LordAdam16:


Don't mind them. This is a classic 'crying wolf' situation. They are blurring the lines and very soon, people will start caring less.

People have never really cared much except if their family or friends are involved. In fact, this is the best time in history
where many people care about sexual harassment.

How can you equate adultery to rape, when as at 2016, AshleyMadison (a married affairs site) had 46 million users.

I have never met any sane person who equates adultery to rape, have you? The more a person supports #metoo, the less likely
they are to be puritanical about adultery. Same can't be said of the moralistic perverts who would like to criminalize adultery if given a chance.

Larry Nassar was sentenced to up to 175 years in prison for sex crimes. I don't see anyone saying it was undeserved.

Be specific, he was a convicted pedophile. Even fellow pedophiles won't publicly support him for obvious reasons.
I don’t want to think that you consider a 175 years imprisonment for a pedophile to be equal to a 90 million dollar severance package for harassment.

Yet a guy who had a consensual affair who lost his job, about to lose his marriage, and lose custody of his kids is not enough punishment.

Consensual?
It appears you are an eyewitness to all Rubin’s sexual exploits.
You are muddling things up, divorce is not a legal punishment for cheating.
In America, you can file for divorce for any reason.

Cheating is not a crime so is divorce. Divorce can be instituted for any reason. Remember that marriage is not slavery.
As for women getting child custody, it is a relic of a long tradition. The same people
who thinks primary custody for women is unfair in divorce will also lash at you if you suggest
that taking care of the home or children should not be women’s job by default, you can’t have it both ways.

He should also have lost his $90m severance package after making a billion-dollar invention.

There is nothing in his contract that entitled him to a $90 million dollar severance package.
It is unfortunate that Google rewarded a pervert with millions of dollar without a fight.

Mandela had an affair. Let South Africa stop paying his family his entitlements. He shouldn't have been given a state burial. He is therefore no longer a beacon of hope and the best that the world has to offer.

Very few countries punish adultery and men are almost never on the receiving end.
Comparing Mandela to sex offenders is quite distasteful. They don’t belong together.

People just make outlandish statements without thinking.

I guess you are part of those people. By equating sexual harassment with having affairs, you undermined the foundation
of all your arguments.
It seems you just “heard” about this case and choose a side without getting other relevant information.

Rubin, a multi-millionaire could have gotten any woman he wants but not him, he needs to show his power
by bullying and coercing many of his subordinates into an unwanted sexual relationship. He is a scum of the
earth.

Men just don’t make a fuss over sexual harassment because they can handle it. And men are not the only perpetrators here, your ‘holy’ ‘immaculate’ Women too are devils. But who comes out to shout blue murder. You guessed right! Love you.

Xisnin:

You believe?
If you are being harassed and you kept quiet, you are sissy and a disgrace to men.
At least, these victims have the courage to come forward, they are not hiding behind
keyboard to show your cowardice.
Speak up or shut up.

hucienda:
They've dismissed the erring staff. What else do they want Google to do again?

This is one of the many after-effects of excessive liberalism.

Liberals are very stupid. Their stupidity can be deadly. They would always support the accuser even when there is no evidence. In fact, they believe that women who claim to be raped should be believed despite the fact that many women have been found to make false rape allegation. They are screwed in the head.

[quote author=Xisnin post=72622490]

First off, I'd come at you hard for not comprehending my message before quoting me. So bite a bullet.

People have never really cared much except if their family or friends are involved. In fact, this is the best time in history
where many people care about sexual harassment.

Can you back this statement with a stat?

Because it seems you are completely unwell to say people "NEVER REALLY CARED MUCH." Do you know the last king (not Emperor) of Rome? He was forced out of the throne because his son raped a lady. And that was ancient Rome. People don't care any much now than they did about sexual harassment, liberals have only wanted to start usurping the criminal justice system by equating allegations to convictions.

You've got to be an id**t to believe people were not caring "as much" (whatever that means) about the act itself until #MeToo started. People always cared, rape and sexual assault are major crimes everywhere. Sexual harassment if proven was not applauded. It was denounced.

I have never met any sane person who equates adultery to rape, have you?

Did you read my reply and the statement I was replying, or were you often dropped on your head as a child when you were young?

Be specific, he was a convicted pedophile. Even fellow pedophiles won't publicly support him for obvious reasons.
I don’t want to think that you consider a 175 years imprisonment for a pedophile to be equal to a 90 million dollar severance package for harassment.

If you read my posts you wouldn't. The only reason why you are asking that question is because you are a F**L! I'm not going to give you slack on that, because my posts are clear, I use English, and it takes a compound f**l to disregard all of that and make unfounded statements.

I've specifically said, numerous times, that the offense has to fit the crime. Are you so daft that you can't understand what that statement means. Because you are definitely retarded if after I've said that here, you st*pidly make that statement.

