Duration pending"Then again, she put herself in that situation by intitiating the DTF convo and accepting the trip.
It doesn't seem as one dimensional as many want to make it seem.
Oh god yeah, I thought you were the guy who made the initial weird defence that I responded to. My bad.
That'd be why the response seemed so bizarre.
Actually, thinking about it, I think I remember accidentally replying to someone else in that post and editing it, so if that was you maybe that was the issue.
Maybe just don't come into threads like this and start criticising victims at all? It's not like she's asking for your advice, or even reading it.No problem, I was a bit surprised. Look, it's hard to criticize someone who suffered injustice without sounding like "it's their own fault". It's not her fault for not wanting sex. That's absurd. I just hope she avoids these kinds of situations in the future, it's just good advice.