Troons stealing breast milk from mothers working at a California tech company

submitted by xoenix from x.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]NastyWetSmear 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

I've observed, with HR, the race is usually to become the accuser. Once you say that someone else is doing something sexist, racist, otherist, it almost seems that this instantly becomes law - the accusation is true and cannot be proven false, even if you prove it's false. The only evidence offered is someone coming in, frowning and saying they feel attacked... You can come in, frown and say you weren't attacking them, but for some reason that equal evidence isn't sufficient. Additional evidence, like having a dozen other people say they didn't believe there was anything negative going on still doesn't seem to outweigh the original weight of the complaint.

It's hard to blame HR. They aren't a court. They pretty much just have to try and keep the wheels from being squeaky as best they can, but it's very easy for people to weaponise that unbalanced mix of: The total authority to fire you because of a complaint and The absolute lack of authority to investigate a complaint in full and fire the other person for raising it maliciously.

[–]Jiminy 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

But we need to change laws so false accusers get their lives ruined.

[–]NastyWetSmear 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

YYeeessss, I think it already is, but you have to be careful with stuff like that.

I'd love to see people who fling accusations around get a swift and serious case of justice, but the last thing you want is to make reporting a crime a coin toss on if or not you end up getting arrested for doing so. I think most places consider making false allegations a crime, but you need to have an airtight case showing that it was a malicious allegation and not just someone who felt honestly in danger but couldn't bring enough proof for a guilty verdict, yeah?

[–]Jiminy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Noooo if the accuser can't prove it means they lied, need new laws saying that.

[–]NastyWetSmear 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Woah there, tiger! If someone shoots your family dead, but then does a good job of covering up the evidence, you don't wanna be locked up.

[–]Jiminy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Doubt that happens. Women's false accusations are a bigger threat.

[–]NastyWetSmear 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

You doubt people kill people? You lost me...

[–]Jiminy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Go read original comment here, stay on topic, don't create scenarios to defend false accusers.

[–]NastyWetSmear 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I am the original comment. I am on topic - the point is that it's difficult to legally punish false allegations simply based on "No proof" because that isn't evidence that the allegation is false and it discourages other possible, future allegations.

If you're trying to say that you want me to keep the examples relevant specifically to HR, then it kind of remains the same argument - If it requires evidence, then I can corner someone in a bathroom and threaten to murder them at work, because it's just them and me in the bathroom. That's what I mean by HR having their hands tied in this regard because they face backlash if there's a complaint that they didn't action, but they also face backlash if there's a complaint that they do action and it turns out to be false.

[–]Jiminy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Fag

[–]OuroborosTheory 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

that sort of rules-lawyering is also how the trans activists dethroned the radfems: if wombxn really were completely abjected victims, the worst in human history, with all the legal standing of a discarded sex toy, how do they also have an iron grip on campus HR departments, divert sexual assault allegations to Title IX star chambers, veto a men's center with 1% the budget of its equivalent, get multimillion budgets for women's shelters, write the laws, advise the courts, write the mandatory training sessions for all the businesses as well as schools?

they also came up with the whole "my individual experience as a middle-class academic professional is the only universal standard," "everyone must to defer to my contradictory and self-serving whims," "we have to be in control of every institution," "you're a traitor to the gender for disagreeing with our niche theories/having any different politics," frankly it never ended: but to many this was an opportunity to be TAKEN

so everyone secretly agreed they were callous, vindictive, spiteful bullies always on the witch-hunt for "oppressors" to have the campus/HR punish (an inverse of Lord Acton's law): what sort of sick bastard(ess) thinks Phil Hartman had it coming or that street kids can go starve if they have a dongle? but unfortunately the ~2014 shift just meant a new busload of psychotic bullies were given full (if secondhand) authority over mainstream media companies, universities, grade schools, law (this was also the time when "you don't need dysphoria to be trans, but we'll unalive ourselves from dysphoria if you ever disagree with us uwu" teens flooded out the older trans)