View Single Post
  #16  
Old 12-26-2012, 02:14 AM
rearnakedchoke rearnakedchoke is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,557
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NateR View Post
She probably would have won the case if she had pursued it as a sexual harassment case. Why they chose to go with gender bias instead of sexual harassment is beyond me.

However, if she never complained about his behavior, then it probably didn't qualify as sexual harassment. Especially if she was participating in the flirting.

I'm not saying she would have won a sexual harassment case because she had a valid complaint, however. I just know she would have won because she's a woman charging a man with sexual misconduct, so the rule of "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply. If you're a man charged with any sort of harassment, misconduct or abuse by a woman, then you're guilty until proven guilty. That's how backwards our judicial system has become.
I don't think this was a criminal case, so innocent until proven guilty may not apply .... And really? The judicial system is backwards when it comes to dealing with men being accused of sexual misconduct??? Sure some men have been falsely accused and persecuted ... But many have gotten off because the women have also refused to be questioned and subjected to rape kits etc ..... So I think its pretty even on that level .... Guys like this are scum and he's made to look like the good guy cuz he went to his church ... Lol ... His wife is dumb for staying with him
Reply With Quote