[HN Gopher] My experience with sexual harassment in the Scala co...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       My experience with sexual harassment in the Scala community
        
       Author : ingve
       Score  : 476 points
       Date   : 2021-04-27 21:00 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (yifanxing.medium.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (yifanxing.medium.com)
        
       | jdmoreira wrote:
       | I have no clue on who this guy is nor do I have any sort of
       | interest in Scala but this is terrible.
       | 
       | If this is even remotely true I hope he suffers enormous
       | consequences including being persecuted.
       | 
       | How are people still getting away with this kind of abuse? How?
        
         | QUFB wrote:
         | > How are people still getting away with this kind of abuse?
         | How?
         | 
         | Read the comments in this thread six hours from now and you'll
         | understand.
        
           | sarakayakomzin wrote:
           | bring in the stallmanites!
           | 
           | I for one am glad there is someone to stand up for him - it
           | makes it very easy to tell who wants to cherrypick and debate
           | semantics due to their own biases.
        
           | rodgerd wrote:
           | Six hours? It'll be flagged out of existence by then, most
           | likely.
           | 
           | On edit: it took mere minutes for the HN rape apologists to
           | show up!
        
             | goblox wrote:
             | She is definitely the kind of woman where a man shouldn't
             | be making such advances. Let her be the acting party. She
             | would have been telling another story if she were on top
             | and had taken the initiative. One of the simplest ways for
             | a man to avoid the problems of consent where he suspects
             | there may be is to be the one from whom consent is needed.
             | 
             | That is the absolute safest other than leaving. If you as a
             | man attempt to get consent that may not be something you're
             | able to obtain. She might be intoxicated and unable to
             | consent. You might not know that. However what's safe is to
             | let anyone initiate sex with you while you remain passive
             | and let them have sex with you.
             | 
             | If you leave then I would strongly advise to say it is
             | because you are feeling sick and think it's something you
             | ate. Go to the toilet first and say you have the runs. That
             | will cushion her pride and make her just glad you left. No
             | chance of something mean-spirited.
        
           | dog_boy wrote:
           | didn't even take an hour...
           | 
           | so many absolutely disgusting comments already.
        
           | jdmoreira wrote:
           | I think I know what you are trying to say and I agree but I'm
           | also on the camp that Richard Stallman didn't say anything
           | necessarily wrong, just awkward.
           | 
           | On the one hand I want people to be able to to speak their
           | minds but on the other hand this guy might be a sexual
           | predator at best and a serial rapist at worst. and he is
           | getting away with it!
        
             | rodgerd wrote:
             | You're apologising for a serial sexual harasser. You _are_
             | the problem.
        
         | na85 wrote:
         | >How are people still getting away with this kind of abuse?
         | How?
         | 
         | It's quite simple, really.
         | 
         | You know that phenomenon you see here on HN with big names like
         | Steve Jobs or RMS, or Elon Musk? The phenomenon where people
         | give them a pass for being disgusting, abusive assholes because
         | "he's a genius/luminary/visionary" or because "his
         | contributions to $thing are so great"?
         | 
         | It's the same phenomenon with people like Jon Pretty.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | pwdisswordfish0 wrote:
           | Alternatively: people diluting the signal, where people bring
           | up serious accusations of rape, and then others show up and
           | compare it to people who are considered assholes by some.
        
             | na85 wrote:
             | See I can tell that you're snidely implying that I'm
             | falsely equating rape with "being an asshole", which I
             | explicitly did not do.
             | 
             | The phenomenon behind why these people get a pass is the
             | same, even if their behavior is different.
        
           | scala__alacs wrote:
           | Being quite involved in the Scala community myself, I can
           | tell you that the impact of his technical contributions is
           | basically zero.
           | 
           | None of the projects he developed along the years has had any
           | momentum (save for one, called "magnolia", which has a modest
           | userbase).
           | 
           | He was giving more talks than anyone else in the community,
           | solely based on vague ideas he couldn't even make happen. He
           | was always bluffing somehow, presenting himself as some kind
           | of grand architect pursuing grand ideas, while his effective
           | impact was close to zero.
           | 
           | I think he was tolerated just because he's been around since
           | basically the language was created, and thus was friend with
           | many people, and could tell stories about the early days of
           | Scala.
           | 
           | With him (hopefully) going away, this will have no impact at
           | all on the development of Scala or related projects, apart
           | from saving slots at upcoming Scala conferences.
           | 
           | So it's definitely _not_ the same phenomenon as RMS or Elon.
        
         | rodgerd wrote:
         | The top comment on this thread is a "what about the MEN?"
         | exercise.
         | 
         | HN is incredibly pro-sexual harasser and anti-victim, along
         | with the broader tech community, sadly.
        
           | kapp_in_life wrote:
           | The top comment discusses the fate of an accused in the court
           | of public opinion, and the limitations of that court. The
           | fact you conflate that with saying "what about the MEN?" is
           | more an indictment of your world view than anything they
           | actually wrote.
        
         | ummonk wrote:
         | It takes a critical mass of accusers to break past the inherent
         | power differential and take down an influential figure without
         | getting blacklisted. There are various reasons this often
         | doesn't happen. For one, it's a coordination problem and second
         | e.g. this post describes his clever choice in targeting
         | immigrant women who don't have much knowledge of western sexual
         | norms and can be gaslit more easily.
        
         | Pfhreak wrote:
         | Because people don't believe victims. They insist that somehow
         | they gave consent, or that somehow the assaulter just couldn't
         | have known. Or they blame the victim, saying that "they
         | deserved it" or "they shouldn't have been in that situation in
         | the first place."
         | 
         | I guarantee you that someone will post in this thread, if they
         | haven't already, that she should know better than to get an
         | airbnb with a man she doesn't know well. No, this isn't her
         | fault. The dude should not have abused her.
        
           | mirekrusin wrote:
           | It would be easier to judge if she said that she did not give
           | consent.
           | 
           | You may be right, but you also have to agree that some people
           | will pause before judging definite rape for described
           | situation where girl accepts invitation to sleep in the same
           | airbnb, without anybody else, with single guy, bringing
           | bottle of wine, not mentioning she did not give consent,
           | feeling bad afterwards. From that description it's really
           | difficult to pass rape judgement - maybe it was, maybe not,
           | what we know is that it was creepy at least for her.
        
             | Pfhreak wrote:
             | > some people will pause before judging definite rape for
             | described situation where girl accepts invitation to sleep
             | in the same airbnb, without anybody else, with single guy,
             | bringing bottle of wine,
             | 
             | None of those things _even remotely imply_ consent for a
             | sexual advance. Those are all things that should be fine
             | for anyone of any gender to do together without there being
             | fear of a sexual assault.
             | 
             | Anyone who looks at that list and thinks that it's ok to
             | have unwanted sexual intercourse because they happened to
             | have a bottle of wine in an AirBNB I'm not sure I want to
             | associate with.
        
               | mirekrusin wrote:
               | I think you cut the list a bit.
               | 
               | As an thought experiment try to think that your
               | husband/wife does those things with somebody (accepts
               | invitation to sleep in the same airbnb, without anybody
               | else, with single opposite sex, bringing bottle of wine)
               | - would you be worried? And if yes, why? Is it not even
               | remotely possible that somebody would feel weird about
               | their partner doing it?
        
               | foldr wrote:
               | One thing you're missing here is that sexual consent is
               | an 'in the moment thing'. Someone might be coming over to
               | your place fully intending to have sex with you, and then
               | change their minds. You have to respect that.
        
               | mirekrusin wrote:
               | My point is that she doesn't mention she didn't want it,
               | said "no" or anything that implies not giving consent.
        
               | toast0 wrote:
               | > There was another time that he insisted on having
               | intercourse regardless of me saying I didn't want to.
        
               | mirekrusin wrote:
               | > There was another time that he insisted on having
               | intercourse regardless of me saying I didn't want to.
               | 
               | Insisting doesn't mean doing it, does it?
        
               | Pfhreak wrote:
               | In English, it can mean doing it. "I wanted to split the
               | check, but he insisted on picking up the bill." For
               | instance, could mean that the person paid the whole bill
               | or that they are putting up a strong resistance.
               | 
               | It's unfortunately ambiguous.
        
               | Pfhreak wrote:
               | She says that he 'insisted'. Typically someone
               | 'insisting' on something implies an initial 'no'.
               | 
               | And furthermore, "not saying no" is not the bar for
               | consent. An enthusiastic, unambiguous yes is the bar for
               | consent. Not giving consent is the default, assumed
               | position until that yes arrives.
        
         | crdrost wrote:
         | This is also the community that brought us, for example, the
         | Fantasyland Code of "Professionalism," a code of conduct that
         | rivals the GPL in how unpleasant I have found it to read and
         | piece together what is going on...
        
       | jenkstom wrote:
       | Another person with a narcissistic personality disorder. I look
       | forward to the day (I'll be long dead, unfortunately) when our
       | society can recognize these people as evil and deal with them in
       | a constructive way while protecting people from them.
        
         | vsareto wrote:
         | Actions make people evil, not personality disorders.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | voces wrote:
       | Since the pattern is so similar, I now recognize this as a form
       | of harmful #metoo activism.
       | 
       | - Attack entire community, not individuals
       | 
       | - Court of Public Social Justice
       | 
       | - The charges amount to unwanted advances being made during a
       | social interaction where that would be acceptable -- not sexual
       | harassment, nor illegal behavior.
       | 
       | Compare https://medium.com/@kristianlum/statistics-we-have-a-
       | problem...
       | 
       | Make the problem about an entire industry: Holywood, Scala, MIT,
       | Statistics. Garantuee public shaming and punishment for your
       | target, by calling out criticism or disbelief as "victim
       | shaming", people calling for you to lose your job, because they
       | got angry reading a Medium post, not because you've been proven
       | guilty by someone without a bias. Ending up in an apartment with
       | someone in another country, drinking wine, but not remembering
       | how much you drank, but you do remember that he did not drink
       | anything (to play up him taking advantage over you), then crying
       | and feeling upset, because someone makes an advance towards you,
       | instead of feeling flattered and politely declining. Going skinny
       | dipping at night in the sea with a bunch of clumsy rowdy tipsy
       | researchers, then blaming an advance someone makes, on conference
       | culture.
       | 
       | Go to the police, get your day in court, and let justice prevail.
       | Not going to join a mob, because someone made you cry once. Even
       | giving the experience sympathy would needlessly rile me up. I'd
       | like to think about other negative things when interacting with
       | Scala and its community, preferably technical.
        
         | skrowl wrote:
         | All for a "he hugged me", not even anything sexual
        
           | anon_tor_12345 wrote:
           | >I felt being taken advantage of that he had unprotected sex
           | with me when I was intoxicated.
           | 
           | At least read the article before being dismissive.
           | 
           | Imagine being 20, getting raped, and having randoms on the
           | internet completely invalidate how traumatic it was because
           | they think you're just meming. Like damn and we wonder why
           | women struggle in tech.
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | GavinMcG wrote:
         | > because someone makes an advance towards you, instead of
         | feeling flattered and politely declining
         | 
         | Convenient to leave out the rape in the next sentence, and the
         | other rape in the next paragraph:
         | 
         | > I felt being taken advantage of that he had unprotected sex
         | with me when I was intoxicated. Nothing felt right. I remember
         | panicking and crying.
         | 
         | > There was another time that he insisted on having intercourse
         | regardless of me saying I didn't want to.
         | 
         | Sorry you don't like to think about that.
        
         | dimgl wrote:
         | Agreed 100%. One of the few levelheaded responses on this
         | thread.
         | 
         | On top of everything you said, which I agree with, I'd also
         | like to see less of these kinds of posts on Hacker News...
        
         | anon_tor_12345 wrote:
         | >advance towards you, instead of feeling flattered and politely
         | declining
         | 
         | Do you know what "advance" means? It's old-timey English for
         | aggression as in
         | 
         | "The enemy advanced on the capital".
         | 
         | No that's not how it's used to today but it still typically has
         | very negative connotations. So I think it's rich irony that due
         | to your own (probable) inarticulateness and (probable) bias you
         | think something that could experienced as violence should be
         | flattering.
        
       | tiew9Vii wrote:
       | > in the Scala community
       | 
       | The allegations are serious. If the author believes she was drunk
       | and did not consent to unprotected sex and taken advantage of
       | that should be reported to the police and the courts due to the
       | seriousness, it's rape.
       | 
       | The title is damaging "in the Scala community" it tarnishes a
       | programming language and individuals who use the language due to
       | the act of one person. The language is dieing with dramas among
       | 1-2 specific people out of thousands.
       | 
       | No one in the right mind would condone the allegations or the
       | perpetrator and sounds like at least one incident a matter for
       | the police.
       | 
       | The allegations are against an individual and the ScalaCenter
       | handling, not the community. The blog post lists individual
       | people in the community who supported the author. I do wish the
       | title wasn't as click bait or more specific to the perpetrators
       | as it is damaging, killing a really interesting industry and
       | technology.
       | 
       | I hope the author finds the peace and justice they deserve from
       | sharing this. The public naming and shaming will have serious
       | repercussions for the accused.
        
       | the-dude wrote:
       | I thought nothing in the post was particulary damning and all of
       | it quite ambivalent.
        
         | arkitaip wrote:
         | You should come with a physical warning sign.
        
       | mr_vox wrote:
       | This case is one of thousands
        
       | kweinber wrote:
       | For those claiming this should be handled in courts: 1) you know
       | it won't be... especially internationally at the expense of the
       | accuser that has to go through an extradition process. 2) it is
       | still valuable to warn others that a predator is on the loose. 3)
       | it's already been publicly corroborated by someone else who had a
       | similar experience and you can expect others to follow.
        
       | mr_vox wrote:
       | This case in one of thousands
        
       | nindalf wrote:
       | @dang I'm sad that this was flagged. It would be nice if you or
       | some other mod could explain why this decision was taken.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Mods don't flag submissions; users do. See
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html
        
       | o_p wrote:
       | Women sleeps with infuential person and smears them after they
       | are well positioned.
        
       | willf wrote:
       | > I have reported all of my experience to the ScalaCenter in
       | 2019. I was hoping to see concrete actions, such as building a
       | reporting mechanism, to protect minorities in the community.
       | Unfortunately, I am not aware of such actions taken.
       | 
       | That sounds like a community failure, not just One Bad Guy.
        
         | Tade0 wrote:
         | Moreover, it appears that his behaviours were sort of an open
         | secret - apparently this went on for years.
        
       | rayiner wrote:
       | > As an inexperienced young woman from a patriarchal culture, I
       | was running away from the stereotype of being thought of as
       | someone "traditional". I should, like he implied, and wanted to
       | be "cool about everything that happened".
       | 
       | "Just be cool" is such an abusive and manipulative behavior I'm
       | flummoxed at how it's lasted this long as socially acceptable.
        
       | wrren wrote:
       | This guy sounds like a practiced predator, he ought to be in
       | jail.
        
       | throwaway800869 wrote:
       | Many Hacker News users belabor the "innocent until proved guilty"
       | angle when it comes to sexual assault.
       | 
       | Could it be that users of a software focused site are
       | overcorrecting for the threat of being labeled creeps?
        
       | joelbluminator wrote:
       | It's not looking pretty for Jon Pretty...
        
       | jghn wrote:
       | I had the pleasure to get to know the author for a brief time in
       | the period her article describes. Some of the surrounding events
       | she describes were public knowledge via Twitter posts and such,
       | for instance getting stranded in Berlin.
       | 
       | From my outsider's vantage point I remember thinking something
       | felt off about Jon's interactions/role in those stories. It was
       | gut wrenching reading the article this AM realizing what was
       | really going on.
        
       | jliving207 wrote:
       | John Pretty is a troublesome character and as he reads through
       | this comment section to find out how his reputation will be hurt
       | by this... I hope it becomes a barrier for him to participate in
       | the Scala Community with influence over others and the
       | Programming Communities all around. Punish John Pretty IMO
        
       | merb wrote:
       | first, a small rant: tbf. I dislike the title. the real title is
       | sexual harassment from Jon Pretty a leader of certain Scala
       | Community standups.
       | 
       | because the current title actually sounds like it's the whole
       | commnity, but the blog is about a specific guy.
       | 
       | ---
       | 
       | second I really do not understand, how other people can be so
       | horrible. he basically abused her in a moment where she was
       | really really desperate and I think such a thing is really really
       | bad.
        
         | nerdponx wrote:
         | > In June, Heather noticed that I was upset at a dinner after
         | ScalaDays. I shared with her about what happened. She warned me
         | to stay away from Jon Pretty. And she wasn't the only person
         | who told me that. Even though my experience in Berlin was
         | awful, it was difficult for me to accept that someone, who
         | seemed like a good friend, mentor, and ally, could be so
         | selfish, manipulative, and cruel.
         | 
         | It sounds like people knew about him and didn't do anything. If
         | the community is allowing it to happen, then the community is
         | as much at fault as the sick individual doing the abuse.
        
           | merb wrote:
           | > It sounds like people knew about him and didn't do
           | anything. If the community is allowing it to happen, then the
           | community is as much at fault as the sick individual doing
           | the abuse.
           | 
           | well around 2017-2019 I was active in scala aswell (more on
           | the playframework side tough) and I dind't even knew about
           | him until I read the blog. you know just because there are
           | members from scalacenter and lightbend does not mean that the
           | community as a whole wanted to have something to do with
           | somebody like him. You know there are thousands of people
           | going to ScalaDays every year, it's highly unlikely that the
           | majority of the scala community would be happy about the guys
           | behavior and it's also highly unlikely that the majority of
           | people in the scala community knew about the guys behavior.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | bcrosby95 wrote:
           | It's a bit vague. I'm not involved in the Scala community and
           | if someone told me a story like that about someone in it I
           | would also tell them to stay away from them.
        
         | ummonk wrote:
         | The community has allowed this guy to continue to be
         | influential, so while the perpetrator is just one guy, it's a
         | community problem.
        
           | capableweb wrote:
           | Relevant passages from the post
           | 
           | > In June, Heather noticed that I was upset at a dinner after
           | ScalaDays. I shared with her about what happened. She warned
           | me to stay away from Jon Pretty. And she wasn't the only
           | person who told me that.
           | 
           | > I have reported all of my experience to the ScalaCenter in
           | 2019. I was hoping to see concrete actions, such as building
           | a reporting mechanism, to protect minorities in the
           | community. Unfortunately, I am not aware of such actions
           | taken.
        
         | andrelaszlo wrote:
         | Well I think the only problem with the title is that
         | "harassment" is not a strong enough word.
         | 
         | About using the word "community", the first paragraph of the
         | open letter explains why it's relevant:
         | 
         | "We, the undersigned, have become aware that, for some time,
         | Jon Pretty has abused his position of privilege and stature
         | within the Scala community to sexually harass and victimize
         | women. He has used the community's conferences to target women
         | who are new to the Scala community, offering mentorship,
         | access, and other forms of support, and then abusing the trust
         | that he has established."
        
         | rodgerd wrote:
         | "The standard you walk past is the standard you accept" applies
         | here. When a good community permits bad actors, it is no longer
         | a good community.
        
       | fishnchips wrote:
       | I have no interest in Scala and never heard of Jon Pretty nor his
       | accuser but the accusations are of a criminal nature (either rape
       | or slander) and it feels like as a society we've long developed
       | more reliable tools and systems to deal with such matters.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | WesolyKubeczek wrote:
       | I don't give two damns about Scala and its community, and I
       | neither believe nor disbelieve the linked post, but boy oh boy
       | does it remind me of the academia in some (many?) countries,
       | where educational/academic advancement per vaginam has been
       | practically an unwritten norm for decades, to the joy of many a
       | creepy professor!
        
