By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Former Naughty Dog Employee Says He Was Sexually Harassed

o_O.Q on 16 October 2017
SpokenTruth said:
o_O.Q said:

 

"Make that kind of violation severe, reduce the backlog so the trials happen in reasonable time, send a national message to women that they matter and you'll get less assaults."

 

well good, those are solutions... whether the amounts of rape that happen will drop or not is another thing though

I tell you what.  Let's try it and find out.  What the hell is the worse that can happen?  Rapists go to prison for decades rather than get probation for 6 months?  Men and women feel more empowered to speak out about assault rather than let it go?  Why are these things considered not important enough to warrant implementation?

i didn't say anything against implementing these strategies

 

personally i think better strategies would be teaching women to protect themselves, having them carry weapons such as mace or knives etc etc etc, but when solutions like these are suggested, then its called victim blaming or some silly nonsense like that... and then nothing gets done and the problem continues to perpetuate because tbh i don't think many people care about rational solutions

 

finally i suppose all i would say otherwise is that people should be wary about implementing increasingly stringent safety measures on something as complex as sexual interaction... because as i've said, someday if you are involved in sexual activity yourself then the very measures you put into place could be used unfairly against you 



Around the Network
think-man on 17 October 2017
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
think-man said:

Think about it for a moment.

If you're too scared to say something than don't say anything at all. When someone asks you a question you don't respond with "Just think about it bro!" This isn't 2+2=4, I want to know why you genuinely care so much about the gender?

If I have to spell it out for you then I can't be bothered discussing it with you. It's not rocket science.



 

How to Make friends In Dark Souls 3

AngryLittleAlchemist on 17 October 2017
think-man said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

If you're too scared to say something than don't say anything at all. When someone asks you a question you don't respond with "Just think about it bro!" This isn't 2+2=4, I want to know why you genuinely care so much about the gender?

If I have to spell it out for you then I can't be bothered discussing it with you. It's not rocket science.

 Ok, sorry. 



Dante9 on 17 October 2017

With the complete lack of evidence, the story could just as well be that this guy was some kind of a problem at work and they decided to get rid of him. Then he came up with some trumped up harassment story and they were forced to offer him money, because these things always look bad even if it's just an unfounded claim and they would want to avoid this kind of attention.
And that goes back to the mob judgement thing. Because most people are simpletons who will believe any claims without evidence. They just love to get onboard the judge train and get some virtue signaling done while they're at it. It's a sad thing that everything is influenced so heavily by the ignorant mob and their knee jerk reactions and emotional fits. In cases like this one, the mob is reacting to things that have not even been established as real yet. Think about it.
I feel like I have to conclude this post with a statement that I do not condone any kind of harassment, no matter who the victim is, and anyone found guilty of such a thing should be punished to the full extent of the law.



o_O.Q on 17 October 2017
SpokenTruth said:
Aeolus451 said:

Nonsensical as usual. "Skepticism should never be your default"? Oh really. Isn't skepticism the basis of how justice in the entire world works? Someone reports a crime, it's investigated in every way to lead to the culprit and to ensure there's no room for doubt in their guilt or innocence. You can't take someone's word on face value when it comes to justice. Anything said as to be treated as questionable unless it's verified. In situations like this, anything the accuser and the accused says has to be looked into before you treat what is said as fact or true because it would be assuming the accused is guilty until proven otherwise. 

I mean skeptical that a women is filing a false report.   You should never be skeptical that a person is filing a false report.  That doesn't mean you have to presume guilt on an a given attacker.  That's separate and I completely agree with you 100%.  Innocent until proven guilty.  But we're not talking about the guilt of a given suspect, we're talking about a person filing a false report.

Better stated, for all people that are shot and killed, is your default stance skepticism that the person was shot and killed?  No, that would be ridiculous.  The person is obviously shot and dead and it would take unusual circumstances for a person to appear shot and appear dead and yet not be either.

For all people that claim they were robbed, is your default stance skepticism that they were indeed robbed?  
For all people that claim they were stabbed, is your default stance skepticism that they were indeed stabbed?
For all people that claim they were raped, is your default stance skepticism that they were indeed raped?

