Can you imagine if it was Amy Hennig and that's why she left? Haha... that would be a twist.

I hope not though. She is classy.

So he claims is that there was not only a person who harassed him, but also the HR department involved in getting him fired. There may be even a third party involved who offered him money to stay quiet. For me that sounds like conspiracy territory.

She didn't quit; she was fired. Not sure what you're talking about. 

"A rate between 2% and 10%, depending on the study, of demonstrably false claims should not be your default position"

so between 98% and 90% of victims don't report their assaults? so how do we know about these cases if they are unreported? 

edit - i misread your post, but regardless there needs to be some objective standard for determining whether a crime has occured and the only possible standard we have to go by is evidence

"Skepticism should never be your default"

skepticism and the need to validate claims is at the core of the justice system and the reason its like that is not only to protect people but to ensure that there is some degree of objectivity

if there is no objectivity then what stops you from one day falling prey to someone making false claims against you?

i don't think many of you understand the consequences of the causes you advocate for

So a rate between 2% and 10% are demonstrably false. What's the conviction rate? According to RAINN, it's about 1%. For the other 80-95% of cases that aren't demonstrably false or in a sense, "demonstrably true" as that is what a conviction should show, we actually do not know if the alleged sexual assault actually happened. But here you are assuming that in every case an alleged sexual assault is that isn't demonstrably false is true.

And how is this for a way to spin the numbers? Of the cases where we have extreme amounts of confidence over whether the sexual assault did occur, according to your own numbers, it's twice to ten times more likely the accusation is false.

Just food for thought.

People confunde being hit on by a superior with being sexually harassed. Is a crime a CEO marrying someone from his company?

yes i misread what you posted and i edited my post to reflect that

"According to the National Research council, 80% of all sexual assaults are unreported to authorities."

if they are unreported how is this organisation able to form this statistic?

And that's the problem with the interpretation of these statistics. 90-90% of sexual assault claims are either unfounded or verified true.

According to the National Research council, 80% of all sexual assault claims are unreported to authorities.

The man's gay? He's gay? There's a female working at a video game company? All the options seem pointless to the actual discussion if I'm catching your drift.

https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/sexual_harassment.cfm

A superior hiting on their subordinates is a little messed up in my opinion. But, it's not really sexual harassment until the superior is made aware that it is unwanted and continues to do so, or punishes the employee for rebuffing their advances.