       | adflux wrote:
       | Does this type of content really fit on this platform?
        
         | mumphster wrote:
         | yes
        
         | melenaboija wrote:
         | I hope it does
        
           | fisf wrote:
           | I hope it fits in a courtroom first and foremost.
        
             | marcinzm wrote:
             | The crimes were mostly committed in foreign countries of
             | which neither party is a resident and which the parties
             | were only visiting for a short duration of time. Countries
             | whose language the victim may not speak fluently or at all.
             | The chance of getting the local police to care is low and
             | even if they did the cost of flights to testify at trials
             | would be beyond the means of the victim.
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | yoavm wrote:
         | Yes, hackers care about their communities.
        
           | McGlockenshire wrote:
           | > Yes, hackers care about their communities.
           | 
           | The number of creep defenders in this thread suggests
           | otherwise. See also: _any_ discussion about codes of conduct.
        
             | calylex wrote:
             | Please provide sources, hint: make sure not to include
             | people asking questions and not categorically wanting to
             | lynch the horrible rapist based on a single story and you
             | interpreting that as "creep defenders".
        
           | calylex wrote:
           | Hackers care about 99% of what everyone else also cares about
           | (you know them operating in the realm of humans.) What a
           | ridiculous point.
        
         | dimgl wrote:
         | I actually don't want to see stuff like this on Hacker News.
         | But I don't make the rules.
        
         | phildenhoff wrote:
         | Yes. It's important that as a society we come to terms with the
         | fact that historically, and now, a lot of people use whatever
         | little power and fame they have to abuse others. We can't sit
         | by and let this happen.
        
       | fabian2k wrote:
       | The "share an AirBnB to be able to afford the conference" part
       | seems particularly damning to me. That seems entirely
       | premeditated and predatory.
        
         | the-dude wrote:
         | To me it sounds generous and possibly completely harmless.
        
           | Pfhreak wrote:
           | It creates a power imbalance, or increases the power
           | imbalance that already existed between the two.
           | 
           | If you have a boss/employee relationship, or a mentor/mentee
           | relationship, or a professor/student relationship, you need
           | to tread _extra_ carefully around consent. One party in those
           | relationships holds incredible power over the other, and can
           | coerce the weaker party into things they may not be
           | comfortable doing.
           | 
           | Likewise, enabling someone to attend a conference they would
           | not otherwise be able to financially afford creates a
           | possibility of coercion . It's not always coercive, but it
           | needs to be handled delicately and appropriately. In the
           | author's situation, if she refused, there was a chance she
           | was thrown out onto the streets of Berlin at who knows what
           | hour, with no money/luggage, and maybe no ability to speak
           | the local language.
        
             | noobermin wrote:
             | I don't agree. The crime here seems to be rape and the use
             | of power to extract sex from another. That's the problem. I
             | don't see how sharing an AirBnB is by itself a problem. In
             | light of everything else, it fits a pattern of
             | manipulation, but it by itself isn't harmful.
        
               | Pfhreak wrote:
               | She would not otherwise have been able to attend. She is
               | able to attend specifically because of his "generosity".
               | This wasn't something she proposed, and when she tried to
               | bring others into the arrangement he pushed back,
               | insisting it was just the two of them.
               | 
               | So yeah, sharing an AirBNB isn't necessarily bad, but in
               | this case specifically it appears to be predatory.
        
               | noobermin wrote:
               | Oh, my bad. I missed that part. I didn't know he pushed
               | back on others sharing. That's clearly to get them alone.
               | Thanks.
        
           | Tade0 wrote:
           | The generous thing would be to fund a private AirBnB for her.
        
           | fabian2k wrote:
           | My experience with conferences is in a different field, but a
           | senior participant proposing to share an AirBnB with a junior
           | participant like a student would be extremely weird.
           | 
           | If you want to support the student, you either organize
           | another student for them to share accomodations, or connect
           | them to one of the travel grants for that conference.
        
         | mirekrusin wrote:
         | "seems" doesn't mean "is", we have law systems to deal with
         | those kind of issues. Judges are for determining where the line
         | between "shitty partner" vs "rapist" lies.
        
           | fabian2k wrote:
           | I'm not a court, I'm a random person on the internet
           | commenting here.
        
             | mirekrusin wrote:
             | Me too.
        
           | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
           | The author doesn't appear to want to make the claim that Mr.
           | Pretty raped her. She suggests, strongly, that he's a shitty
           | person. She wants other people to know this. Courts don't
           | adjudicate such matters, unless they have further
           | consequences.
        
       | Benlights wrote:
       | Jon Pretty responds
       | https://twitter.com/propensive/status/1387168037908910085/ph...
        
         | hamburglar wrote:
         | I always try to remain approachable and supportive. Through
         | this openness, I've nailed a lot of girls.
        
       | domano wrote:
       | This is just downright disgusting, does somebody know if there
       | have been consequences? I usually go to general or Go conferences
       | and wonder if there is similiar stuff happening, but i have a
       | good feeling since at least the go conferences alway emphasize
       | inclusion. Lets hope this is true.
        
         | ipaddr wrote:
         | Everyone is migrating Scala projects as we speak.
         | 
         | This has very little to do with Scala and everything to do with
         | the darkside of the conference scene. Getting involved with
         | conferences at the level she did introduces travel - drugs -
         | drinking - partying with somewhat like minded young people. The
         | culture at the top can be about money, stars and groupies but
         | it revolves around power. Those in charge decide who speak.
         | Those who speak can get opportunity and money. Money buys
         | speaker slots.
         | 
         | Conferences are an anti pattern to programming.
        
           | domano wrote:
           | I have been going to conferences regularly for the past 9
           | years (eycept covid of course) and find them to be rather
           | tame actually. Drinking is widely spread, but most other
           | stuff i have not noticed. I also gave talks - maybe the
           | community is different here in europe.
        
           | andrewzah wrote:
           | I must be going to the wrong conferences!
        
         | jghn wrote:
         | I straddle a handful of domains in my professional life. Each
         | of these domains has these stories come up from time to time.
         | Further each domain talks about whisper networks where people
         | alert newcomers who the bad actors are. I have come to view it
         | as more likely that every community has these problems than to
         | view it as a localized concern.
        
       | Zelphyr wrote:
       | There is a lot about the sexual events in this post that, to me,
       | highlights something I feel is important which is: we parents
       | need to get better had having conversations with our children
       | around sex.
       | 
       | This girl was feeling uncomfortable and crying but at the same
       | time "didn't think those behaviors were problematic". I can't
       | help but wonder if her parents never sat her down and discussed
       | situations like this and, I get it. That's a really uncomfortable
       | conversation to have with your child. It is, however, and
       | important one.
       | 
       | This doesn't just apply to girls by the way. We parents need to
       | be telling our sons what kind of behavior is and isn't
       | acceptable. It's not enough to expect them to figure it out. Who
       | are they figuring it out from if not us? Probably other
       | inexperienced boys.
       | 
       | Please don't rush to put words in my mouth by thinking I am
       | suggesting the guy in the article is innocent of the accusations.
       | I'm making no commentary on either party from this article.
       | That's for the courts to decide should one or both parties choose
       | to take that course of action.
       | 
       | I'm simply saying it is important that parents overcome their
       | discomfort around discussions of sex with their children so that
       | the children can make informed decisions.
        
         | clcaev wrote:
         | I also think we can better build communities by ensuring people
         | are in safe situations, especially when traveling or when they
         | are in an unfamiliar environment. This is especially true of
         | young adults who have yet to experience predators.
        
         | DoreenMichele wrote:
         | _we parents need to get better had having conversations with
         | our children around sex._
         | 
         | I'm a survivor of childhood sexual abuse. I thought long and
         | hard about this and decided that talking to my children about
         | the existence of sexual predators would rob them of their
         | innocence.
         | 
         | I've studied how this works. Sexual predation almost never
         | starts with rape. It starts with myriad instances of boundary
         | violation and disrespect and culminates in rape.
         | 
         | Rape hinges on the detail of consent. As a society trying to
         | combat this issue, we seem to overlook that for the most part.
         | 
         | I taught my children that hugs and kisses required consent. I
         | taught that from birth. Even a baby too young to talk can turn
         | their face away because they don't want a kiss or hold their
         | arms up enthusiastically to receive affection.
         | 
         | When they were older, I told them if they told someone "no" and
         | their decision was not respected, come get me.
         | 
         | I only had one of them come get me once. The person who felt
         | entitled to get "sugar" from my child was utterly shocked that
         | I told them they were wrong.
         | 
         | This was an elderly female relative. My children are both boys.
         | 
         | Most likely, she wasn't actually a child molester, but this
         | practice of adults demanding hugs and kisses from children who
         | have no right to say "no" is commonplace and gets treated as
         | something _funny_ in movies. I treated it as no laughing
         | matter.
         | 
         | If you want children to understand consent and respect, the
         | best thing to do is let them experience it firsthand from
         | birth. And make sure they know that rule is a two-way street,
         | not a one-sided privilege.
        
           | sweetheart wrote:
           | DoreenMichele coming in as a strong contender for Parent of
           | the Year 2021. You rule.
        
         | globular-toast wrote:
         | Agreed. I can't believe a woman would be naive enough to share
         | a room with a man. For crying out loud, if a man invites you to
         | a room with him alone he wants to have sex. It's that simple.
         | 
         | I think boys already are told what is acceptable and what
         | isn't. We got taught, in no uncertain terms, what would be
         | considered rape or sexual assault. But I think people are
         | afraid to mention the obvious when it comes to things like
         | putting yourself in uncomfortable situations.
         | 
         | I predict this comment will be downvoted, so let me anticipate
         | your objections. I had my bike stolen last week. I left it
         | somewhere unlocked. This is considered my fault. Now you could
         | say, no, it's not my fault, it's the bastard who stole it. And,
         | sure, you'd be right. But the fact is I don't have a bike right
         | now. Lock up your bike.
        
           | Accacin wrote:
           | I'm not sure if I'm different or not, but I've shared a room
           | alone with female friends on multiple occasions (when
           | younger) with literally nothing happening even when we shared
           | a bed.
           | 
           | Obviously, we were long time friends and this would be
           | different if I was meeting a conference speaker, but as
           | usual, nothing is as black or white as "men only want sex".
           | 
           | However, I do agree with your point. Boys need to be taught
           | what could be considered rape, and girls need to realise that
           | sadly some men will abuse them sexually if given half a
           | chance.
        
             | globular-toast wrote:
             | I've walked down the street before and not stolen things
             | from people's houses. I assume you leave your front door
             | unlocked at night?
        
           | Zelphyr wrote:
           | > I think boys already are told what is acceptable and what
           | isn't.
           | 
           | Maybe things have changed since I was young but, that may be
           | overly generous. The kind of discussion I'm suggesting never
           | happened with me, or, if it did, it happened only once. My
           | parents left me to figure that out on my own. I don't want
           | this to sound like I'm attacking my parents because I'm not.
           | I had great parents, but the topic of sexual behavior was
           | obviously something they weren't comfortable having with me
           | at the time.
           | 
           | Thinking back on conversations I've had with pretty much all
           | of my male friends, they had the same experience.
        
         | faitswulff wrote:
         | +1 but especially our boys. Girls and women already learn so
         | much about how to avoid being harmed by men. It's time for our
         | boys to learn how to become kind men - and for those of us who
         | are men to model that for them.
        
           | analognoise wrote:
           | Doesn't this remove agency from women?
        
           | throway98752343 wrote:
           | Boys should be educated, but this will still happen.
           | 
           | I cannot believe this guy doesn't know that what he's doing
           | is wrong.
           | 
           | We should identify and mitigate high potential threats by
           | public warning, ostracism or legal action. Overcorrect if
           | necessary.
        
       | swyx wrote:
       | similar stories are emerging:
       | 
       | - https://killnicole.github.io/statement/ (edit i see she has
       | added it to the article itself)
       | 
       | - https://twitter.com/brianclapper/status/1387115214064193537?...
       | 
       | - https://twitter.com/adelbertchang/status/1387090351626723329...
       | 
       | there seems to be some coordination here, as this came out pretty
       | much at the same time.
       | https://typelevel.org/blog/2021/04/27/community-safety.html
       | 
       | Yifan also linked to this piece on What You Can Do:
       | https://hypatia.ca/2014/08/05/what-you-can-do/
        
         | epicureanideal wrote:
         | Sometimes character assassination is coordinated.
         | 
         | I personally only slightly increase the probability of
         | something being true when multiple accusers come forward. I
         | still want to see proof.
         | 
         | What if a bunch of your ex-girlfriends or ex-boyfriends got
         | together and decided to ruin your life with accusations?
        
           | noobermin wrote:
           | I don't want to stir the pot, but as a comment below links,
           | Pretty responded with a statement[0]. He doesn't say this is
           | what happened at all but that's a conclusion one can draw if
           | you just read his statement. He doesn't insinuate it directly
           | but he says they were consensual relationships and the two
           | people are upset about how they ended.
           | 
           | [0] https://twitter.com/propensive/status/1387168037908910085
           | /ph...
        
           | kelnos wrote:
           | I'm seriously curious to know what kind of proof you would
           | accept that would make you believe these accusations.
           | 
           | I hear your sort of response a lot, but it's mostly from
           | people who won't change their mind no matter what (and will
           | continue to move the goalposts as more evidence comes to
           | light), or set the bar so high that it's basically impossible
           | to provide the proof they want.
        
             | DyslexicAtheist wrote:
             | not OP and I believe the accusations. but if she would have
             | wanted a) real justice and b) create even more hell for the
             | accused while c) staying out of the firing line of
             | misogynists on social media, and d) get closure sooner
             | because people won't be after her for the next years to
             | remind her, then she should have filed a police report.
             | 
             | Given his situation (see my other comment[1] on why) she
             | could have made his situation much (I repeat MUCH MUCH)
             | worse than what she did. I wouldn't want to know the amount
             | of abuse she now gets because of it and in the months (if
             | not years to come).
             | 
             | [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26962280
        
           | lukasb wrote:
           | What proof would satisfy you? How is a victim of rape
           | supposed to be able to supply that proof? Should women wear
           | body cams at all times?
        
           | colecut wrote:
           | "What if a bunch of your ex-girlfriends or ex-boyfriends got
           | together and decided to ruin your life with accusations?"
           | 
           | This just pretty much does not happen without reason, and I
           | think it is safe to say that if it did, you are probably a
           | terrible person.
        
             | sneak wrote:
             | > _This just pretty much does not happen without reason,
             | and I think it is safe to say that if it did, you are
             | probably a terrible person._
             | 
             | That's not a safe assumption at all.
        
               | colecut wrote:
               | That's why I threw in a probably.
               | 
               | Innocent until proven guilty and all that jazz, but there
               | will be assumptions nonetheless..
               | 
               | I would love to know what these women stand to gain by
               | humiliating themselves if it is all made up.
        
             | tester756 wrote:
             | >This just pretty much does not happen without reason, and
             | I think it is safe to say that if it did, you are probably
             | a terrible person.
             | 
             | oh c'mon, it's insanely naive, let's dont try to push
             | narration that those things do not happen
        
               | colecut wrote:
               | wow not an example or anecdote or anything huh... The
               | parent comment provided multiple anecdotes. It might not
               | be proof but it is at least evidence.
        
               | colecut wrote:
               | When do they happen, and why did they happen?
        
               | tester756 wrote:
               | Unfortunely I'm unable to come with some kind of
               | recipe/equation for that.
        
           | julianlam wrote:
           | If a bunch of your ex-girlfriends or ex-boyfriends got
           | together to assassinate your character, then between all of
           | those separate relationship, there was only one common
           | factor, you.
           | 
           | A coordinated release in my opinion reinforces the statement.
        
           | throway98752343 wrote:
           | If a bunch of people who once had close, perhaps even loving
           | relationships with you all come forward and risk their own
           | reputation to say you're bad enough to warrant criminal
           | action, I'd say it's on you to prove them wrong.
           | 
           | Or maybe it's all a grand conspiracy, in which case let's
           | follow the money and see that it leads... nowhere.
        
             | dimgl wrote:
             | There doesn't need to be a grand conspiracy to want to
             | smear someone. Additionally, what happened to innocent
             | until PROVEN guilty? Allegations are not proof.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | monocasa wrote:
           | I for one, while having a mountain of ex-
           | girlfriends/boyfriends, haven't left them vindicate enough to
           | do something like coordinate a character assassination
           | against me.
        
           | Accacin wrote:
           | Seriously? How often does this happen? Unless you are a
           | terrible person, I doubt anyone would try to ruin someone's
           | life like this.
           | 
           | This lady seems to have her head screwed on. Her post doesn't
           | seem to me like she's trying to cause a witch hunt and it
           | seems like she's sharing her story in a logical and sensible
           | manner.
           | 
           | I'll gladly read the post from another woman defending John
           | Pretty, but I doubt that's going to be forthcoming.
        
           | joe5150 wrote:
           | why would they be motivated to do that?
        
           | naurupatel wrote:
           | Bummed I had to scroll this far into the thread to see some
           | reason.
           | 
           | This is horrifying if it did happen but I don't know Yifan
           | and I don't know Jon Pretty nor the trustworthiness of
           | either.
           | 
           | It's disturbing to see HN readers jump to conclusions so
           | quickly without proper evidence. If we continue to reduce our
           | capacity for assessment of a situation to individual
           | anecdotal accounts what kind of world will we live in 5 years
           | from now?
        
             | sweetheart wrote:
             | When these things happen, it's often impossible to provide
             | evidence. There is nothing could be proven in the court of
             | law. So we have victims, and no justice in that case, so
             | what are we supposed to tell the victim? Don't get raped?
             | And if they are, and resort to the only form of vindication
             | they have left (openly sharing it), we're supposed to tell
             | them to shut up?
             | 
             | Sharing these things often feels like (and IS) the _only_
             | thing a victim can do to maintain even a shred of their
             | personhood or agency. If we take that away, we are telling
             | victims of horrific abuse to pick up the pieces of their
             | lives alone, and quietly. That is not how one heals, and it
             | will exacerbate a chilling system of victim shaming that
             | leads to untold anguish.
        
           | hamburglar wrote:
           | If a bunch of mg ex-girlfriends coordinated a character
           | assassination campaign against me I would probably be forced
           | to consider that maybe I'm an asshole.
        
             | tester756 wrote:
             | this guy seems to be popular in Scala community, maybe
             | somebody does not like him?
             | 
             | meanwhile you're probably just normal person
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | tracer4201 wrote:
       | Not to discount her story or what happened to her, but I'd be
       | interested to hear his side of the story.
       | 
       | I know nothing about this other than this one article, but I do
       | know someone who committed suicide after a false rape accusation
       | that stuck even after the accuser admitted to making it all up.
        
         | dimgl wrote:
         | I'm not sure why you're getting downvoted. Why shouldn't we
         | hear what he has to say?
         | 
         | That being said, he's already said he's not going to be saying
         | much on the matter.
        
