Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not from a legal standpoint-I expect that the legal system has reasonably well defined standards. But from a social or societal one. Doesn't matter if the accused is a Democrat or Republican, celebrity or CEO. What is a reasonable standard of proof or evidence to condemn one, to ruin their life and reputation, and their career?
This is not to provide an excuse to abusers or harassers. True perpetrators deserve nothing but contempt and scorn, to be ostracised and fired. Thing is-anyone can make a claim of sexual harassment or abuse at any time. The vast majority of the cases take place behind closed doors and are "he said, she said".
In far too many of these cases it sounds as if these actions were known to co-workers for years, if not decades. Women were warned not to be alone with Mr. X. Why didn't anyone, any of those co-workers go after him? In those cases it seems pretty clearcut-especially with victims coming forward as events happen.
Other cases, not so much. Cases where not a single word is spoken, a single accusation made. Where the alleged perp is respected by co-workers and no rumors exist. Yet....2 weeks before an election a victim (that far too often happens to be working on the campaign of the opposition) pops up and makes a claim. And of course far too often the media runs with those rumors with no efforts to verify the reports.
So, again-what is a reasonable standard? When should alternative motives be questioned-rather for political gain or a fat court settlement? What is a reasonable amount of proof before we accept it and destroy someone's life?
That's a tough one.
I'm surprised the issue, having been around so long, doesn't have completed studies with recommendations already.
But there are case studies and recommendations.
The minimum standard of proof for sexual harassment should be that it was officially reported near the time it was occurring, or there were dated records kept of the incidents (even just in a diary). Witnesses or people who were confided in about the incidents would definitely be helpful.
The minimum standard of proof for sexual harassment should be that it was officially reported near the time it was occurring, or there were dated records kept of the incidents (even just in a diary). Witnesses or people who were confided in about the incidents would definitely be helpful.
Beyond a reasonable doubt, except for an election, which is a whole different story, as no one is entitled to win an election.
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilnewbie
The same standard as ANY other crime?
I think the OP is quite clear that we are not discussing a court of law. Basically, you’re calling for no standard beyond photographic evidence. Sexual-harassment typically does not leave any physical forensic evidence. There is usually no possession of contraban. Are you saying but in less we see someone sexually harass the victim, we should assume the victim is lying?
Honestly, I think the first conversation we need to have is one about what is and is not acceptable behavior in the first place.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