The guilt of the robber, stabber and rapist is subject to the process of law and are innocent until guilty but you don't harbor initial doubt about the person being robbed or the person being stabbed....so why have doubts the person was raped?

o_O.Q said:

i didn't say anything against implementing these strategies

 

personally i think better strategies would be teaching women to protect themselves, having them carry weapons such as mace or knives etc etc etc, but when solutions like these are suggested, then its called victim blaming or some silly nonsense like that... and then nothing gets done and the problem continues to perpetuate because tbh i don't think many people care about rational solutions

 

finally i suppose all i would say otherwise is that people should be wary about implementing increasingly stringent safety measures on something as complex as sexual interaction... because as i've said, someday if you are involved in sexual activity yourself then the very measures you put into place could be used unfairly against you 

Yeah, that IS victim blaming.  You want to change the attitude and actions of the victims rather than the attitude and actions of the attackers.  That's backwards and simply accepts rape, assaults and attacks as an inevitability that cannot be prevented.

You'd rather teach your daughter to fear men than teach your son to respect women. How can you not see how misguided that is?

 

"Yeah, that IS victim blaming.  You want to change the attitude and actions of the victims rather than the attitude and actions of the attackers."

 

to be frank this attitude is not only moronic, but it ultimately causes more damage in the end because people are actually DISCOURAGED from taking a proactive approach to their safety

instead of telling people the obvious - that there is danger out there, but they can take measures to be safer you instead tell them to take a passive weak stance and nothing changes 

 

"You want to change the attitude and actions of the victims rather than the attitude and actions of the attackers."

 

i can't believe that i have to explain this to what i'm assuming is a grown adult, but you are never going to stop people from commiting evil acts

 

so therefore, what can be changed with regards to this situation?

 

"You'd rather teach your daughter to fear men"

 

i'd teach anyone to respect the fact that EVERYONE is capable of and occasionally acts on evil impulses throughout their lives and that they should therefore use common sense in there decision making

 

"than teach your son to respect women."

 

so... let me get this straight you somehow live in some parallel universe where children always abide by the teachings of their parents and criminals are never aware before hand that their actions are wrong?

 

let me ask you something, have you ever done something that you knew before hand to be wrong? i know that i have on many occasions, what about you?



Around the Network
Aeolus451 on 17 October 2017
SpokenTruth said:
Aeolus451 said:

Nonsensical as usual. "Skepticism should never be your default"? Oh really. Isn't skepticism the basis of how justice in the entire world works? Someone reports a crime, it's investigated in every way to lead to the culprit and to ensure there's no room for doubt in their guilt or innocence. You can't take someone's word on face value when it comes to justice. Anything said as to be treated as questionable unless it's verified. In situations like this, anything the accuser and the accused says has to be looked into before you treat what is said as fact or true because it would be assuming the accused is guilty until proven otherwise. 

I mean skeptical that a women is filing a false report.   You should never be skeptical that a person is filing a false report.  That doesn't mean you have to presume guilt on an a given attacker.  That's separate and I completely agree with you 100%.  Innocent until proven guilty.  But we're not talking about the guilt of a given suspect, we're talking about a person filing a false report.

Better stated, for all people that are shot and killed, is your default stance skepticism that the person was shot and killed?  No, that would be ridiculous.  The person is obviously shot and dead and it would take unusual circumstances for a person to appear shot and appear dead and yet not be either.

For all people that claim they were robbed, is your default stance skepticism that they were indeed robbed?  
For all people that claim they were stabbed, is your default stance skepticism that they were indeed stabbed?
For all people that claim they were raped, is your default stance skepticism that they were indeed raped?

The guilt of the robber, stabber and rapist is subject to the process of law and are innocent until guilty but you don't harbor initial doubt about the person being robbed or the person being stabbed....so why have doubts the person was raped?

o_O.Q said:

i didn't say anything against implementing these strategies

 

personally i think better strategies would be teaching women to protect themselves, having them carry weapons such as mace or knives etc etc etc, but when solutions like these are suggested, then its called victim blaming or some silly nonsense like that... and then nothing gets done and the problem continues to perpetuate because tbh i don't think many people care about rational solutions

 

finally i suppose all i would say otherwise is that people should be wary about implementing increasingly stringent safety measures on something as complex as sexual interaction... because as i've said, someday if you are involved in sexual activity yourself then the very measures you put into place could be used unfairly against you 

Yeah, that IS victim blaming.  You want to change the attitude and actions of the victims rather than the attitude and actions of the attackers.  That's backwards and simply accepts rape, assaults and attacks as an inevitability that cannot be prevented.