       | willeh wrote:
       | This may be a tone-deaf sidetrack but also perhaps an important
       | piece of advice for some. There should be an impenetrable barrier
       | between ones love life and ones professional life. While there
       | are certainly people who have met their significant other in a
       | professional setting, there are much better ways of doing that,
       | especially nowadays. By striving to keep this separation water
       | tight we can avoid both unwanted advances and false allegations.
       | 
       | The above is not comment on the allegations in the post, any more
       | than if everyone followed the above basic principle we would not
       | have to deal with disturbing stories such as this one. It is
       | important that stories such as this one are told but perhaps with
       | the names left out.
        
         | thatswrong0 wrote:
         | or maybe just don't rape people idk
        
         | tucosan wrote:
         | I've seen careers of members of both sexes ruined because
         | people let the pheromones cloud their judgment.
         | 
         | The number one golden rule of professionalism: never f--- at
         | the factory. Don't make advances. Don't even flirt.
        
         | jnwatson wrote:
         | That's simply unrealistic and unhelpful.
         | 
         | That the author met this person in a professional setting is
         | beside the point. It would be just as serious if it happened at
         | a hobby event.
        
           | willeh wrote:
           | Perhaps `professional` is too narrow then. I think the power
           | differential is an enabling factor for behaviour like this.
           | While there certainly are creeps in normal dating situations,
           | they are often easier to avoid. This story is very much about
           | how this power differential allows one person to abuse
           | another like this.
           | 
           | Being aware of how this affects human relationships is
           | neither unrealistic nor unhelpful. It is something to take
           | seriously and talk about in groups where it could arise.
        
         | noobermin wrote:
         | This is probably good advice but if people are spending more
         | and more of their time at work and work starts becoming half of
         | their life, with outings with coworkers, bosses being your
         | friend and not just your boss, then where can you meet people
         | exactly?
         | 
         | You can't honestly demand both that people be disconnected from
         | their coworkers and that they make work be 90% of their life.
         | One part has to give (preferably the latter part).
        
       | chovybizzass wrote:
       | I'm just going to stay away from Scala altogether now.
        
       | umvi wrote:
       | Jon Pretty's response:
       | https://twitter.com/propensive/status/1387168037908910085/ph...
        
       | JPKab wrote:
       | Jon Pretty sounds like a complete creep and yes, based on this
       | account, a predator.
       | 
       | That being said, there is a court and criminal justice system for
       | a reason. While I empathize with the author, and utterly despise
       | the archetype of high-status men who use their status within
       | programming communities as a tool to target women, I find the
       | nature of these kinds of posts to be counterproductive.
       | Therapeutic to the author? Likely. A way to mobilize support?
       | Certainly. But the method can be abused. Imagine a letter like
       | this targeted at you one day, except unlike Mr. Pretty, you are
       | innocent. Ask yourself if that's a possibility, and if you think
       | that there is a zero probability of anyone maliciously
       | weaponizing accusations of sexual misconduct.
       | 
       | My brother was a victim of a vicious smear by a female colleague,
       | who falsely accused him of stalking her as a result of him
       | calling her out one day for stealing his project and presenting
       | it while he was traveling to the funeral of his wife's
       | grandfather. He was able to show video footage of him picking up
       | his son and daughter at a daycare the very moment the woman
       | claimed he was at her house, but by then, the HR department
       | couldn't turn back, and he was fired. (He was later sent a large
       | gift basket by several of his coworkers who had heard from
       | someone in HR that the charges were false, but "optics" were the
       | reason they had to move forward with his termination.)
        
         | fred_is_fred wrote:
         | > I find the nature of these kinds of posts to be
         | counterproductive. Therapeutic to the author? Likely. A way to
         | mobilize support? Certainly. But the method can be abused.
         | 
         | I feel like you made your own point with the story about your
         | brother. Everyone below is ready to boycott the company which
         | you basically named already.
        
         | NovemberWhiskey wrote:
         | We have a criminal justice system so that, when the standard of
         | proof can be met, the state can punish and deter wrongdoers
         | through fines, forcible incarceration and other limitations on
         | freedom.
         | 
         | No-one is entitled to maintain a positive reputation just
         | because they've yet to be convicted in a criminal court. One
         | can be a creepy sex-pest without that behavior rising the level
         | of criminality, and one should not be surprised if rumors of
         | such behavior gets around.
         | 
         | For those who feel they are being slandered, there is a law of
         | defamation and a civil courts system for a reason. At least
         | there, the burden of proof is only balance of probabilities.
        
         | noobermin wrote:
         | I'm sure what your brother faced is terrible but how exactly
         | does this relate to the story?
        
           | swyx wrote:
           | its a reminder that mob justice is really terrible when it is
           | wrong. we dont have all the facts. we should absolutely take
           | precautions from this guy causing further harm, but the rape
           | accusation needs to go thru the legal process including
           | allowing the accused to defend themselves.
        
             | ummonk wrote:
             | Well, in this instance given that his coworkers sent him a
             | gift basket, it sounds like the mob came to the right
             | conclusions while the institution took the wrong action.
        
             | noobermin wrote:
             | My point is that these are not that analogous. The linked
             | account is one of many accusations against John Pretty.
             | What the comment is referring to is an accusation that
             | sounds like it's one person's word against another and
             | primarily a conflict confined to one HR department. It
             | isn't really "mob justice" then, it's HR siding with one
             | party.
        
           | JPKab wrote:
           | Behavior like this should be punished within the framework of
           | the civil and criminal court system. The court of public
           | opinion has no rules as to the validity of evidence
           | introduced, and relies on informal enforcement mechanisms as
           | well, which are prone to abuse.
           | 
           | The court of public opinion still thinks that the riots in
           | Kenosha were justified (the actual courts heard and saw real
           | evidence that determined that Mr. Blake was indeed sexually
           | assualting his ex and was indeed reaching for a knife when he
           | was shot). The court of public opinion thought that the
           | invasion of Iraq in 2003 was justified because they thought
           | Saddam helped OBL. The recent case of the teenage girl shot
           | in Columbus featured the Court of Public Opinion weighing in
           | that the girl should have been allowed to stab the other girl
           | pinned against that car, and the cop should have "shot her in
           | the leg", which any expert on use of force would immediately
           | explain would not have worked. Why? Because the public as a
           | whole is filled with smart individuals, but an an aggregate
           | level are a bunch of moronic lemmings, like all large groups
           | of people are.
        
             | noobermin wrote:
             | You've listed a number of disparately connected recent news
             | events and referred to some ominous "Court of Public
             | Opinion" which has come to some perspective as if it
             | somehow unites them. My point is you're drawing some thread
             | and connecting this all to your brother. I'll echo again
             | something I said in another reply, I'm not sure how
             | analogous or connected these things are. It sounds mostly
             | like your brother had his word against another accusation,
             | and HR sided against him. Is HR now the "court of public
             | opinion?" I thought that qualifies as due process in this
             | case.
             | 
             | Again you're making some bigger point only you seem to be
             | hearing but spell it out for me and for everyone else.
        
           | emilsedgh wrote:
           | It was an example of how this method can be abused comparing
           | to the criminal justice system.
        
         | caconym_ wrote:
         | Arguably the problem in your brother's case is more his
         | organization being willing to ignore evidence in favor of
         | "optics", and less the ability of women to make their
         | experiences with predators public.
         | 
         | When accusations like this come out, organizations with a stake
         | in the outcome should act with integrity to find the truth and
         | respond to it. Witch hunts are never a good idea. But the fact
         | that some men may be falsely accused doesn't mean women
         | shouldn't speak up when they have experiences like this.
         | Ironically, many (if not most) women who _don't_ speak up
         | publicly end up being gaslighted and marginalized by the very
         | same kinds of corporate entities who were willing to throw your
         | brother under the bus for _optics_. By the same token, it's
         | often a last ditch attempt to get some help after all other
         | avenues have failed.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | Ankintol wrote:
         | > there is a court and criminal justice system for a reason
         | Having supported a few friends trying to push these kinds of
         | complaints through the courts, I think the precise reason this
         | kind of naming and shaming has become so common place is the
         | criminal justice system isn't working well.
         | 
         | Even for fairly straightforward sexual assault case in a
         | liberal jurisdiction _with witnesses_ I 've watched a friend
         | struggle with members of the justice system verbally insulting
         | and degrading them as they try to obtain justice for
         | themselves.
         | 
         | Having seen all that when I see a post like this I understand
         | why the author did not go to court, and don't question it. If
         | we took the time to actually fix the courts I'd be much more
         | skeptical of claims that had not been presented to law
         | enforcement.
         | 
         | I feel for people like your brother who are victims of people
         | abusing the trend, but as long as our justice system fails
         | victims so horribly I think this is the least bad solution
         | available.
        
           | epicureanideal wrote:
           | Can you please provide proof that our justice system is
           | failing victims? Do you just mean that the conviction rate is
           | anything less than 100% for accusations?
           | 
           | Also, can you clarify what you mean by "verbally insulting
           | and degrading them"? It's possible you just mean the lawyer
           | is accusing them of lying... which is what you do when you
           | think a person is lying. The accused does have a presumption
           | of innocence, and the accuser may need to be cross examined
           | under some reasonable amount of emotional stress to see if
           | their behavior under stress reveals that they are lying.
           | There's not really any way around this other than "well,
           | we'll just assume they're telling the truth and anyone they
           | accuse is guilty" which is a far worse solution in my
           | opinion.
        
             | Ankintol wrote:
             | > Can you please provide proof that our justice system is
             | failing victims? Do you just mean that the conviction rate
             | is anything less than 100% for accusations?
             | 
             | I'm confused that you think this is something I can prove
             | through citations. The way we adjudicate whether someone is
             | a victim is through the courts, my claim is the courts do a
             | bad job of this. There are only two things I can think to
             | poinnt you at:
             | 
             | 1. The numerous written accounts online of women attempting
             | to get justice and being stonewalled. Some of the more
             | famous cases during the beginning of the #metoo era showed
             | this.
             | 
             | 2. I can say that the lived experience of every woman I
             | know to have gone through the courts found it unnecessarily
             | degrading (n~=20) and while I believe all of them, only a
             | quarter (n~=5) received a guilty verdict. I know far more
             | women who did not go through the process due to stories
             | from women they know.
             | 
             | I'm personally convinced, if you're not I understand but am
             | not ready to expend the energy digging up cases to try and
             | convince you.
             | 
             | > can you clarify what you mean by "verbally insulting and
             | degrading them"
             | 
             | Literal slurs, misogynistic generalizations about women
             | being temptresses, stereotypically horrible questions such
             | as "were you asking for it?"
        
         | toast0 wrote:
         | > That being said, there is a court and criminal justice system
         | for a reason.
         | 
         | The alleged crimes are difficult to prove in general, but in
         | this case the victim seems to have been only visiting the
         | country where the crime occurred. And didn't fully understand
         | what had happened contemporaneously. I would hope she
         | approaches the appropriate criminal authorities to report, and
         | I would hope something is done, but without local knowledge of
         | how these reports are handled in Berlin, I would expect it to
         | mostly be written down somewhere and no further action taken.
         | 
         | Speaking out in a public way like this helps others who
         | experienced the same pattern of behavior to recognize it, and
         | possibly share similar experiences to the point where a
         | criminal investigation may be started, if relevant. It also may
         | help put people who might be exposed to similar behavior in the
         | future on notice, so they can attempt to avoid it, or report it
         | as it happens, if it happens in the future.
        
         | arthur_sav wrote:
         | Yes, what happened to due diligence?
        
           | klyrs wrote:
           | What happened to free speech? If you think this is slander,
           | don't the same rules apply; mustn't we presume the innocence
           | of Yifan until she's proven guilty?
        
             | arthur_sav wrote:
             | I think you made my point.
             | 
             | We used to have a process to figure out what happened and
             | make a judgement after the facts have been laid out.
             | 
             | What we get now is emotional responses to outrageous
             | headlines and mobs ready to crucify the accused.
             | 
             | What a farce.
        
         | suifbwish wrote:
         | It's the modern day equivalent of being accused of witchcraft.
         | You get a trial but good luck getting your reputation back.
         | People are trained not to doubt this sort of thing end assume
         | guilt, then when confronted they rattle off some supposed
         | statistical fact that it's virtually impossible for the accuser
         | to be lying.
        
           | solosoyokaze wrote:
           | Except there's no such thing as witchcraft but sexual
           | harassment is very real. Victims have every right to speak
           | up.
           | 
           | Libel and slander laws are also real. If someone is actually
           | making a false accusation, there's already legal ways to deal
           | with it.
        
             | matz1 wrote:
             | >there's already legal ways to deal with it
             | 
             | suing can cost money, time, effort, and may not able to
             | necessarily clear your name even if you won.
        
             | hulahoof wrote:
             | As the parent mentioned, the problem isn't recourse it is
             | by that stage your life is already ruined. I don't think
             | there is a clear answer though, the only moral thing to do
             | is to support the accuser.
        
           | UncleMeat wrote:
           | What are people supposed to do then. If your friend sees
           | somebody at the store and says "that guy is an asshole, he
           | used to beat me up in middle school" do you respond "wait I
           | can't develop any opinion of that person without a trial"?
        
             | SpicyLemonZest wrote:
             | Of course not, but that's because I know my friend
             | personally. If I saw someone putting up posters outside my
             | apartment complex saying "the guy in Unit 214 is an
             | asshole, he used to beat me up in middle school", I
             | wouldn't spread the accusation without knowing more about
             | what's going on.
        
               | UncleMeat wrote:
               | Even if you had multiple other people corroborate it?
        
               | SpicyLemonZest wrote:
               | I can't imagine a situation where I would spread an
               | accusation against someone I don't know based on the word
               | of other people I don't know. I'm frankly a bit confused
               | why this is controversial - it seems like common sense to
               | me, and nobody I know in real life has ever done this.
               | (Of course, this is symmetric, so I wouldn't _dis_
               | believe the accusation either.)
        
             | matz1 wrote:
             | What are you going to do ? Just believe it ?
        
         | nindalf wrote:
         | You see the double standard you're preaching?
         | 
         | When a woman is sexually assaulted, you tell them to use the
         | justice system. You stick to this despite other folks telling
         | you the chances of conviction are low. You don't want people to
         | make public accusations.
         | 
         | And yet you, in this thread, have no problem making accusations
         | against Nike for wrongful termination. Why not use the legal
         | system to pursue this? You answer that too - low chance of
         | success apparently.
         | 
         | Within a few minutes you've done exactly what you're asking OP
         | not to do.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | joelbluminator wrote:
         | > who use their status within programming communities as a tool
         | to target women
         | 
         | In general I don't like it as well because it could lead to
         | abuse as we just read - but that's also not always black or
         | white. In some cases it could be real romance or attraction
         | between two adults, even if one has a higher status than the
         | other (that's of course not what happened in this story! I'm
         | just saying it could be consensual, even if the "high status"
         | person uses his status just to get sex. Movie stars and rock
         | stars do the same thing.
        
         | furyofantares wrote:
         | We have criminal and civil justice systems that have different
         | levels of burden of proof, and correspondingly differ in the
         | severity of their outcomes.
         | 
         | It makes sense to also have social justice systems that are
         | lower burden of proof and have lesser consequences. Especially
         | for crimes that are difficult to prosecute and have low
         | visibility.
        
         | supernintendo wrote:
         | This kind of mentality is exactly why predatory behavior is so
         | prevalent in the tech industry. A victim speaks out against
         | their accuser and the first thing you do is reduce her
         | experiences as "counterproductive" and nothing more than
         | therapy for the author. Then you deflect to some personal
         | anecdote of a false accusation that has nothing to do with the
         | issue we're talking about. The issue is about sexual harassment
         | and assault within the Scala community. Your post derails a
         | very important conversation by appealing to the same sorts of
         | narratives that ends up normalizing this kind of behavior -
         | that it is in some way shameful for victims of abuse to speak
         | out because it contributes to some sort of culture where
         | innocent men are more likely to be falsely accused. You're
         | worried about that and not the culture we have now where it's
         | accepted that it's normal for men to harass women through
         | catcalling, stalking and casually making sexual comments about
         | us or judging our bodies. It's no wonder that real instances of
         | abuse would be overlooked.
         | 
         | Anyone who has been through sexual assault knows the trauma you
         | have to live with and how agonizing that can be. There comes a
         | point where abusers need to be called out, if only to protect
         | members of the community who wouldn't know otherwise and might
         | become end up becoming victims themselves. In the case of Scala
         | and Jon Pretty, we see more accounts coming out in the
         | aftermath of Yifan's post [0][1][2]. I wish her and all other
         | victims peace of mind, compassion and healing from the trauma
         | that was forced upon them.
         | 
         | [0] https://killnicole.github.io/statement/
         | 
         | [1]
         | https://twitter.com/brianclapper/status/1387115214064193537?...
         | 
         | [2]
         | https://twitter.com/adelbertchang/status/1387090351626723329...
        
         | nicklecompte wrote:
         | > Imagine a letter like this targeted at you one day, except
         | unlike Mr. Pretty, you are innocent.
         | 
         | "Imagine that you were convicted of murder but, unlike John
         | Wayne Gacy, you were innocent."
         | 
         | Seriously what is the point of comments like this? False
         | convictions are real and very very bad, but I know very few
         | social justice advocates who are opposed to locking up serial
         | killers. Likewise, the existence of unscrupulous people who
         | make false accusations of sexual assault/etc is a real problem.
         | But that's a very shitty excuse to trash every public
         | accusation - especially when in practice it is the public
         | accusation that leads to more victims speaking out.
         | 
         | More to the point: Jon Pretty is a notable public figure who
         | has been credibly accused of extremely toxic and disgusting
         | behavior towards large portions of the Scala community. At
         | least some of this behavior is clearly not illegal, merely
         | dangerous and profoundly unethical[1]. Therefore the court of
         | public opinion is the only court that has solid jurisdiction,
         | so to speak.
         | 
         | [1] That said: some of the accusations and the large number of
         | alleged victims merit a criminal investigation.
        
           | DyslexicAtheist wrote:
           | > Therefore the court of public opinion is the only court
           | that has solid jurisdiction, so to speak.
           | 
           | based on what his public info shows about his location this
           | medium post (and the ensuing public outrage) cops in that
           | country will have to press charges (in case they haven't been
           | pressed already).
           | 
           | There is a high chance he is a flight risk so they will book
           | him, _unless_:                 - he is actually a passport
           | holder of that country (doesn't seem the case), and        -
           | has a proper address registered as is law, (many Brits don't
           | care since British law doesn't require it)       - has a
           | strong social family network in that country, (unlikely)
           | - has a job in that country (contracting/freelancing doesn't
           | count here)
           | 
           | ... then he is looking forward to spending 6 months minimum
           | in "Untersuchungshaft" (hard time) or for whatever length of
           | time investigations are ongoing (until trial).
           | 
           | What I'm getting at is that this is a very serious allegation
           | that _will_ result in hard time if convicted but also until
           | he actually gets his day in court! But for that to happen she
           | needs to do more than a Medium post (make a statement with
           | the cops which can be scary but shouldn't be if she actually
           | brings a lawyer). In case she doesn't then it needs to be
           | considered a character assassination which itself is a
           | felony. In any case posting such a piece is legally risky for
           | her and if she would have bothered getting a lawyer, they
           | most certainly would have advised her against it. The best
           | option for her would be to go through the court system of
           | where he is currently located.
           | 
           | Most other options have a high risk of this going nowhere
           | (cost + extradition etc) and even give more room for
           | speculation and he-said-she-said which shouldn't (imho) be
           | the goal of the metoo movement and indeed it should be called
           | out for mob-justice.
        
             | kelnos wrote:
             | I think there are a few problems with this:
             | 
             | Another commenter mentions somewhere here that the specific
             | thing that happened may not have been illegal in Germany
             | then (but is now). I don't know how to verify that as I
             | don't speak German.
             | 
             | This happened several years ago; there is no physical
             | evidence that remains. This, as you allude to, is a he-
             | said-she-said situation. I assume there are
             | emails/texts/etc. that might speak to Pretty's poor
             | character and ill intent, but that's not much. In the US
             | this would almost certainly not be enough for a conviction.
             | Maybe it would be in Germany or the UK, but I suspect not.
             | 
             | Agree that she may have opened herself up to legal
             | liability (at least an accusation of libel or defamation).
             | As I recall, in the UK it is harder than in the US to
             | defend oneself in court against accusations of libel.
             | 
             | It is possible, though, that Pretty might be dissuaded from
             | bringing any legal action because doing so will only draw
             | more attention to his bad behavior, and could result in a
             | worse situation for him than just going and hiding under a
             | rock for a few years.
        
           | philwelch wrote:
           | I think there's a crucial point that you missed:
           | 
           | "...there is a court and criminal justice system for a
           | reason"
           | 
           | John Wayne Gacy was convicted in a court via the criminal
           | justice system. As a society, we have chosen this as our
           | mechanism for adjudicating these types of accusations, and
           | that mechanism has evolved certain safeguards over time. It's
           | not perfect, but it is a far fairer venue to be tried in than
           | the "court of public opinion". That's not an insignificant
           | point, and you're glossing over it entirely.
        
             | nicklecompte wrote:
             | No, because Gacy was accused of things that were actually
             | illegal, whereas much of what Pretty was accused of is
             | clearly not illegal, just shitty. So, _as I said in my
             | comment_ and hardly "glossed over," the court of public
             | opinion (and the possibility of social  / professional
             | sanction) are entirely appropriate!
             | 
             | This idea that individuals aren't allowed to publicly
             | criticize the actions of public figures, or report on their
             | own experiences with public figures, is so painfully stupid
             | that I find it astonishing that you are arguing in good
             | faith. This is not something you would actually believe in
             | other contexts (say, if a CEO is accused of verbal abuse).
        
           | Cyril_HN wrote:
           | You are conflating conviction with mere, non-legal
           | accusation.
           | 
           | Conviction means someone made an accusation at a legal level,
           | then it was considered worthy by police, then by a country's
           | prosecution service, then by a jury, and then (probably) by
           | an appeals court too. Under normal circumstances, that's a
           | bar infinitely higher than, "I'm claiming to have a story
           | about someone."
        
           | andrewzah wrote:
           | Someone should coin a law for this phenomenon: Every single
           | time a ~~woman~~ victim makes a public statement like this,
           | in the comment sections a man must be discussing false
           | accusations or the court of public opinion. I don't think
           | I've ever not seen this.
           | 
           | People who are abused are damned if they do, damned if they
           | don't.
           | 
           | edit: removed specific gender
           | 
           | edit2: I'm not trying to be inflammatory here. This is a
           | phenomenon that I've noticed over the years.
        
             | JPKab wrote:
             | People who are accused are damned if they do, damned if
             | they don't.
             | 
             | If I lived in a simplistic world like you do where only the
             | rights of the accuser matter, and the rights of the accused
             | are ignored, my life would be easier. But I don't have that
             | luxury.
        
             | Manuel_D wrote:
             | We need to be able to listen to accusers. We also need to
             | be able to evaluate the accusations honestly. If it's taboo
             | to express doubt or skepticism of accusations of sexual
             | impropriety, then that isn't functional either.
             | 
             | I think you've got the phenomenon backwards: when people
             | are skeptical of a murder accusation or an alleged robbery,
             | it's accepted as part of normal discourse. But showing
             | skepticism of allegations of sexual impropriety is not.
        
             | solosoyokaze wrote:
             | It's also a completely false argument since there's libel
             | and slander laws. If the accused was innocent, they would
             | simply sue the false accuser. That they don't says
             | everything.
             | 
             | The barrier and punishment for coming forward as a victim
             | of sexual abuse, rape or harassment is great indeed.
             | Questioning every case is ignorance of existing laws setup
             | to handle any false accusations.
        
               | pc86 wrote:
               | If it's hard to demonstrably prove actual cases of sexual
               | assault, doesn't it follow that it would be _as_ hard, if
               | not harder, to prove the negative?
        
               | epicureanideal wrote:
               | Not trying to sue someone for slander doesn't actually
               | say anything.
               | 
               | There's a lot of factors. How much will it cost? How much
               | publicity will it generate and is that worse than just
               | letting it go? What is the standard of proof that must be
               | met and are they confident they can prove that it's a
               | false statement? What are the consequences if they
               | somehow fail to meet that burden? Etc.
               | 
               | Also, how did the left become the party of "if he's in
               | the courtroom he must be guilty of something"?
        
               | solosoyokaze wrote:
               | So are you saying that victims must win a court case to
               | have their story believed but perpetrators should be
               | taken at their word?
               | 
               | If someone wants to clear their name, go to court and sue
               | for slander. If it's two people's word against each
               | other, I'll believe the victim every time since there's
               | such a high cost of coming forward and slander laws
               | exist.
               | 
               | EDIT Since I'm now throttled...
               | 
               | I'm saying that coming forward either means:
               | 
               | 1. Something really happened to you.
               | 
               | 2. You're breaking the law and can be punished.
               | 
               | High stakes, no? Which is one of the many reasons false
               | accusations are exceedingly rare if not non-existent.
               | 
               | I will always believe the victim unless the perpetrator
               | wins a libel case. It's the legal mechanism for fighting
               | back.
        
               | pc86 wrote:
               | > _So are you saying that victims must win a court case
               | to have their story believed but perpetrators should be
               | taken at their word?_
               | 
               | Not the person to whom you're replying, but the
               | presumption of innocence means this exactly. If you are
               | accused of a crime, you are _presumed innocent_ until it
               | can be proven you 're not.
        
               | endominus wrote:
               | So are you saying that victims (of slander) must win a
               | court case to have their story believed but perpetrators
               | (of slander) should be taken at their word?
               | 
               | The sword cuts both ways.
               | 
               | Except it doesn't, because if you're in the news for
               | {serious crime} and later clear your name, your
               | reputation is still probably trashed. There is no real
               | mechanism for recovery in the modern panopticon. Lowering
               | standards of evidence required for conviction (to
               | basically nothing, if some people are taken seriously) is
               | such a kludgy, cumbersome hack to solve this problem that
               | it shocks me that people present it seriously. It's
               | utopian thinking.
        
               | JPKab wrote:
               | So in your judgement, a person who is accused is guilty
               | if they don't retaliate with a slander/libel lawsuit? Did
               | you ever stop to think that maybe, just maybe, lawyers
               | and filing lawsuits might be expensive, prohibitively so?
               | 
               | The "existing laws setup to handle any false allegations"
               | exist only for accusations made in the court system.
               | 
               | It's amazing to me how little thought people like you
               | have behind your beliefs. You basically just regurgitate
               | what you heard from your college electives with zero
               | mindfulness or introspection.
        
               | joshuamorton wrote:
               | > The "existing laws setup to handle any false
               | allegations" exist only for accusations made in the court
               | system.
               | 
               | This is wrong though.
               | 
               | > Did you ever stop to think that maybe, just maybe,
               | lawyers and filing lawsuits might be expensive,
               | prohibitively so?
               | 
               | Indeed, and reporting a crime, and ensuring it is handled
               | appropriately by a police force is also exceedingly
               | costly, though perhaps not financially.
               | 
               | Significant portions of your post violate the HN
               | guidelines.
        
               | djbebs wrote:
               | That's not how libel and slander works. You not only have
               | to prove that the statements were false, but that the
               | accuser knew they were false and was deliberately
               | malicious in spreading the falsehoods
        
             | Sebb767 wrote:
             | And people who are accused are damned, period. I can see
             | why mob justice can sometimes be the only options for
             | victims, but the abuse potential is _massive_.
             | 
             | By the way, I see no reason a woman or a trans person could
             | not make this statement.
        
               | andrewzah wrote:
               | "but the abuse potential is massive."
               | 
               | I think people grossly exaggerate this. We have libel and
               | slander laws. Individual companies aside, entire
               | communities of people aren't that stupid. In my opinion,
               | this is a really pessimistic view of people and also not
               | based in reality in my experience.
               | 
               | At the end of the day, we need to be able to listen to
               | victims. The amount of fake accusers compared to real
               | victims is microscopic.
               | 
               | "And people who are accused are damned, period."
               | 
               | Not really. There are literally countless examples of
               | accusations/allegations and nothing happening to people
               | for whatever reason, usually influence/popularity.
        
               | philwelch wrote:
               | > I think people grossly exaggerate this. We have libel
               | and slander laws.
               | 
               | Yeah, but think about how those work. (IANAL).
               | 
               | If I can convince enough people that you are an awful
               | person, I can ruin your reputation. As a recourse, you
               | can sue me for defamation. But once you do that, we've
               | switched sides--now I am the defendant and you are the
               | accuser. Unlike a criminal defendant, the defendant in
               | the court of public opinion never enjoys a presumption of
               | innocence. Instead, he has to carry that burden of proof
               | through a civil lawsuit just to clear his name.
               | 
               | > Individual companies aside, entire communities of
               | people aren't that stupid.
               | 
               | If that's true, why bother with courts of law in the
               | first case? If the mob is capable of adjudicating
               | questions of guilt or innocence, we're wasting a lot of
               | money on lawyers as a society.
        
               | zo1 wrote:
               | >"I think people grossly exaggerate this. We have libel
               | and slander laws."
               | 
               | I don't understand what those laws have to do with this?
               | As if they somehow protect a potentially innocent party
               | from incorrect accusations? At what point would an
               | accusation such as the one in the blog post even
               | constitute as libel/slander?
        
               | JPKab wrote:
               | I should note that my brother thought exactly the way you
               | did, before this happened to him. Just an FYI.
               | 
               | He didn't move to Portland randomly. He's the most
               | liberal of the liberal. Just remember that you almost
               | never hear media coverage of accusations that turn out to
               | be false. You just hear about the accusations when they
               | are first made. Do you think the coverage of the Duke
               | Lacrosse case was equally high after the accusations were
               | proven to be fabricated?
        
           | commandlinefan wrote:
           | > Imagine that you were convicted of murder
           | 
           | OP points out that we have criminal courts for a reason -
           | he's not comparing this scenario with an actual conviction
           | after a trial with presumed innocence. In your analogy, it
           | would have to be common for people to be fired from their
           | jobs (and blackballed from entire industries) on the strength
           | of a murder accusation that hasn't even been presented to the
           | police, much less been through a trial.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | JPKab wrote:
           | John Wayne Gacy was convicted in a criminal court of law,
           | with rules, where he was presumed innocent until proven
           | guilty.
           | 
           | You attempt to draw a connection, but it's a false analogy
           | out of the gate.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | kelnos wrote:
             | I mostly agree with the point you're making, but I think
             | it's a bit of a stretch to assume that the jury actually
             | really presumed Gacy innocent at the start of his trial.
             | 
             | Like everyone, they were certainly biased toward assuming
             | his guilt in the run-up to the trial.
             | 
             | No system is perfect, and humans are fallible. But that's
             | kinda the underlying issue with this entire discussion: if
             | she had gone to the authorities (especially if only years
             | after the incident in question, and also consider that the
             | incident happened in a different country), would there be
             | any legal remedy here? I think it's pretty likely that
             | nothing material would have come of that.
        
           | throway98752343 wrote:
           | I'd never heard of that guy, so to save others the trouble,
           | in 1980 he was found "guilty of 33 charges of murder; he was
           | also found guilty of sexual assault and taking indecent
           | liberties with a child" and was executed by the USA in 1994.
        
             | DonHopkins wrote:
             | All true, but you forgot the money shot:
             | 
             | "A clown can get away with murder." --John Wayne Gacy
             | 
             | John Wayne Gacy, often called the "Killer Clown," was one
             | of the worst serial killers in U.S. history, raping and
             | murdering at least 33 young male victims.
             | 
             | https://www.biography.com/crime-figure/john-wayne-gacy
             | 
             | John Waters hangs one of John Wayne Gacy's infamous clown
             | paintings on the wall of his guest room, so his guests
             | never stay too long.
             | 
             | Politically Incorrect with John Waters
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7zFp7CaJqE&ab_channel=luri
             | e...
             | 
             | Chilling paintings by 'killer clown' John Wayne Gacy
             | expected to sell for PS7,000 each
             | 
             | https://metro.co.uk/2017/10/09/chilling-paintings-by-
             | killer-...
        
         | tootie wrote:
         | I think that's a pretty cynical POV. False accusations happen,
         | but aren't the norm. Far more abusers get away with their bad
         | behavior than good people are wrongly punished. Yifan already
         | has a second woman coming forward describing similar behavior
         | as well some witnesses to some of the public parts. It's
         | probably unlikely she'd be able to prove a criminal case in
         | whatever country this happened, but we don't need bad behavior
         | to be criminal to declare it unacceptable and stop rewarding
         | it. It's likely we'll see a few more pretty soon, hear Pretty's
         | side and then the court of public opinion can render a
         | decision. Right now, her story is pretty plausible and she has
         | seemingly no motive to fabricate. He won't go to jail, but he
         | will stop being invited to conferences and likely lose his
         | livelihood.
        
         | devilduck wrote:
         | You know the reason people started leaning into social justice
         | is because the cops and the courts weren't doing a very good
         | job? That's why we are where we are. Also the fact that a lot
         | of dudes just can't imagine a world where they just keep to
         | themselves doesn't really help the problem. But again, this is
         | where we find ourselves and it is going to keep continuing.
         | 
         | And frankly the idea that there are people that believe "smear
         | campaigns" are as normal as every day sexual harassment is
         | extremely laughable.
        
         | matz1 wrote:
         | > Imagine a letter like this targeted at you one day, except
         | unlike Mr. Pretty, you are innocent.
         | 
         | You already assume he is guilty ?
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | btilly wrote:
         | I only kind of agree.
         | 
         | In this case a Chinese woman living in the USA apparently got
         | raped in Germany 3 years ago. To involve law enforcement she
         | would have to travel to a country where she doesn't speak the
         | language, to make an accusation for which she has no evidence
         | but her word, against a man who lives in another city.
         | 
         | What, exactly, do you imagine that the police are likely to do
         | with her report?
         | 
         | I hate the court of public opinion as much or more as the next
         | guy. But if this is a real pattern and he is as practiced as it
         | sounds, after 10-20 women come forth then I'll be very
         | confident that the crime is real. And there is also a chance
         | that we can hit a critical mass where law enforcement somewhere
         | may take an interest after all.
         | 
         | I agree with you that ideally this would go to the police first
         | and they would actually act. But in the real world, she picked
         | one of the best of the bad options available to her.
        
           | baobabKoodaa wrote:
           | > raped
           | 
           | I agree with everything else in your post except for the
           | description of events as "rape". According to the story she
           | wrote, they had sex when she was drunk, and she thought for
           | months after the fact that the sex had been consensual. To me
           | it sounds like sexual abuse / exploitation, not rape. (Unless
           | you're making the pedantic argument that having sex with an
           | intoxicated person is always rape, in which case 2
           | intoxicated persons having sex would mean that both persons
           | rape each other.)
        
           | gambiting wrote:
           | >>To involve law enforcement she would have to travel to a
           | country where she doesn't speak the language, to make an
           | accusation for which she has no evidence but her word,
           | against a man who lives in another city.
           | 
           | Well, that's not strictly true. At least the official advice
           | in the UK is that even if the crime happened elsewhere you
           | should still report it locally, then the case _should_ be
           | forwarded to the authorities in the country where it
           | allegedly happened.
           | 
           | https://www.helpforvictims.co.uk/content/Q1.htm#:~:text=You%.
           | ...
           | 
           | No idea how/if that would work in US, but in general you
           | _should_ be able to report it locally.
        
           | Fern_Blossom wrote:
           | >To involve law enforcement she would have to travel to a
           | country where she doesn't speak the language, to make an
           | accusation for which she has no evidence but her word,
           | against a man who lives in another city.
           | 
           | That's what an embassy is for... they help deal with these
           | situation.
           | 
           | >And there is also a chance that we can hit a critical mass
           | where law enforcement somewhere may take an interest after
           | all.
           | 
           | Don't complain that a law enforcement agency doesn't do
           | anything if they're never made aware of the problem.
        
             | nawgz wrote:
             | There are plenty of stories of law enforcement ignoring,
             | downplaying, and even harassing victims of sexual crimes
             | who try to report it. Please do not act like the police are
             | a high trust authority who act only in good faith - we have
             | overwhelmingly seen the other side of that in these past
             | years.
        
               | suifbwish wrote:
               | There are also plenty of stories of the legal system
               | working as intended. You can create any narrative you
               | want from selectively paying attention to data.
        
               | nawgz wrote:
               | Yes, sure. Instead, by holistically paying attention to
               | data, we can see that rape is a wildly underprosecuted
               | crime[0], and thus we can stop acting like there are no
               | possible barriers obstructing these victims from justice.
               | 
               | Actually, it's kind of hilarious when I put it this
               | way... you're the one selectively looking at the data to
               | justify inaction.
               | 
               | [0]:
               | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/10/06/less-
               | than...
        
               | suifbwish wrote:
               | It's clear that emotion clouds judgement on this issue
               | more so than even murder.
               | 
               | Did you just cite Washington Post as an authoritative
               | source?
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | cogman10 wrote:
             | > That's what an embassy is for... they help deal with
             | these situation.
             | 
             | Have you ever worked with an embassy? I have, it's no
             | picnic even in the best of circumstances (lost passport).
             | It takes time to setup such an appointment and you are
             | expecting a young college student to have the wherewithal
             | to navigate that all while being on a budget and having
             | their current lodging with the aggressor.
             | 
             | You are expecting an abused person to do everything right
             | in a foreign county while currently staying with their
             | abuser.
             | 
             | Don't blame a sexual abuse victim for not doing everything
             | right and by the books.
        
           | pydry wrote:
           | >What, exactly, do you imagine that the police are likely to
           | do with her report?
           | 
           | If it's anything like the UK (and I suspect it is), they'll
           | likely take it seriously. For example, see the police's
           | reaction here:
           | 
           | https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/comments/mt1kw4/withd.
           | ..
           | 
           | If she got robbed, on the other hand, or she reported
           | something like this ten years ago, they'd probably say "meh
           | we are busy, here's your crime reference number now go away".
        
           | belorn wrote:
           | Sweden and Uk spent tens of millions dealing with extradition
           | case for just getting a hearing over an accusation with
           | similar amount of evidence.
           | 
           | Technically the legal system could do the same in her case.
        
             | bashinator wrote:
             | Technically correct is the least useful kind of correct.
        
         | api wrote:
         | I don't like this court-of-public-opinion stuff much either and
         | the abuse potential is real. At the same time: what else are
         | people going to do? There seems to be no other recourse.
         | 
         | Most people let bullies get away with it because even stepping
         | in as a third party means standing up to a bully. It can be
         | scary, but even if there's no real risk it's still a fucking
         | pain in the ass. Who wants to get into a mud slinging
         | competition with a predator? Or get a harassment lawsuit? If
         | someone is willing to harass other people this way, they will
         | certainly harass you this way.
        