You'd rather teach your daughter to fear men than teach your son to respect women. How can you not see how misguided that is?

Yes to the three questions about robbery and what not. You should at least make sure there's no holes in their story before you take their word for it 100%. If there's any holes, it should be investigated. It's rarely clear cut and people's lives will be affected by it. People lie and for a myriad of reasons including for nonsensical ones. Should we trust everone's word when it comes to car accidents or how about in cases of self-defense shootings?



potato_hamster on 17 October 2017
SpokenTruth said:
o_O.Q said:

i didn't say anything against implementing these strategies

 

personally i think better strategies would be teaching women to protect themselves, having them carry weapons such as mace or knives etc etc etc, but when solutions like these are suggested, then its called victim blaming or some silly nonsense like that... and then nothing gets done and the problem continues to perpetuate because tbh i don't think many people care about rational solutions

 

finally i suppose all i would say otherwise is that people should be wary about implementing increasingly stringent safety measures on something as complex as sexual interaction... because as i've said, someday if you are involved in sexual activity yourself then the very measures you put into place could be used unfairly against you 

Yeah, that IS victim blaming.  You want to change the attitude and actions of the victims rather than the attitude and actions of the attackers.  That's backwards and simply accepts rape, assaults and attacks as an inevitability that cannot be prevented.

You'd rather teach your daughter to fear men than teach your son to respect women. How can you not see how misguided that is?

Hold on, you're acting like attackers don't know what they're doing is wrong. They know it's wrong, and they do it anyway because they don't care that it's wrong. Is it victim blaming if your house gets robbed and your insurance claimed is denied because you left all of your windows and doors unlocked, and the robbers just strolled in your front door? Of course not. It is reasonable to expect people to take precautions to protect themselves and make smart choices. Leaving your door unlocked is a poor choice, so is venturing out in this world with the expectation that no one is going to fuck with your day because ideally, that is how it should be.

I'd rather teach my children to be good and decent people and treat everyone how they would like to be treated, and also teach them there's shitty people out there that you need to avoid and protect yourself against. It's not a false dichotomy.

ps. You're gendering your arguments again.



Aeolus451 on 17 October 2017
SpokenTruth said:
And this is why people don't report 80% of sexual assaults. Someone goes through one of the most traumatic events possible and they get met with "I'm skeptical you were assaulted. You're probably lying". So they feel violated twice. Nice.

There's no exceptions with innocent til proven guilty. If you take a person's allegation as true by default, you're assuming the person they've made the allegation against is guilty by default. If you can't take word of everyone in a car accident as absolute truth, ya sure as hell can't take the word of an accuser of sexual assualt as absolute truth just because they've made an allegation. You have to double check everything they say like in any other criminal investigation. 



potato_hamster on 17 October 2017
SpokenTruth said:
And this is why people don't report 80% of sexual assaults. Someone goes through one of the most traumatic events possible and they get met with "I'm skeptical you were assaulted. You're probably lying". So they feel violated twice. Nice.

Seriously? You make it sound like the vast majority of sexual assaults are brutal rapes. That's not true. Most sexual assaults that come up in surveys (such as the one that reports that 1 in 5 women, and 1 in 6 men experience sexual assault in their lifetime) are things like someone trying to kiss you without you wanting it, or being touched in a way you don't want to be touched, or having any type of sexual expereince, while under the influence of drugs or alcohol regardless of the sobriety of the partner, and regardless of whether you thought it was consensual.

Example: this is an unreported sexual assault that happened just last night:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kq2vQEje708

As that woman is partaking in a sexual assault survey and is if anyone has ever tried to kiss her without her consent, and if she's honest, she'd have to answer yes. She's statistically a sexual assault victim who didn't report the crime.



Superman4 on 17 October 2017

Suck it up buttercup. Quit being a pussy. He should have taken the money, or just dealt with it and not went to HR. Since when does anything good come from HR?