           | SpicyLemonZest wrote:
           | I don't blame the people who go public - I just wish that the
           | rest of us would be a bit more hesitant to immediately signal
           | boost them. (For example, I might avoid upvoting a story like
           | this to the top of a tech news aggregation platform when the
           | accused hasn't had time to respond.)
        
           | darig wrote:
           | The 2nd amendment still exists (for now). Protect yourself
           | and eliminate a predator in 1 easy step. Please. For the
           | children.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | fishnchips wrote:
           | Contact law enforcement.
        
             | marcinzm wrote:
             | You mean the law enforcement in a foreign country that you
             | are visiting for only a few days? The one that would
             | require you to spend untold thousands of dollars, that you
             | don't have, on flights if you had to testify in a court in
             | a language that you do not fluently speak?
        
               | varjag wrote:
               | What do you do if you're mugged in a foreign country?
        
               | marcinzm wrote:
               | Generally count yourself lucky to be alive and then fly
               | home in a few days.
        
               | varjag wrote:
               | So you suggest the victims should just shrug it off.
        
               | jokethrowaway wrote:
               | The chances of the police and the court system doing
               | something are not many and it will cost you.
               | 
               | I tried fighting injustices in court, it often doesn't
               | work and you just end up wasting money.
               | 
               | I would have rather spent the money on a guy with a
               | wrench.
        
               | marcinzm wrote:
               | I mean they could post on social media about their
               | account and see if the community acts.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | vkou wrote:
             | Law enforcement will tell you to pound sand. Much (not all)
             | of this kind of abuse isn't _illegal_ , and DAs rarely want
             | to prosecute the parts that are. It ruins their district's
             | crime stats, it's difficult to prosecute, and many of them
             | just don't care.
             | 
             | Not to mention that this took place while traveling to a
             | foreign country.
             | 
             | Edit: I'm assuming that folks disagreeing with this post
             | have had nothing but success with reporting sexual
             | harassment and assault to police departments, foreign and
             | domestic... Because the alternative assumption is a lot
             | less charitable.
        
             | rodgerd wrote:
             | Yes, I'm sure they'll treat it with the seriousness that
             | they treat the decades-long ignored pile of rape kits.
        
             | domano wrote:
             | This seems international though, this is not simple. As a
             | victim doubly so, since you also have to combat your
             | damaged pyche. In the end there needs to be an
             | investigation, but sadly some uproar is needed for
             | something to happen in cases like these.
        
             | ivan_gammel wrote:
             | This is generally a good idea and the right thing to do,
             | but cancel culture still exists for some reason. Probably
             | it's because people do not trust conventional justice and
             | do not believe in law enforcement?
        
               | fishnchips wrote:
               | Publicly taking high moral ground when it costs you
               | nothing is insanely gratifying and as old as the humanity
               | itself.
        
               | api wrote:
               | In the legitimate "cancel culture" cases you generally
               | find that all other avenues have been tried multiple
               | times, often for _years_.
               | 
               | In the original #metoo Hollywood case it's that the whole
               | culture was/is rotten and has been for decades. There's
               | no other recourse because the culture normalizes "casting
               | couch" type stuff. That's where the term comes from after
               | all.
        
               | marcinzm wrote:
               | Law enforcement is not perfect and these crimes are often
               | hard to prove in isolation. So worst case you go to law
               | enforcement, they talk to the perpetrator but do nothing,
               | and then the perpetrator mostly destroys your future
               | career. A lot of downside and risk for the victim. You
               | can look at the film industry for numerous famous
               | examples of victims being blacklisted in retaliation.
        
               | ivan_gammel wrote:
               | That's exactly my point. The law enforcement is not
               | adequate to the needs of society and cannot offer
               | efficient protection for victims. Cancel culture can be
               | ugly, but for many it's the only way to get justice, and
               | it is a sign that some reform is needed.
        
             | devilduck wrote:
             | Yes because that has proven to be extremely effective!
             | Amazing insight here.
        
             | xahrepap wrote:
             | A relative ran an online community. It was small, but not
             | tiny
             | 
             | There was some cyber-bullying (for lack of a better word)
             | going on. My relative called law-enforcement, then was
             | referred to the FBI. A case was filed and was told they
             | would circle back on it to collect details. They never
             | called back. My relative was never able to make contact
             | with them about it again.
             | 
             | Completely ignored. I can't remember the details, but it
             | wasn't just a "you're fat and ugly" type of bullying. But
             | it was a real safety issue for a member of the community.
             | Law enforcement completely failed in this case.
             | 
             | Now what?
             | 
             | I despise the "public court". The internet and viral online
             | comments deciding who's innocent and who's guilty. (the man
             | during the US capitol riots who lost his job because he was
             | seen in a photo holding a black woman. Turns out, he was
             | actually saving her life! But the "public court" announced
             | him as guilty and they went after him, contacting his
             | employer, people saying awful things about him online.
             | https://kfor.com/news/washington-dc-bureau/white-man-seen-
             | in... )
             | 
             | But on the flip side... what do you do when law enforcement
             | completely fails?
        
               | jokethrowaway wrote:
               | Public law enforcement doesn't have any incentive doing
               | anything.
               | 
               | We need private police and a new legal system
        
               | klyrs wrote:
               | Private police??? Like, uber but for swatting? No thank
               | you
        
             | UncleMeat wrote:
             | My sister has been raped. The officers laughed. My wife has
             | been harassed. The officers wrote some things down on forms
             | and did nothing.
             | 
             | It achieves little.
        
         | knodi123 wrote:
         | The redress for a false accusation that results in serious harm
         | to your career is a slander lawsuit. Sounds like all the ducks
         | are in a row, evidence wise, so just figure out how much damage
         | she caused, and sue her for it.
         | 
         | I know it's not quite the same, and an ounce of prevention is
         | better than a pound of cure- but there's this narrative that a
         | person who is falsely accused is utterly powerless before the
         | power of any angry woman willing to yell "perv", and that's
         | just false.
        
           | vkou wrote:
           | What's doubly ironic is that the bar for convicting an actual
           | predator in a criminal court of law is incredibly high, but
           | the bar for winning a libel case against a false accuser in a
           | civil court is... A lot lower.
           | 
           | It's far easier to obtain justice when you are falsely
           | accused, then when you have been assaulted - but HN threads
           | on the subject are predominantly full of arguments about how
           | awful the falsely accused have it.
        
           | JPKab wrote:
           | My brother was suicidal at one time due to the accusations,
           | and more importantly, the fact that everyone immediately
           | believed them. When his wife got the idea to call the daycare
           | and ask if they had video footage, he thought for sure he'd
           | be saved. (His employer also had his company cell phone
           | location data which further corroborated his alibi). He
           | literally proved himself innocent to his HR department. But
           | if you've ever been involved on the inside in one of these
           | situations, once HR has initiated a termination, they end up
           | introducing additional liability if they halt the termination
           | (effectively admitting they were in the wrong).
           | 
           | He certainly COULD have sued for slander, but the cost of the
           | lawsuit and retaining a lawyer, and for him, the emotional
           | toll, was too high.
           | 
           | And I completely understand that there is a huge toll for
           | accusers as well.
           | 
           | I think, depending on the venue, that the process can be very
           | traumatic for accusers with real claims, and also accused who
           | are targeted by false accusations. The colleague who accused
           | him was a woman who his coworkers had warned him "not to
           | cross" because she was "a total sociopath" according to his
           | other team members. One of them even told him "you should
           | have listened to me" after he was terminated.
           | 
           | It's interesting how poorly most coders understand the
           | realities of human nature. People aren't devils, but they
           | aren't angels either.
           | 
           | I just really resent the fact that any attempt at injecting
           | nuance into these kinds of conversations brings out attacks
           | from the un-nuanced, tribalists who reduce everything down to
           | bumper sticker slogans and identity groups. It's disgusting
           | and reminds me of the sectarian conflicts I've witnessed in
           | other nations.
        
         | 908B64B197 wrote:
         | > heard from someone in HR that the charges were false, but
         | "optics" were the reason they had to move forward with his
         | termination.
         | 
         | Time to name the company.
        
           | JPKab wrote:
           | A massive company that makes overpriced, low-quality athletic
           | products that double as status symbols, which they
           | manufacture overseas (often using child labor) but then sell
           | for massive markups in the US, Europe, etc. They have an
           | extremely aggressive "woke" presence in their advertising,
           | because as long as you care about social justice for your
           | targeted customers, who cares that "people of color" in the
           | developing world are being paid slave wages to create your
           | products. You probably know who I'm talking about now, but
           | I'm not going to name them.
        
             | throwaway0a5e wrote:
             | So is this company's products more of a status symbol with
             | the Chryler 300 and Newports type crowd or the Lada and
             | vodka type crowd?
        
             | darig wrote:
             | you spelled "nike" wrong.
        
             | medicineman wrote:
             | Nike.
             | 
             | Hell, I'd do anything for a downvote.
        
             | Elof wrote:
             | Seems like your brother can probably sue for damages if
             | this is the whole story
        
               | donnythecroc wrote:
               | Yes clearly, if he has corroborating evidence. Also, it's
               | easy to get an unfair dismissal lawyer on compensation
               | share I.e. they take 40% of any compensation as their
               | fee. Plus if it's a major corp and your brother has
               | evidence then they'll usually have a budget/insurance for
               | paying off these types of claims.
        
               | JPKab wrote:
               | He was told his case was legitimate, but the cost was too
               | much for him to afford. Also, large corporations have
               | massive legal teams.
               | 
               | The narrative that is widely believed is that "the cost
               | of making an accusation is so high that nobody would do
               | it, so automatically believe accusers" and they pretend
               | that there is no cost to being accused.
               | 
               | It's an oversimplification and ignores the game theory
               | involved in these things.
        
             | baryphonic wrote:
             | Sounds like your brother believed in something and
             | sacrificed everything. If I were him, I might hire an
             | employment lawyer and sue the shit out of them. Ya know,
             | "Just do it."
        
               | JPKab wrote:
               | The cost was hundreds of thousands of dollars, and the
               | company would have fought it for about 3 years, based on
               | the advice of the wrongful termination specialist he
               | consulted. He would have been bankrupted, and did what
               | most people do, and just moved on.
        
               | PascLeRasc wrote:
               | So now you see why most women who are sexually assaulted
               | don't report it.
               | 
               | https://www.rainn.org/statistics/criminal-justice-system
        
               | ummonk wrote:
               | Seriously! The justice system is often ineffective for
               | delivering justice both to victims of sexual abuse and
               | victims of false accusations.
        
               | tomp wrote:
               | Can you explain the reasoning a bit more? _JPKab_ 's
               | argument is that the estimated costs were $100k+. In my
               | uneducated eyes, the estimated cost of reporting a crime
               | is 30 minutes trip to the police station and filling some
               | report / talking to someone, maybe 2 hours of your time?
               | Essentially trivial.
        
               | orwin wrote:
               | Ok, my sister was raped by her boss, was found in her
               | appartment three days later my father, who immediately
               | called a lawyer (female, specialized in criminal law).
               | She told my sister that since they were only two in the
               | kitchen with no surveillance camera, she couldn't sue but
               | only report (its called "main courante" in my country)
               | and "hope" that another girl is raped before 2039 and
               | report it. The policeman concurred, nothing to be done.
               | 
               | I still shout "rapist owned" each time i pass his
               | business, as do my brother and my father, my sister
               | privately shared her story with his daughter on facebook
               | last year (his daughter is one year younger than my
               | sister, the creep), basically destroying their
               | relationship, and the cooking school my sister went to
               | directly called all female student and ex-student to tell
               | them to avoid his restaurant. I also scraped social
               | networks (only public data, nothing illegal) for his
               | activities two years ago but only found business
               | contacts. Each of them still received a nice email
               | though.
               | 
               | I will move back next month, so i will continue my
               | shouting campaign harder after the pandemic end and hope
               | his business can't survive covid. Since his restaurant
               | will be between my place and the place i keep my boat,
               | i'm pretty sure i can be successful.
        
               | DonHopkins wrote:
               | So they swooshed it under the rug, and you don't want to
               | air max facts about the case in public?
        
               | baryphonic wrote:
               | That's awful. Even more reason for me to despise That
               | Company.
               | 
               | My father managed a mom & pop shoe store in the 80s. That
               | Company got its start distributing through small local
               | shoe stores, and as soon as they started making big
               | bucks, began treating the local stores like garbage.
               | Throughout my childhood, we were banned from buying or
               | wearing their, as you accurately put it, overpriced, low
               | quality crap.
        
           | CoastalCoder wrote:
           | IANAL, but if the story is true, would it be reasonable to
           | sue that coworker for defamation/slander and for lost wages?
        
             | ratsmack wrote:
             | The average person doesn't have the means to launch an
             | extensive and hard to win lawsuit like that.
        
         | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
         | >That being said, there is a court and criminal justice system
         | for a reason.
         | 
         | If you come to my home and act in a way that my family and
         | other guests find offensive, we're not going to invite you
         | back. We're also not going to try to prosecute you.
         | 
         | There is a huge set of behaviors that are not criminal nor
         | civil offenses, but still things that if experienced would
         | likely lead people to want to avoid you, not hire you, not work
         | with you etc.
         | 
         | The author did not claim that Mr. Pretty broke any laws. She
         | doesn't call for any legal consequences. There's no basis for
         | suggesting that the story needs to be judged by a legal system.
        
         | jfengel wrote:
         | The problem is that only a tiny percentage of harassers and
         | rapists are ever convicted. The court -- rightly -- sets a very
         | high bar to conviction, and police and prosecutors often won't
         | even attempt it unless the evidence is overwhelming.
         | 
         | You're concerned that this is stacked against you, but the
         | courts are stacked against the victims. So it doesn't really
         | suffice to decry the one problem without addressing the other.
         | 
         | So perhaps you can see what it looks like to many women when
         | you say, "Hey, I'm sorry this happened to you, but this bad
         | thing happened to my brother, so _shrug_". Did your brother go
         | to the courts and police to address these issues? It may been
         | unlawful termination.
         | 
         | There is a large domain of behavior that is either nebulously
         | legal or difficult to prosecute but which makes our communities
         | much, much worse. It's counterproductive to tell the people
         | victimized by that to stop talking about it. The solution is to
         | go forward and find ways to set up our communities to protect
         | people. And that can't mean just asking victims to accept that.
        
           | epicureanideal wrote:
           | > the courts are stacked against the victims
           | 
           | Ah, that pesky presumption of innocence getting in the way of
           | our 100% conviction rate. /s
        
             | orwin wrote:
             | The first sentence is literally:
             | 
             | "The problem is that only a tiny percentage of harassers
             | and rapists are ever convicted. The court -- rightly --
             | sets a very high bar to conviction, and police and
             | prosecutors often won't even attempt it unless the evidence
             | is overwhelming.".
             | 
             | First, its a poor place and topic for sarcasm (it just an
             | observation, i'm not against it, i do have good friends
             | like that) but more than that, GP actually adressed the
             | point you're trying to highlight in his first sentence.
        
             | supercheetah wrote:
             | That wasn't being disputed. It does mean that, in the real
             | world, a lot of victims will never see justice until
             | there's overwhelming evidence, if ever.
        
           | bitwize wrote:
           | > The court -- rightly -- sets a very high bar to conviction
           | 
           | Rape convictions are so abysmally low that there's been a lot
           | of rethinking in feminist circles as to whether the "beyond
           | reasonable doubt" standard -- or even the presumption of
           | innocence -- is fair or just. Some countries have been
           | looking for ways to ameliorate this. For example, in thr USA,
           | college date rape is such a problem that universities are
           | required to investigate accusations of sexual harassment or
           | assault and discipline offenders based on the looser
           | preponderance standard, or be found in violation of Title IX
           | by the federal Department of Education.
        
           | chmod600 wrote:
           | "The problem is that only a tiny percentage of harassers and
           | rapists are ever convicted."
           | 
           | How can that be known? Why do you presume that someone is a
           | harasser or rapist if they weren't convicted?
        
             | joshuamorton wrote:
             | Because I know people who have been harassed and raped and
             | whose harassers and rapists weren't punished.
             | 
             | I know literally dozens of stories like that, and maybe a
             | handful where the harasser or rapist was punished at all.
             | Of those, even fewer where they were convicted of a crime.
             | 
             | The majority of these cases the victim isn't public in
             | their accusation, there's no argument that they're trying
             | to gain something or hurt someone else. So by comparing the
             | data that is presumably more honest, that people make in
             | private, to that in public, we can assume that most
             | instances of harassment go unpunished.
        
               | throwaway0427 wrote:
               | I'm one. I'm also male. It was brutal. No, I did not go
               | to the police. I was far too afraid.
        
             | lukasb wrote:
             | Less than 1% of rapes lead to felony convictions:
             | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/10/06/less-
             | than...
             | 
             | Same article notes that between 2-8% of rape complaints are
             | false. Worries about false rape claims are wildly
             | overblown.
        
               | throwaway0a5e wrote:
               | >Less than 1% of rapes lead to felony convictions
               | 
               | Car break-ins outnumber car thefts by several orders of
               | magnitude. Assaults outnumber murders by probably a
               | similiar amount.
               | 
               | I'd be very suspicious if there was a class of crime
               | where any large fraction of instances result in higher
               | level charges being brought.
               | 
               | >between 2-8% worries about false rape claims are wildly
               | overblown.
               | 
               | If 2% of the time cops fired their weapons it blew up in
               | their hand or 2% of car crashes resulted in a fatality it
               | would be an outrage.
               | 
               | 2-8% is huge when you're talking about people's lives
               | being permanently altered for the worse.
               | 
               | If anything the worries are under-blown. But then again,
               | when compared to the rest of the court system (not that
               | long ago they were framing random minorities in order to
               | close cases) and prosecution process 2-8% might not be
               | that bad.
        
               | BurningFrog wrote:
               | The number of fake rape complaint surely depends on how
               | they're treated.
               | 
               | If an accusation only has effect if it's proven in court,
               | there will be few of them.
               | 
               | If you can destroy someone's life by a mere accusation,
               | false accusations will be very common. Also, just a
               | _threat_ of such an accusation will be very powerful.
        
               | JPKab wrote:
               | You're on point with this.
               | 
               | I think we can all agree that the accusers in the Salem
               | witch trials couldn't have been telling the truth, unless
               | they were hallucinating (there's a theory that lysergic
               | acid in grain could have caused hallucinations, but its
               | weak and not proven).
               | 
               | Let's just agree that none of the women executed in Salem
               | were actually practicing black magic. Why were there so
               | many accusers claiming they were? I mean, false
               | accusations are "exceedingly rare" and accusers "gain
               | nothing".
               | 
               | Yeah, people in the 18-35 demographic, to quote Bill
               | Maher, "are the favored advertising demo because they're
               | gullible." They don't know anything about human nature
               | either.
        
               | ALittleLight wrote:
               | Doesn't your set of statistics show that rape accusations
               | are 2-8 times as likely to be proven false as they are to
               | be proven true?
        
               | WesolyKubeczek wrote:
               | And yet you wouldn't like to fall within those 2-8%.
        
               | lukasb wrote:
               | Aren't you more worried about the 99% of rape victims who
               | receive no justice of any kind?
        
               | suifbwish wrote:
               | No. The two concepts have nothing to do with eachother.
               | It's bad that victims don't get justice but it's also bad
               | if people are convicted of crimes they didn't commit.
               | Wrongfully punishing people without sound evidence just
               | to satisfy the feelings of someone who was wronged is not
               | a sane justice system.
        
               | WesolyKubeczek wrote:
               | I am, and still I prefer a system where some guilty
               | people will avoid a punishment versus an overreaching
               | system which will also punish some innocent people for
               | some kind of a greater good.
               | 
               | What the linked article is talking about, though, does
               | not seem to be ,,rape" as defined by a criminal code, so
               | all this rape discussion hardly applies.
               | 
               | Nevertheless, one can be a creepy disgusting asshole and
               | still not do things which are illegal, technically
               | speaking.
        
               | suifbwish wrote:
               | The article notes that 2-8% of rape cases are PROVEN
               | false. The real number is definitely higher than that as
               | people do go to prison under wrongful conviction. Bottom
               | line is if you don't have compelling evidence for a crime
               | you don't have a case. That's a good thing as it protects
               | us from unjust punishment most of the time. It's real sad
               | that victims that can't prove their case don't have
               | justice but it's much more important that the innocent
               | are not wrongfully punished.
        
               | joshuamorton wrote:
               | It doesn't actually say that.
               | 
               | The article cited[0] is a review of analysis from ~1980
               | to 2005. If you restrict yourself to only analysis that
               | don't count cases involving alcohol as false reports, the
               | number drops to 2-3%.
               | 
               | The article also notes that false reports are usually
               | different from real reports, important among these facts
               | is that false reports are often attention seeking, and so
               | are examples of what society thinks rape "should" look
               | like (violent, anonymous) as opposed to what it often is
               | (ambiguous and often by someone the victim knows and
               | trusts). As such, the percent of false rape accusations
               | where a particular individual is accused of the crime are
               | likely even lower than this 2-3% number.
               | 
               | > but it's much more important that the innocent are not
               | wrongfully punished
               | 
               | This depends. It's much less morally cut and dry than you
               | claim.
               | 
               | [0]: https://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/publicatio
               | ns/2018-...
        
               | suifbwish wrote:
               | This doesn't seem very scientific. You can't determine if
               | someone is lying based on them "seeming like an attention
               | seeker or not" deductive reasoning in a legal system
               | demands "beyond a shadow of a doubt" certainty before
               | convictions are made.
               | 
               | Also no it's pretty cut and dry: if you punish someone
               | who is innocent under ANY circumstance without reviewing
               | the case under a very critical eye you might as well
               | throw out the justice system entirely, break out the
               | torches and pitchforks and start gathering wood for the
               | witch burning.
        
               | epicureanideal wrote:
               | > Same article notes that between 2-8% of rape complaints
               | are false. Worries about false rape claims are wildly
               | overblown.
               | 
               | That is a HUGE percent of false accusations! On the high
               | end that's 1 in 10! In the middle, it's 1 in 20. That's a
               | LOT.
        
               | nawgz wrote:
               | Yet you express no concern at the amount of unprosecuted
               | cases...
        
               | suifbwish wrote:
               | The cases would be prosecuted if there was evidence to
               | support them. You can't just punish people without proof.
               | Contrary to popular belief the purpose of the legal
               | system is not to make wronged people feel better.
        
               | nawgz wrote:
               | So you think a crime as endemic as rape which is punished
               | at vanishingly low rates indicates innocence of the perps
               | instead of a fundamentally flawed justice system,
               | starting at the point of evidence collection? Even after
               | seeing those very evidence collectors, the police, flaunt
               | their duties and the law repeatedly?
               | 
               | Interesting.
        
               | stickfigure wrote:
               | I am curious. What percentage of all rape convictions
               | would you tolerate being wrong (that is, the person
               | behind bars is innocent) in order to ensure sufficient
               | coverage of convicting the guilty?
        
               | suifbwish wrote:
               | The idea of someone being able to accuse someone else of
               | a crime without evidence should terrify anyone who
               | believes in freedom and democracy. Rape, murder, or any
               | other crime.
        
               | joshuamorton wrote:
               | What does that have to do with this article? Are you
               | saying that the OP has requested this person be
               | criminally convicted?
        
               | suifbwish wrote:
               | Not from what I have read. It seems like they chose the
               | internet mob as their bringer of justice.
        
             | void_mint wrote:
             | Do you think that OJ was innocent?
             | 
             | And if not, doesn't that imply you also agree (to an
             | extent) that trials/law enforcement on heavily politicized
             | cases have the potential to be totally mismanaged and end
             | in injustice?
        
               | throwaway0a5e wrote:
               | OJ probably did it but the prosecution failed to prove
               | him guilty so he walked free as he should.
               | 
               | He's lucky he was a wealthy celebrity or he wouldn't have
               | gotten the full protection that the courts supposedly
               | afford to the accused.
        
           | DaveExeter wrote:
           | > The court -- rightly -- sets a very high bar to conviction,
           | and police and prosecutors often won't even attempt it unless
           | the evidence is overwhelming.
           | 
           | Huh? Have you ever heard of the Central Park Five? Google
           | "Central Park Five" and you'll have a more enlightened view!
        
             | ummonk wrote:
             | The Central Park five voluntarily confessed and were almost
             | certainly guilty. The only issue was that there was a sixth
             | perpetrator who had raped the victim after and wasn't
             | caught at the time.
        
               | DaveExeter wrote:
               | If you did a little research you will find they got paid
               | $41,000,000 by the City of New York!
               | 
               | You think the City just handed over tens of millions of
               | dollars because settling would be cheaper then going to
               | trial?
        
               | DonHopkins wrote:
               | "Almost certainly guilty," huh? Citations please? Are you
               | talking about a DIFFERENT "Central Park Five" than the
               | ones who were exonerated? Or are you just ironically
               | quoting Trump? Do you agree with him that hate is what we
               | need if we're gonna get something done?
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Park_jogger_case
               | 
               | >From the outset the case was a topic of national
               | interest, with the commentary on social issues evolving
               | as the details emerged. Initially, the case led to public
               | discourse about New York City's perceived lawlessness,
               | criminal behavior by youths, and violence toward women.
               | After the exonerations, it became a high-profile example
               | of racial profiling, discrimination, and inequality in
               | the media and legal system. All five defendants
               | subsequently sued the City of New York for malicious
               | prosecution, racial discrimination and emotional
               | distress; the City settled the suit in 2014 for $41
               | million.
               | 
               | https://www.pbs.org/kenburns/the-central-park-
               | five/convictio...
               | 
               | >On December 19, 2002, Justice Charles J. Tejada of the
               | Supreme Court of the State of New York granted a motion
               | to vacate the thirteen-year-old convections in the
               | infamous case. He did so based on new evidence: a
               | shocking confession from a serial rapist, Matias Reyes,
               | and a positive DNA match to back it up. A year later, the
               | men filed civil lawsuits against the City of New York,
               | and the police officers and prosecutors who had worked
               | toward their conviction. In 2014, they settled that civil
               | case for $41 million dollars. Despite their exoneration,
               | the police and prosecutors involved in the case maintain
               | that they were guilty of the crime.
               | 
               | https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-48609693
               | 
               | >Five black and Hispanic boys, aged between 14 and 16,
               | would be found guilty and jailed for the crime.
               | 
               | >They became known as the Central Park Five.
               | 
               | >But they never committed the crime.
               | 
               | [...]
               | 
               | >The role of Donald Trump
               | 
               | >New York in the 80s and 90s was much more dangerous than
               | it is today.
               | 
               | >Race relations were strained - especially when it came
               | to the police.
               | 
               | >Meanwhile, Donald Trump - then a New York property mogul
               | - seemed convinced the teens were guilty.
               | 
               | >He spent a reported $85,000 (around PS138,000 today) on
               | four full-page adverts in New York newspapers titled:
               | "Bring Back The Death Penalty, Bring Back Our Police!".
               | 
               | >He wrote: "I want to hate these murderers and I always
               | will. I am not looking to psychoanalyse or understand
               | them, I am looking to punish them."
               | 
               | >In an interview with CNN at the time, he said: "Maybe
               | hate is what we need if we're gonna get something done."
        
         | ksm1717 wrote:
         | Very tactful. You should respond with this story in real life
         | when someone tells you they were sexually abused.
        
         | kelnos wrote:
         | It's a bit strange that you claim that the proper venue for
         | this sort of thing is the justice system, but then relate a
         | story where your brother for some reason did not avail himself
         | of the justice system to right a wrong against him.
         | 
         | And that just rams the point home: often the justice system
         | doesn't help, and actively hurts. If he'd brought suit against
         | his former employer for terminating him, even if he won, he
         | would have gained a reputation in his field for being litigious
         | toward employers, and that would have greatly hurt his future
         | employment prospects.
         | 
         | So maybe, just maybe, there are reasons the justice system
         | isn't going to work so well in this situation either.
        
         | jlebar wrote:
         | > Ask yourself if that's a possibility, and if you think that
         | there is a zero probability of anyone maliciously weaponizing
         | accusations of sexual misconduct.
         | 
         | As a straight, white man: False accusations of sexual assault
         | are extremely rare, but they do happen. It's not a zero
         | probability event.
         | 
         | I guess my response is, right now there's a nonzero chance of
         | someone assaulting someone else, and then a nonzero chance
         | they'll away with it. And there's a nonzero chance of someone
         | making a false accusation and another nonzero chance of them
         | getting away with it. We as a society have to weigh the
         | likelihood of each of these four things occurring.
         | 
         | All experience (and you can look this up) is that sexual
         | assault is perpetrated relatively frequently, and people
         | frequently aren't held accountable in the criminal justice
         | system, for a variety of reasons. OTOH the evidence is that
         | false accusations are vanishingly rare in comparison.
         | 
         | So we should just...keep this in mind, is all, before saying
         | that this kind of public statement is counterproductive. Maybe
         | it protects someone from him, or maybe it protects someone from
         | someone like him. Sure, I'd like him to be in jail, but maybe
         | in the flawed system we live with today, the best we can hope
         | for is he's kicked out of the Scala community. Maybe that would
         | be productive?
        
         | jmcgough wrote:
         | I can empathize with your brother's situation. That kind of
         | thing is horrifying for anyone to imagine.
         | 
         | With that said, creeps like this continue to proliferate
         | because the courts only do anything in very rare cases (Cosby
         | or other serial abusers). It typically only hurts people who
         | were abused, not helps - it can take years to go through court,
         | and in this situation because it's across borders there's
         | likely no court to file with.
         | 
         | People come forward in blog posts because it's often their only
         | reasonable way to try to hold someone accountable and warn
         | other potential victims.
        
         | ummonk wrote:
         | HR should have fired the female colleague upon discovering the
         | allegations were proven false, not left it up to the courts and
         | criminal justice system.
        
         | bjarneh wrote:
         | I agree with you about the accusations. He sounds creepy; but
         | one blog-entry is not exactly hard evidence. An internet mob
         | may assume its all true anyway.
         | 
         | > men who use their status within programming communities as a
         | tool to target women
         | 
         | Wouldn't "programming communities" be one of the worst places
         | for a true predator? There are so few women compared to men
         | here. I would think most predators would choose the modeling or
         | acting industry; where this type of behavior is almost
         | expected...
        
           | hulahoof wrote:
           | Abusers will use the platform they have
        
           | endominus wrote:
           | I would presume that many predators have followed that exact
           | line of thinking, and there may be population pressure
           | pushing them towards other fields. Any ecological model will
           | show that a certain population of prey can support only so
           | many predators, if you'll pardon the pun, so some must
           | naturally migrate to fill other niches that, while not as
           | abundant, are less crowded with competition. You'll probably
           | find less sophisticated predators in these sparser
           | environments, as they were outcompeted by "stronger" (read,
           | more careful, charismatic, and effective) predators in the
           | richer ecologies.
           | 
           | An interesting thought. Under this model, (and I realize that
           | this is a post-facto realization, but what can we do?) we
           | would expect to see significantly more reports of predator
           | behavior in these less competitive niches than the objective
           | number of predators would imply, because the predators in
           | them are less skilled at hiding their predation than
           | predators in the more prey-rich environments.
        
       | js2 wrote:
       | Yes, of course she should have contacted law enforcement, but she
       | was in a foreign country, intimated and young. And law
       | enforcement still fails women:
       | 
       | https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/how-po...
       | 
       | In an ideal world, the criminal justice system works. In the real
       | world, it's a patchwork system that sometimes works and sometimes
       | doesn't.
       | 
       | https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2019/09/17...
       | 
       | So this is why we see women continue to post these stories. Her
       | story is backed up by other women.
       | 
       | I believe her.
       | 
       | Meta: I don't know how to make the justice system work better in
       | a case like this. The presumption of innocence is critical and I
       | don't want a system easily abused by false accusers, but it's
       | also clear that predators can take advantage of the presumption
       | of innocence. Even if she had gone to police at the time,
       | ultimately she would have to convince them it wasn't consensual.
       | 
       | https://slate.com/human-interest/2014/11/how-cops-respond-to...
       | 
       | Edit 2: found this paper from 2012 written by a police
       | organization that talks about the complexities of dealing with
       | sexual assault in the criminal justice system:
       | 
       | https://www.policeforum.org/assets/docs/Critical_Issues_Seri...
        
         | dbg31415 wrote:
         | It's not that I don't believe her. It's just such a slippery
         | slope.
         | 
         | This is vigilantism -- the same as if you went out and shot a
         | guy who stole your wallet.
         | 
         | We don't trust victims of crimes to dole out punishments.
         | Justice is tempered by due process, checks and balances,
         | proportional response, all that.
         | 
         | So I believe her, but I don't think the world is a better place
         | when people use this approach to conflict resolution. I'd much
         | rather see her go to court and get a conviction.
         | 
         | This is just revenge.
        
           | hamburglar wrote:
           | It seems that this may be the _only_ consequence of raping
           | someone in many cases.
        
           | danShumway wrote:
           | > This is vigilantism -- the same as if you went out and shot
           | a guy who stole your wallet.
           | 
           | Nobody has shot John Pretty.
           | 
           | I don't understand how "justice" says that Yifan has to lie
           | or pretend that she hasn't gone through a traumatic
           | experience. Writing a blog post is not equivalent to shooting
           | someone. Someone truthfully and honestly describing their own
           | life experience is not violence.
           | 
           | And if nothing else, surely she has the right to warn other
           | women and let them make their own decisions about how to
           | calibrate their risk around John.
           | 
           | > I don't think the world is a better place when people use
           | this approach to conflict resolution.
           | 
           | I'm not always thrilled with public shaming, but to argue
           | that people shouldn't be able to speak about their
           | experiences, or that people shouldn't be able to choose who
           | they associate with, or that people shouldn't be able to warn
           | each other about abusers -- that is also a very slippery
           | slope. Especially in a world where the vast majority of rape
           | cases are never reported or prosecuted.
           | 
           | It's just such an extreme position to say that people even
           | just talking about abusers is 'revenge'. It's like arguing
           | that because courts sometimes convict innocent people that we
           | should abolish all laws. There is a middle ground between
           | attacking someone for a poorly phrased 10-year-old tweet, and
           | arguing that people shouldn't be talking about personal
           | experiences they've had with sexual harassment.
        
           | kelnos wrote:
           | > _Justice is tempered by due process, checks and balances,
           | proportional response, all that._
           | 
           | That's the ideal, but in the real world justice is pretty
           | lacking.
           | 
           | What other action would you suggest she take, right now? What
           | authorities should she go to? Does she need to get on a plane
           | back to Germany and file a police report three years after
           | the fact? Another commenter noted that this specific thing
           | might not even have been illegal in Germany when it happened
           | (but is now).
           | 
           | Even if there is no legal remedy, is this the sort of thing
           | that we want to continue to happen in our technical
           | communities? If not (and I seriously hope not), then what do
           | we do to neutralize these sorts of people?
           | 
           | So what's the alternative? She just shuts up, gets no
           | closure, and we allow a serial manipulator and probably
           | rapist to keep trolling the Scala community for new,
           | vulnerable victims?
        
           | ummonk wrote:
           | If you think ostracizing someone and removing him from
           | positions of influence is equivalent to shooting him, I don't
           | know what to say to you.
        
         | morelisp wrote:
         | It was also, disgustingly, probably not legally rape in Germany
         | at that time. (Or only recently so.)
        
       | dheera wrote:
       | Related:
       | 
       | Open letter of support for community members targeted by Jon
       | Pretty
       | 
       | https://github.com/scala-open-letter/scala-open-letter.githu...
        
         | mirekrusin wrote:
         | I don't know anything about it, but this starts to look a bit
         | like public lynching.
        
           | ezluckyfree wrote:
           | no, a lynching is a murder by a racist mob
           | 
           | this is a community realizing that John Pretty is a predator
           | and deciding that they don't want a predator in a position of
           | power
           | 
           | frankly, it's weird as hell for you to be confusing those two
           | things
        
             | kbelder wrote:
             | The similarity is that both are mob actions, done without
             | legal charges or rules of evidence.
             | 
             | I'm not defending the guy specifically; I have no idea
             | whether he's a guilty scumbag or a persecuted innocent. But
             | even jerks deserve a certain amount of due process before
             | punishment. Maybe she's the scumbag? I don't know, and
             | neither do you.
        
               | TheCoelacanth wrote:
               | A lynching is done by a literal mob. This is being done
               | by a metaphorical mob.
        
             | huachimingo wrote:
             | Not necessarily by a racist mob, just an angry mob[1].
             | 
             | [1]https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/lynch#English
        
             | mirekrusin wrote:
             | not me or you are to judge this, we don't know the details,
             | it may as well be that he is completely shit partner and
             | not much more than that, which is not unlawful.
             | 
             | do you think after those posts his
             | scala/programming/whatever he's doing career won't suffer?
             | he's dead in many professional circles regardless if he's
             | jail material or not.
        
               | klyrs wrote:
               | He wasn't her "partner", he was her _mentor_ ; he abused
               | his position, tricked her into staying in an apartment
               | alone with him, got her drunk and forced himself on her
               | against her wishes.
        
             | kingsuper20 wrote:
             | >no, a lynching is a murder by a racist mob
             | 
             | no, a lynching is an extra-legal murder by a mob.
        
               | Pfhreak wrote:
               | In the US, lynching has extremely strong implications of
               | racist violence. It's not _strictly_ the definition of
               | the word, but most folks in the states will understand a
               | lynching to imply race related murders.
        
               | cbmuser wrote:
               | > In the US, lynching has extremely strong implications
               | of racist violence.
               | 
               | Please don't assume everyone is a US citizen.
        
               | Pfhreak wrote:
               | I'm not. In fact, I'm the opposite. That's literally why
               | I wrote that comment. It was for the benefit of people
               | who were not US citizens who may not understand that a US
               | reader will likely interpret the phrase that way.
        
             | throwawayfrauds wrote:
             | That's not what lynching is. Lynching is mob justice
             | without a trial. The name came from Charles Lynch, who
             | punished Loyalists during the American Revolution.
        
           | trynton wrote:
           | @mirekrusin: "I don't know anything about it, but this starts
           | to look a bit like public lynching."
           | 
           | Trial by Internet.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | dimgl wrote:
           | Make no mistake. This is a public lynching.
        
           | jjeaff wrote:
           | No, I don't think open letters are anything like public
           | lynching.
        
           | Pfhreak wrote:
           | Which part?
           | 
           | The part where people are saying they've become aware of
           | several independent, substantiated accusations against
           | Pretty?
           | 
           | The part where they state that sexual assault is
           | unacceptable?
           | 
           | The part where they demand that Pretty stop this behavior,
           | and that communities put stronger code of conducts in place
           | to specifically call out preying on/sexually assaulting
           | members of that community as unacceptable?
           | 
           | Refusing to associate with Pretty, who they believe is an
           | sexual abuser?
           | 
           | Which part of that is 'a bit like a public lynching'? I want
           | you to be specific, because waving your hand loosely at a
           | document and being like, "Well I dunno, but this seems like
           | an execution designed to drive fear into a community" is not
           | only wildly inappropriate but also rhetorically hollow.
        
             | tryonenow wrote:
             | Look, both accounts read like naive women who accepted
             | favors from a mentor-like figure and did not say "no" to
             | advances. The other accuser starts her letter by admitting
             | that she and Pretty were in an "on and off" long distance
             | _relationship_. I think a significant component of the
             | discomfort that these women feel is a manifestation of a
             | sort of social indoctrination, wherein young women are led
             | to believe that historically normal and mutually beneficial
             | relationships are somehow dehumanizing because of a power
             | dynamic. There is also an underestimation of the amount of
             | clout and positive attention that accusers receive from
             | communities for coming forward, and vicious, public
             | condemnation of anyone who dares to question the stories or
             | claimed harm to the alleged victims.
             | 
             | Humans are biologically predisposed to trade sexual access
             | for favors. I believe the harm that many victims claim to
             | have experienced is mostly or purely a manifestation of
             | social conditioning and sometimes clout chasing where
             | claims are exaggerated or fabricated. Blindly believing
             | alleged victims carries a significant risk of victimizing
             | otherwise innocent people and we need to move back to some
             | middle ground. Especially considering the biologically
             | determined nature of human sexual interaction - which is
             | never black and white and, frankly, has always been a game
             | of overcoming reluctance. Hesitating and not saying NO
             | cannot be treated the same way as overt rape without
             | criminalizing desirable (for both men and women) sexual
             | interaction. Yes, the chase is extremely important, for
             | both sexes, and we see the same dynamics throughout the
             | animal kingdom.
        
             | ipaddr wrote:
             | "We will not use or promote any software artifacts that are
             | maintained by Mr. Pretty"
             | 
             | This part seems over the top. You go down this road and you
             | end up in some foss hell. Later you find out someone who
             | abused someone checked in code in linux. You can't use
             | windows or a mac because of jobs and gates and you are back
             | on a c64 until you realize what a bad person Jack was and
             | you end up on OS/2.
             | 
             | I guess those who signed want to use an unmaintained
             | version?
             | 
             | I get that people want to do something. Maybe conferences
             | are not the best avenue for the community to meet safely.
             | Providing gender safe housing would go a long way to having
             | a more successful conference if successful means less
             | rapes.
        
               | Pfhreak wrote:
               | Edit: Would you characterize that part as "a bit like a
               | public lynching"? Because I definitely wouldn't, even if
               | I disagreed with it or felt it was too much.
               | 
               | ---
               | 
               | I think you are very uncharitably reading that comment.
               | There's a difference between, "This person checked some
               | code into a repo" and "this person is the maintainer of a
               | project".
               | 
               | And I think that it's reasonable for people to hold the
               | stance of, "I don't want to run this person's code
               | because I believe they are a serial abuser" and to
               | clearly state why. If other repos see that, maybe they
               | decide to take on that stance, maybe they don't.
               | 
               | They encourage others to consider doing the same, but the
               | don't _demand_ them.
        
           | melenaboija wrote:
           | It starts looking to me like a bit of explaining what
           | happened repeatedly
        
         | calylex wrote:
         | You have no evidence to be smearing someone's name and defaming
         | them on HN in this way. Stop this behavior until there is legal
         | grounds for doing so.
        
       | eloff wrote:
       | > I don't remember how much I drank. I don't remember him
       | drinking. But I remember feeling uncomfortable when he made
       | advances on me. I felt being taken advantage of that he had
       | unprotected sex with me when I was intoxicated. Nothing felt
       | right. I remember panicking and crying.
       | 
       | I don't want to victim blame here because this guy sounds like a
       | grade A creep and predator. But does a person not have some
       | responsibility here to not get so intoxicated when alone with a
       | member of the opposite sex in a private space? Because sometimes
       | the person is consenting at the time and then regrets it later -
       | and then proceeds to ruin the other person's life by accusing
       | them of taking advantage of an intoxicated individual. I just
       | find this whole area very slippery about when consent means
       | consent and when it doesn't - especially the way sex, alcohol,
       | and drugs are so intertwined in our society. I rightly or wrongly
       | think you have to have some responsibility for putting yourself
       | in such a vulnerable place where you are not in the right frame
       | of mind to resist advances or make sensible decisions. Am I wrong
       | about that?
       | 
       | I don't know if she gave consent, and again, I'm inclined to give
       | her the benefit of the doubt, based on her story, age, etc. I
       | just want to discuss this whole business of consent while
       | intoxicated on which I do not have a clear opinion.
        
         | donohoe wrote:
         | Hello. A few answers...
         | 
         | >> But does a person not have some responsibility here to not
         | get so intoxicated when alone with a member of the opposite sex
         | in a private space?
         | 
         | No. You are shifting the blame to the victim here. You should
         | not be assaulted/attacked/whatever whether you are sober,
         | tipsy, drunk, unconscious.
        
         | dmit wrote:
         | > I don't want to victim blame here
         | 
         | And yet
        
         | colechristensen wrote:
         | It is... complicated, but if a sober person takes advantage of
         | the apparent willingness of a very intoxicated person, they
         | have done something wrong.
         | 
         | In general regardless of your state of mind, you should be
         | deciding if somebody is actually capable of giving consent in
         | their state of mind regardless of how they act.
         | 
         | A drop of alcohol does not remove all ability to give consent
         | but there is a point where it is no longer possible and so
         | you're left with a situation where there isn't right and wrong
         | absolutely but a grey area of many degrees... which as a decent
         | person you should always err on the side of caution.
        
         | fabian2k wrote:
         | A person that is in an incapacitated state is not able to
         | consent, in that situation the burden is entirely on the other
         | person. Just because someone is not able to say no doesn't
         | meant they did consent.
         | 
         | I'm talking about close to blackout drunk, heavily
         | incapacitated, not slightly tipsy.
        
           | eloff wrote:
           | So question then, what if the other person is equally
           | incapacitated?
           | 
           | What if the other person believes the incapacitated person is
           | not so far gone as to be unable to consent?
           | 
           | Is consent only consent if you give a breathalyzer test in
           | front of a witness?
        
         | retrac wrote:
         | The front door of one's home always seemed a good analogy to
         | me.
         | 
         | Is it good practice to lock your front door, on the assumption
         | that some people are malicious and will take advantage and rob
         | you if you don't? With particular caution suggested in some
         | areas? Yes.
         | 
         | Is someone who is robbed when they did not lock their front
         | door responsible for the crime in some sense? No, not really. A
         | normal human failing to carry out a precaution that shouldn't
         | be necessary in the first place, perhaps. I've forgotten to
         | lock my front door once in a while, haven't you?
        
         | choeger wrote:
         | Responsibility is the wrong word. There is a difference between
         | good advice and victim blaming. Just because the victim was
         | careless doesn't make them in any form responsible for the
         | crime. Nevertheless, I would certainly advise my daughter
         | against getting drunk in such a situation.
        
           | yason wrote:
           | >> But does a person not have some responsibility here to not
           | >> get so intoxicated when alone with a member of the
           | opposite >> sex in a private space? > > Responsibility is the
           | wrong word.
           | 
           | It's not a responsibility in ethical sense yet it is street
           | smart behaviour.
           | 
           | A less amplified example: if you walk into a biker bar,
           | insult that the regulars are assholes whose bikes you just
           | kicked over outside, they have no moral justification to hurt
           | you just as people are ethically bound to not sexually abuse
           | intoxicated persons in our society. But there's some chance
           | the guys in the biker bar won't just call the police and
           | politely retain you until they arrive and, instead, you get
           | beaten into some half-liquid state of matter.
           | 
           | The reason for that is because the regulars likely follow
           | their own rules and not yours or the greater society's.
           | Similarly, predator-type people don't follow the morals that
           | we recognize. If all you can resort to is morals, you will
           | lose with people who don't play by your rules. If someone
           | doesn't see a moral problem in the sexual abuse of a passed
           | out person it won't help to merely remind this person of just
           | that: the abuser _simply doesn 't give a shit_ but plays a
           | whole different game.
           | 
           | This is where the society could step in with its justice
           | system and link the abusive behaviour to something the abuser
           | does actually mind, like a harsh enough conviction to make
           | the abusive behaviour less inviting. But society also has to
           | be fair so as to not give harsh convictions to people who
           | have not abused anyone despite being accused of doing that,
           | and then the waters get muddy again. In many cases there's no
           | objective verdict to be reached because no third party can
           | ultimately tell what the heck happened, even if actual abuse
           | did take place.
           | 
           | This leads to the bizarre but common pattern where the
           | potential victims have to become proactive in taking measures
           | to not actually become victims, and in doing so limit their
           | choices and decisions of what to do, where to go and with
           | whom. The onus somehow gets transferred to the person who
           | shouldn't have to use time and energy to prevent these things
           | from happening. The potential victims are the only party in
           | the game who follow the society's rules and they have that
           | losing stance because of that.
           | 
           | They shouldn't have to have -- and they don't have -- a
           | _moral_ responsibility to prepare for the worst: the moral
           | responsibility single-handedly falls on the perpetrator --
           | the one who doesn 't ever consider morals! So, the result is
           | that the potential victims are imposed by purely practical
           | concerns to limit their choices in order to secure themselves
           | against wrongdoings, just in case. It's not right but it's
           | also smart -- that's the big dilemma.
        
         | claudiawerner wrote:
         | >I don't want to victim blame here because this guy sounds like
         | a grade A creep and predator. But does a person not have some
         | responsibility here to not get so intoxicated when alone with a
         | member of the opposite sex in a private space?
         | 
         | No. The idea that being around a member of the opposite sex
         | (and does this apply to members of the same sex? e.g. men
         | raping men, and women raping women?) in a private space while
         | being intoxicated levies some kind of 'responsibility' to be on
         | the lookout for rape is absolutely victim blaming. It's
         | insisting that her non-sexual actions of literally just being
         | around someone confers a responsibility of _any_ kind
         | pertaining to a sexual act _on her_.
        
           | eloff wrote:
           | > No. The idea that being around a member of the opposite sex
           | (and does this apply to members of the same sex? e.g. men
           | raping men, and women raping women?)
           | 
           | I specifically used the word person because I think this
           | could happen between any two people of any sex. I'm certain
           | it even happens to men, by women. Just men are much less
           | likely to regret it the next day.
           | 
           | > levies some kind of 'responsibility' to be on the lookout
           | for rape is absolutely victim blaming
           | 
           | If you gave consent because you were drunk, that's not really
           | rape, it could be poor judgment. The perpetrator might
           | reasonably think you're sober enough to make your own
           | decisions. Especially if they are also inebriated.
           | 
           | Just calling it victim blaming is missing that this is a
           | pretty gray area.
        
             | dmit wrote:
             | > If you gave consent because you were drunk, that's not
             | really rape, it could be poor judgment.
             | 
             | No, it's lack of judgement. Total inability to judge, in
             | fact.
             | 
             | > The perpetrator might reasonably think you're sober
             | enough to make your own decisions. Especially if they are
             | also inebriated.
             | 
             | It doesn't matter what the perpetrator thinks. And
             | _especially_? Is the perpetrator less guilty of rape
             | depending on his blood alcohol level?
        
               | eloff wrote:
               | > It doesn't matter what the perpetrator thinks.
               | 
               | I think it may be the only thing that can decide the
               | difference between a crime here or not. If the other
               | person gives consent, then how you judge their ability to
               | make their own decisions here is the difference between
               | having intent to rape or not having intent. Intent
               | matters in a lot of crimes, I don't think it matters in
               | rape cases - I could be wrong.
               | 
               | > Is the perpetrator less guilty of rape depending on his
               | blood alcohol level?
               | 
               | So the victim has no responsibility if blood alcohol
               | level is too high for good judgment, but the perpetrator
               | is responsible no matter their blood alcohol level and
               | judgment? That seems self-contradictory.
        
               | dmit wrote:
               | > So the victim has no responsibility if blood alcohol
               | level is too high for good judgment, but the perpetrator
               | is responsible no matter their blood alcohol level and
               | judgment?
               | 
               | Exactly. That's why they're called 'victim' and
               | 'perpetrator'.
               | 
               | If the victim got triple blackout drunk, the only person
               | they'd hurt is themselves. But the rapist, in addition to
               | physical damage, inflicts deep, lasting psychological
               | damage upon their victims. It's not just "regret".
        
               | eloff wrote:
               | Ok, let's say it's a man and a women, she's the
               | "perpetrator" and he gives consent. She's his boss and
               | they're on a business trip and drank too much at the bar.
               | In the morning he feels taken advantage of and deeply
               | regrets it because he's married. Do you still stand by
               | that?
        
               | dmit wrote:
               | > she's the "perpetrator" and he gives consent
               | 
               | If "he gives consent", then she isn't a perpetrator. By
               | definition.
               | 
               | If one of the parties gets drunk, they _can 't_ give
               | consent. Again, by definition.
        
               | eloff wrote:
               | > If "he gives consent", then she isn't a perpetrator. By
               | definition.
               | 
               | > If one of the parties gets drunk, they can't give
               | consent. Again, by definition.
               | 
               | Say she comes on to him, and he responds
               | enthusiastically. But he's too drunk to give consent by
               | your definition. Then she's just committed a rape? From
               | her POV, also drunk, she made a move, he reciprocated,
               | all in all it was a pleasant evening.
               | 
               | She clearly didn't mean to commit a crime in this case,
               | and both their judgment was impaired. Whose fault is it?
               | 
               | I don't think it's fair to say it's all her fault - and I
               | don't think a court of law could find fault here, fairly,
               | with no witnesses and no evidence.
        
         | indymike wrote:
         | Would it be ok for the guy to get her drunk, then go to an ATM
         | and talk her into emptying out a bank account?
        
           | eloff wrote:
           | Strawman argument.
        
           | totony wrote:
           | Is it ok for bars to take advantage of drunk people so they
           | spend frivolously (or alcoholics who throw away their
           | paycheck every week?)
        
         | Pfhreak wrote:
         | > I don't want to victim blame here ... but does the victim
         | bear some responsibility?
         | 
         | The answer to your question is no. The victim bears no
         | responsibility. The abuser took advantage of someone, who bears
         | no fault for the result. There's no "well, both parties were in
         | the wrong here". The abuser should not have abused the other
         | party, no matter how vulnerable the other party made
         | themselves.
         | 
         | You specifically said you didn't want to victim blame, then
         | _immediately_ blamed the victim.
        
           | eloff wrote:
           | And what if they were consenting - I'm not saying that's the
           | case here, I don't know obviously, I'm asking in general,
           | just like my comment is a musing about the vagaries of when
           | is consent not consent.
        
             | Pfhreak wrote:
             | It's not vague. Consent is an enthusiastic and unambiguous
             | yes. Was there an enthusiastic and unambiguous yes? You
             | have consent. Was there not an enthusiastic and unambiguous
             | yes? You do not have consent.
        
               | eloff wrote:
               | I think we can agree on that.
               | 
               | I'm not arguing about what consent is, I'm arguing about
               | whether you bear responsibility for what happens to you
               | if you put yourself in a vulnerable position, give
               | consent without being of sound mind, and then regret it
               | later. I think 1) that's pretty dumb to put yourself in
               | that situation, and 2) you do have partial responsibility
               | for what happened.
        
               | Pfhreak wrote:
               | Sure, but do you believe that's what's described here? I
               | don't see anything that suggests that consent was ever
               | given.
        
               | eloff wrote:
               | I'm pretty sure I wrote that I don't know what the facts
               | are here and that I'm inclined to side with her.
               | 
               | I'm asking about this situation in general, not about her
               | specific case.
        
         | faitswulff wrote:
         | Yes, you are victim blaming. Men aren't wild bears, they're
         | human beings who should be held accountable for their actions.
         | How drunk someone is around another human being has nothing to
         | do with the perpetrator's culpability.
        
           | calylex wrote:
           | Speak up HN, don't let voices like this dominate and
           | represent you. Of course what the OP said was not victim
           | blaming. How ridiculous! Several times the commenter
           | expressed doubt and kept asking if he/she is wrong and how
           | would like to be corrected if that is the case.
           | 
           | You come in here with the high moral ground and make such
           | wild indignant proclamation that "men are not bears." Please
           | take this to another community.
           | 
           | > How drunk someone is around another human being has nothing
           | to do with the perpetrator's culpability.
           | 
           | This is just stupid on its face. DUI exists for a reason and
           | DUI tests are given not because police assumes the drivers,
           | of course would, "take responsibility" and not drink, but
           | because the police exercises common sense if an idiot driver
           | is unable to walk a straight line.
        
           | eloff wrote:
           | > Yes, you are victim blaming. Men aren't wild bears.
           | 
           | They're also not harmless. And I chose the word person for a
           | reason - this could happen between a straight man and a gay
           | man, or a woman could take advantage of a drunk man (although
           | he's not likely to regret it, unless maybe he's married or
           | something - or she gets pregnant)
           | 
           | The thing is I think you have some responsibility for your
           | own decisions, drunk or not.
           | 
           | I don't think it's right to take advantage of someone who's
           | drunk - but it's tough to prove that after the fact and many
           | a young man has had their lives ruined by a woman who they
           | thought consented and then later accused them of rape.
           | 
           | On the other hand I can really empathize with the woman's POV
           | here, and think that it's terrible that there are men out
           | there who take advantage of them when they're under the
           | influence - and I'm sure that's more common.
           | 
           | This just doesn't seem cut and dried.
        
           | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
           | Without being too flippant, I'd like to point out that we do
           | actually hold wild bears accountable for their actions. There
           | was a news report last week about a bear shot somewhere in
           | the US because it had attacked someone (it seemed to have
           | been trying to guard a particularly valuable food stash).
        
             | faitswulff wrote:
             | The point is that many comments here are assuming that men
             | lack the agency to keep themselves from assaulting people.
             | That lets the men off the hook. To your example, _if we
             | blame the bear, we should blame the man, as well._
        
           | totony wrote:
           | I don't think that's what the parent meant.
           | 
           | If someone is intoxicated, I agree that it seems weird to
           | disregard their consent when drugs+alcohols are the social
           | lubricant of society (and very interwined with sex).
           | 
           | Also, of course you are responsible for your actions even
           | when under the influence (drive and kill someone? no excuse
           | because you were intoxicated - it's your fault). It's crazy
           | to me that people call that "victim blaming". Although I
           | understand how someone can take advantage of others, I don't
           | think the distinction is intoxicated = taken advantage of.
        
             | faitswulff wrote:
             | Someone being assaulted when they're intoxicated is not
             | equivalent to someone knowingly driving a car when they're
             | drunk. The sexual predator consciously chooses to assault
             | their victim; the car doesn't choose to crash.
             | 
             | EDIT - a lot of you seem to think that this is equivalent
             | to a DUI. It is not. If you are driving under the
             | influence, then you are the perpetrator of the accident. If
             | you are drunk and somebody else sexually assaults you, then
             | the other person is the perpetrator.
        
               | eloff wrote:
               | Cars don't choose, the driver does. The driver is always
               | responsible, regardless of state of inebriation.
               | 
               | There's a very big distinction to be made here between an
               | assault and if the person gives consent - or sometimes
               | could even be the initiator. Again, to be very clear, I'm
               | not saying that was the case here.
        
             | WesolyKubeczek wrote:
             | If you get drunk downtown, does it make getting your
             | pockets picked and your smartphone stolen your _fault_?
             | 
             | You're _stupid_ if you get drunk downtown with an expensive
             | smartphone where it can be easily stolen. Still, does it
             | mean that you have somehow to share jail time with your
             | thief, or does it mean that the thief has to serve less
             | time, or that your thief may go with your smartphone
             | because it's your fault to get drunk downtown in the first
             | place?
             | 
             | Explain please.
        
           | choeger wrote:
           | Some men decide to behave like wild bears, it seems. So while
           | it indeed doesn't change anything about the responsibility,
           | it is still a good idea to take steps that could prevent
           | becoming a victim in the first place.
        
           | ryandrake wrote:
           | Victim blaming or not, I think most parents wisely caution
           | their children about alcohol, intoxication, and making good
           | decisions about their own personal safety, when they reach
           | the appropriate age. What parent doesn't have that
           | conversation with their teenage kid?
        
             | pseudalopex wrote:
             | I don't think eloff is Yifan's parent.
        
             | dmit wrote:
             | > I think most parents wisely caution their _daughters_
             | about alcohol, intoxication, and making good decisions
             | about their own personal safety
             | 
             | > What parent doesn't have that conversation with their
             | teenage _daughter_?
             | 
             | Sorry, a-reduced your comment. Force of habit. Also, the
             | pattern matching checker complained your examples only
             | apply to a subset of possible genders.
        
       | Graffur wrote:
       | I don't know who he is, who she is and I don't care about the
       | scala 'community' too much, especially the types that give talks
       | at conferences.
       | 
       | The writing is like a story that is missing pages. Surely the law
       | needs to be involved here?
        
       | Shadonototro wrote:
       | What this story has to do with the whole "scala community"?
       | 
       | Seems like she is naive and got seduced by someone, nothing crazy
       | 
       | Why always portraying womens as weak people, c'mon
        
       | rozab wrote:
       | There has been a common theme in this thread that the justice
       | system should just sort it all out. Leaving aside all the issues
       | of jurisdiction and citizenship that make a prosecution
       | vanishingly unlikely here, the criminal justice system is just
       | not cut out for dealing with cases of rape.
       | 
       | To prove it beyond reasonable doubt would require a level of
       | evidence that is simply not present here. And in the UK, _a
       | suspect is only charged with a crime in 1.4% of reported cases_
       | [0]. This is why its so sickening when people gloat that some
       | defendant in a sexual abuse case was found not guilty; it really
       | doesn't mean they didn't commit the crime.
       | 
       | But even though the criminal justice system is not cut out for
       | this kind of thing, that doesn't mean we have no other recourse.
       | The reason the standard for evidence is so high is because the
       | system would otherwise be vulnerable to abuse, and the
       | consequences of wrongful conviction (loss of liberty or even
       | execution) are so grave. Whether or not you agree that this very
       | high standard is justified (I don't), it is clear that the
       | consequences of publicly calling out this behaviour are less
       | serious. Social ostracisation within a very specific community
       | isn't such a big deal, but the direct benefits (protecting women
       | through awareness) may be almost as good.
       | 
       | Whether or not you agree with the above, it's definitely an issue
       | we need to think about. All it takes is someone close to you
       | going through this to realise that the pre-MeToo system is
       | inadequate. This new one isn't ideal, but it's a million times
       | better. If you can think of a way to make things better then I
       | want to hear it.
       | 
       | [0]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48095118
        
       | Kattywumpus wrote:
       | Let's just do away with the justice system entirely since social
       | media seems to fulfill its functions perfectly.
        
         | TheCoelacanth wrote:
         | Right. Just like the justice system would, social media will
         | sentence him to the extremely harsh punishment of... not being
         | invited to conferences anymore.
        
         | datavirtue wrote:
         | This is actually a serious theory called anarcho-capitalism.
        
           | calylex wrote:
           | Yes. By Chomsky:
           | 
           | "Anarcho-capitalism, in my opinion, is a doctrinal system
           | which, if ever implemented, would lead to forms of tyranny
           | and oppression that have few counterparts in human history.
           | There isn't the slightest possibility that its (in my view,
           | horrendous) ideas would be implemented, because they would
           | quickly destroy any society that made this colossal error."
           | 
           | Except we're seeing its horrendous ideas flourishing.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | tester756 wrote:
       | was there a quarter without drama in Scala community? :o
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | rlmenu wrote:
       | Lots of comments obviously focus on the issue whether this is
       | truth or slander. There is another angle to this:
       | 
       | A word of advice for new people in OSS. You do _not_ need to go
       | to conferences to be successful in the field. Many of the
       | developers who actually write code do _not attend conferences_.
       | 
       | On the other hand, people who want to associate themselves with
       | the work of others, narcissists, activists of all kinds,
       | parasites and a lot more are to be found in the conference
       | circuits. There are some legit people as well but you'll also
       | find them online where the work happens.
        
         | noobermin wrote:
         | Painfully true but kind of unfortunate as young professionals
         | are often pushed into going to conferences as a way to get
         | ahead in their career.
        
       | ramtatatam wrote:
       | > "There was another time that he insisted on having intercourse
       | regardless of me saying I didn't want to"
       | 
       | This is rape is it not? Whoever this guy is, in my opinion this
       | case should get in front of the judges. I can't imagine what the
       | author of the story have gone through.
        
         | mirekrusin wrote:
         | Rape is doing it, not insisting, I think.
        
           | ramtatatam wrote:
           | > "I felt being taken advantage of that he had unprotected
           | sex with me when I was intoxicated. Nothing felt right. I
           | remember panicking and crying."
           | 
           | After reading above and then seeing the part about
           | "insisting" I feel there was more behind this statement. The
           | author's circumstances was also very easy to be taken
           | advantage of. I'm not woman but my guess is there probably is
           | shock involved in situations like this. People are not acting
           | in reasonable ways when in shock..
        
           | eloff wrote:
           | Insisting could mean doing it in this context. English is
           | weird.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | Pfhreak wrote:
           | Sex was had while she did not consent, she mentions in the
           | fifth paragraph.
        
             | ALittleLight wrote:
             | Slightly later she writes "I maintained friendship with him
             | for a few months after May, because I was convinced that it
             | was all consensual". I think it is something of a
             | philosophical issue to debate about whether you can think
             | you consented and later determine you didn't. It's also
             | strange to me that it takes months and consultation with a
             | therapist to determine if you did or did not consent.
        
               | namenotrequired wrote:
               | > It's also strange to me that it takes months and
               | consultation with a therapist to determine if you did or
               | did not consent.
               | 
               | It would have been strange to me.
               | 
               | But I was recently victim of emotional abuse by someone I
               | admired and trusted. And it is not strange to me anymore.
               | 
               | Abusers are sophisticated. Trust is a complex thing.
        
               | Pfhreak wrote:
               | Have you ever been in an abusive relationship? Or seen
               | one firsthand? People can be made to believe all sorts of
               | things that aren't true by charismatic or powerful
               | people. It may take them some time to realize they are
               | being tricked or abused.
               | 
               | You absolutely can be told you consented, and trust that
               | person's word, and realize later that no, actually you
               | had not. It's just convenient for the abuser for you to
               | believe you had.
        
               | Humdeee wrote:
               | This article reads like she did not say no as much as she
               | did not say yes, which leaves the reader in a muddled,
               | grey area and unsure of how to interpret anything. Is she
               | consenting, or more specifically, is she explicitly
               | claiming to not consent? It's a very awkward article,
               | leaving readers with more questions than answers at the
               | end, which is never what you want your readers to feel
               | when garnering support.
        
               | Pfhreak wrote:
               | Consent is unambiguous and enthusiastic yes. The default
               | assumption is that no consent is given. Not saying yes is
               | the same as saying no.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | ALittleLight wrote:
               | Maybe that's true and some Rasputin-like figure could
               | manipulate you into believing you thought things that you
               | didn't, but that doesn't seem to be what is alleged here.
               | She wasn't living in this guy's cult, he helped her
               | professionally and with conferences, and she agreed to
               | share a room with him on a trip. That strikes me as less
               | mind-control and more just a situation that people get
               | into sometimes.
               | 
               | She is and was an adult woman. Can I not expect her to
               | know, in the typical case, whether she does or does not
               | consent to sex? And I'm not talking about "He got me
               | drunk and then forced sex when I couldn't consent" -
               | obviously that would be rape, but it seems like you
               | should realize that when you sober up, not months or
               | years later.
        
               | Pfhreak wrote:
               | She was left panicked and crying. That's not generally a
               | sign that there was unambiguous consent.
               | 
               | And it doesn't take a Rasputin-like figure to be an
               | abuser. Plenty of people are taken advantage of and
               | taught to believe things they later realize were abusive,
               | even in relatively short situations. Pretty held all the
               | power here -- he controlled where she was staying, he
               | helped her get to the conference, she was intoxicated,
               | she believe he was her mentor, she believe he had the
               | ability to get her industry connections, etc.
               | 
               | Coercing someone into sex that they later realize wasn't
               | consensual (once they are free from that person's
               | influence) doesn't mean she was lying in the moment or is
               | somehow "discovering" something now.
               | 
               | > Can I not expect her to know, in the typical case,
               | whether she does or does not consent to sex?
               | 
               | Adult humans (because I think this can happen to men
               | too), can absolutely be caught off guard and be "unsure"
               | about whether they are consenting to sex. Not everyone is
               | wired the same, and not everyone is able to make a quick
               | snap judgement. Not everyone is fully able to say no when
               | pressured.
               | 
               | Furthermore, grappling with the question, "Was I just
               | raped/sexually abused?" is really, really challenging.
               | What does that do to your identity? Are you forever a
               | victim? Are you going to have to out yourself and someone
               | else? Will you forever be the target of the public's
               | pity? Are you going to have that stigma attached to you
               | when you want to enter relationships in the future?
               | That's a LOT to put on someone, and many, many victims
               | choose to try and believe that things were consensual,
               | because it seems easier that facing the realization they
               | were abused.
        
               | ALittleLight wrote:
               | She says that she remembers panicking and crying. I agree
               | that those are both clear signs of non-consensual sex.
               | Why does it take months and therapy for her to decode
               | those clear signals? If Jon noticed her crying and
               | panicking we would expect him to interpret that as a
               | clear "I do not consent" signal.
               | 
               | The power Pretty holds here is pretty minor. He's helping
               | her get into conferences and mentoring her. He
               | "controlled where she was staying" in the sense that he
               | made the reservation for their AirBnB. He's not
               | confiscating her passport, she isn't destitute. She
               | could've gotten another hotel, hostel, AirBnB. To be
               | clear, I am not saying "She didn't get another room and
               | so deserves to be raped" but I am saying that his "power"
               | in this regard is pretty minor - just because someone is
               | paying for your room that shouldn't make it impossible
               | for you to say "No" to them.
               | 
               | A big part of why it is morally and legally wrong to have
               | sex with children is that children aren't mature enough
               | to make decisions about sex. Children cannot consent. You
               | seem to be suggesting that a similar standard applies to
               | this adult woman - she can't know if she consented to a
               | sexual encounter or not. To me, that implies you are
               | suggesting it should be illegal to have sex with this
               | woman - after all, she apparently can't tell if she
               | consented or not.
        
               | Pfhreak wrote:
               | > Why does it take months and therapy for her to decode
               | those clear signals?
               | 
               | Because brains aren't just bundles of logical
               | interpreters that fully understand what they are
               | experiencing all the time. There are many, many reasons
               | why we may rationalize some behavior in the moment. Why
               | do victims of cons sometimes defend the con artists for
               | significant periods of time after they leave? Why do
               | humans hold out hope for lost loved ones, when the
               | evidence is clear they've passed away?
               | 
               | Emotionally charged topics take a long time for our minds
               | to process sometimes. Sometimes we need help from others
               | to put our thoughts in order or to gain perspective.
               | Maybe she never asked herself, "Why was I crying?" until
               | a therapist said, "Why were you crying?" We're all wired
               | different, and we have to allow for some flexibility in
               | how were perceive and react to events -- especially
               | traumatic events.
               | 
               | > To me, that implies you are suggesting it should be
               | illegal to have sex with this woman - after all, she
               | apparently can't tell if she consented or not.
               | 
               | Come on, that's a clear strawman. I'm happy to disagree
               | with you about this and discuss it, but that whole
               | paragraph feels needlessly out of line.
        
               | ALittleLight wrote:
               | I think the paragraph that you identify as a strawman is
               | actually the core of our disagreement. I don't intend it
               | as a strawman of your idea but as an illustration of why
               | I struggle to accept the idea that you can retroactively
               | change whether or not you consented - or, phrased in a
               | way you might be more likely to agree with, whether or
               | not you can reevaluate your consent decisions after the
               | fact.
               | 
               | If she doesn't know whether she genuinely consents to sex
               | or not, then how is it morally acceptable to have sex
               | with her? You might be raping her. If she can reevaluate
               | consent decisions in the future, that implies they are
               | not certain in the present. It seems straightforward to
               | say that if you are uncertain about whether someone
               | consents to sex you shouldn't have sex with them.
               | 
               | If this is a strawman I genuinely don't see it. I think
               | it is the logical consequence of accepting mutable
               | consent and it is part of why I don't accept that - or at
               | least why I hesitate to accept mutable consent.
        
               | cmsj wrote:
               | I think you underestimate how skilled abusers can be at
               | emotional manipulation.
        
               | jnwatson wrote:
               | The same argument can be made the other direction. It is
               | quite common for someone to be convinced after the fact
               | it was nonconsensual when it was indeed consensual.
        
               | Pfhreak wrote:
               | I'm sure it happens, I strongly doubt it's "quite
               | common". Especially relative to the incidence of it
               | happening the other way (where an victim escapes and
               | abuser and realizes they were being abused.)
        
               | aphextron wrote:
               | >You absolutely can be told you consented, and trust that
               | person's word, and realize later that no, actually you
               | had not. It's just convenient for the abuser for you to
               | believe you had.
               | 
               | There has to be a line drawn somewhere when you start
               | talking about hardcore felony level criminal accusations
               | though. Should anyone who's ever had an (at the time)
               | consensual intimate encounter then have cart blanche to
               | hold accusations of rape over you for the rest of your
               | life?
               | 
               | I mean just picture this guy's POV for a moment. You
               | think you had a consensual relationship with someone, who
               | then continued having friendly relations with you for
               | months afterwards. Then out of nowhere you're being
               | called a rapist on the internet. I get that the guy is a
               | total creep. But it's absolutely terrifying to think that
               | being in a crappy relationship can land you in prison
               | now.
        
               | tmotwu wrote:
               | Perhaps why she did not explicitly call out rape in her
               | message. However, it's a very realistic abuse and
               | harassment claim, that in itself is already extremely
               | problematic.
        
               | Pfhreak wrote:
               | To be clear, that guy held several positions of power
               | over her. Even in the most absolutely charitable reading,
               | which is that this is a bad relationship (a reading I
               | strongly disagree with) -- if you hold significant power
               | over someone, you shouldn't be entering into casual
               | sexual relationships.
               | 
               | If you want to pursue that relationship, it can be done,
               | but not carelessly. This isn't a situation where a one
               | night stand went awkwardly, there are several additional
               | factors here.
        
             | the-dude wrote:
             | That is not what she says there. She says she felt
             | uncomfortable and taken advantage of.
        
               | boblax wrote:
               | She is definitely the kind of woman where a man shouldn't
               | be making such advances. Let her be the acting party. She
               | would have been telling another story if she were on top
               | and had taken the initiative.
               | 
               | One of the simplest ways for a man to avoid the problems
               | of consent where he suspects there may be is to be the
               | one from whom consent is needed.
               | 
               | That is the absolute safest other than leaving. If you as
               | a man attempt to get consent that may not be something
               | you're able to obtain. She might be intoxicated and
               | unable to consent. You might not know that. However
               | what's safe is to let anyone initiate sex with you while
               | you remain passive and let them have sex with you.
               | 
               | If you leave then I would strongly advise to say it is
               | because you are feeling sick and think it's something you
               | ate. Go to the toilet first and say you have the runs.
               | That will cushion her pride and make her just glad you
               | left. No chance of something mean-spirited.
        
               | klyrs wrote:
               | She was unable to resist his advances, for various
               | reasons listed. While it doesn't sound like she beat him
               | off with a stick, it does sounds like she shut down,
               | dissociated, and didn't say "no." Consent isn't presumed;
               | consent is not the lack of a "no", consent is the
               | presence of free, ongoing, and enthusiastic yes. Even if
               | she reluctantly agreed, it consent wasn't freely given in
               | light of the power imbalance and intoxication. Even if
               | she reluctantly agreed, that isn't enthusiastic consent.
               | Even if she wanted sex, but he refused to use the
               | protection she wanted him to use, that's not ongoing
               | consent. But she clearly didn't want sex with this dude;
               | not like that
        
               | Pfhreak wrote:
               | Being taken advantage of _while intoxicated_ and while
               | there was a significant power imbalance between the two.
               | She was not in a position to give consent there -- being
               | intoxicated, being in a place that was being rented
               | Pretty (and she could risk being out on the street if she
               | refused), having no money and luggage on hand, being the
               | mentee of Pretty (or believing she could be), etc.
               | 
               | She ended up crying and panicking. That generally isn't
               | the outcome of a consensual relationship.
        
               | baobabKoodaa wrote:
               | It definitely sounds like he abused his position and did
               | a horrible thing, but the thing he did is not rape
               | (assuming OP story is 100% accurate description of
               | events).
               | 
               | If 2 people are intoxicated and have sex, do they both
               | rape each other? If one person holds more power than the
               | other, while both are intoxicated, is it just a one-way
               | rape? Or is it still a two-way rape, where one person
               | just "rapes a bit more" and the other person "rapes a bit
               | less"? What if the person who had power ends up
               | regretting sex afterwards and cries, does it "turn the
               | tables" and cause the rapist to suddenly become the
               | victim of rape, after the fact?
               | 
               | Yes, she was drunk. Yes, she later regretted having sex.
               | These things alone do not mean that rape was committed.
               | As far as I can tell, she is not referring to the events
               | as "rape", so maybe you shouldn't either.
        
       | rayhu007 wrote:
       | It is terrible abuse and disgusting. Keep no silence, sue the
       | predator and send him to where he deserve to be.
        
       | typon wrote:
       | You'd think this type of behaviour wouldn't happen anymore, given
       | the whole MeToo movement and people constantly complaining about
       | getting cancelled.
        
         | throway98752343 wrote:
         | That's what makes me wonder if this kind of abuser can't help
         | but do these things. But on the other hand, maybe anyone would,
         | if conditions were right.
         | 
         | These public callouts which occupy the area between keeping
         | silent and taking legal action are like antibodies marking a
         | potentially dangerous cell.
        
       | mrlonglong wrote:
       | It's time these women came forward and reported the person to the
       | police. As with #metoo, justice does indeed gets handed out, it
       | just takes time. The only thing I'm sad about is the considerable
       | amount of pain and suffering these women have to endure. Hugs
       | all.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-04-27 23:01 UTC)