Let me repeat myself for the umpteenth time. You might likely not understand it again, because like the other guy you also are an unintelligent waste of space. 175 years for Nassar's crime is a fitting punishment. A dismissal + $90m several package is fitting for Rubin.

The very fact that you think anyone would equate both shows how empty you are.

Consensual?
It appears you are an eyewitness to all Rubin’s sexual exploits.

No I'm not, and neither are you.

You are muddling things up, divorce is not a legal punishment for cheating.
In America, you can file for divorce for any reason.

Cheating is not a crime so is divorce. Divorce can be instituted for any reason. Remember that marriage is not slavery.

I'm not muddling things up. You are just too st*pid to understand anything I say. That's why you keep having to type basic nonsense.

I never said divorce is a crime. I never cheating is a crime.

I said, dude was dismissed and he got divorced. That's called paying his dues. Those are the consequences of him having an undisclosed extramarital relationship. A fitting punishment for his offence.

As for women getting child custody, it is a relic of a long tradition. The same people
who thinks primary custody for women is unfair in divorce will also lash at you if you suggest
that taking care of the home or children should not be women’s job by default, you can’t have it both ways.

No, it's not a relic of a long tradition, you a**wipe. Men can also get child custody. He was contesting child custody with his wife, and infidelity will almost always mean he loses the custody battle. You can do a simple Google search, since you're clearly about as informed as a caveman.

There is nothing in his contract that entitled him to a $90 million dollar severance package.
It is unfortunate that Google rewarded a pervert with millions of dollar without a fight.

Have you ever heard of Golden Handshakes and Golden Parachutes?

Google's $90m is perfectly legal. If it wasn't, investors, employees, and law firms would have filed a lawsuit.

Andy Rubin was head of Android. Then head of Robotics. He lost out to Pichai to become the Android/Chrome boss when they were merged. Same Pichai is currently the Google CEO. Rubin sold Android to Google for a mere $50m. As at 2016, Google had made $22b in profits (not even revenue) from Android. And Rubin was head of the division until 2013.

In tech, it is criminal for him to leave the company with nothing after practically inventing an ATM, unless he commits an actual crime.

That $90m package is because of that $20b+ in profits from his invention. Which in my opinion is both an insult and that low partly because of the accusation. You're never going to get that kind of package at Google as a dunce.

Very few countries punish adultery and men are almost never on the receiving end.
Comparing Mandela to sex offenders is quite distasteful. They don’t belong together.

And you're a buff**n. Mandela cheated. Andy cheated. Andy is not a registered sex offender. Mandela isn't either.

I guess you are part of those people. By equating sexual harassment with having affairs, you undermined the foundation
of all your arguments.
It seems you just “heard” about this case and choose a side without getting other relevant information.

That's you.

Dude had an affair, didn't disclose it against company policy, lady wanted a way out without blow back, she made an accusation that would get thrown out from any competent court of law, Google dismissed Andy for flouting company policy under the guise of the credibility of an accusation, gave him compensation for his service to the company, case closed.

No one is equating sexual harassment with having an affair. But if he didn't have an undisclosed affair with her, she wouldn't willfully go to a hotel room, suck his d*ck, then claim she was forced.

She's a trash bag. And I have zero sympathy for f*ckers like that.

Rubin, a multi-millionaire could have gotten any woman he wants but not him, he needs to show his power
by bullying and coercing many of his subordinates into an unwanted sexual relationship. He is a scum of the
earth.

No. Nobody can get any woman he wants. You've got to stop perpetrating that myth. He had a consensual affair with a lady of sound mind (she worked at f*cking Google). It was not unwanted as you st*pidly claim. It was an affair. It lasted one whole year.

She wanted to slut her way up the ladder, as well as eat her cake and have it. Because there are plenty of ladies who told him no and he didn't force. Google has 75,000 employees.

Never in your life quote me again. I'm allergic to stupidity. Especially one as outrageous as yours!

-Lord

LordAdam16:

You guys have been dating for a year plus, she's wanted to end things, then the last sexual encounter they have turns out to be the only one he forced her to do.

Sorry, not buying this BS!

Yes it's BS, because there is absolutely no way, no way in hell, that a man can sexually harass/assault, at any point in time in a sexual relationship, his girlfriend, mistress, wife or any one he is in a sexual relationship with, absolutely no way. .
No Way at all.
Such things don't exist and are only fantasy.
Suddenly there is no such thing as marital rape anymore.

Very cute, let's imply that there is no way a Lady can be sexually assaulted just because the person who assualted her is her boyfriend, Husband, Someone she had an affair with, e.t.c

SMH

You don't know if it is true or not.

That lady (I try not to use the word "b*tch" even though I'm sure his wife thinks she is) found the perfect plan to end the relationship without affecting her career. Which is why she'd never go public.

Now you're sure of what the wife thinks. She thinks she is a bitch. What else does she think? Does she think her ex husband is a lying, disgusting, cheating, sexual harassing piece of shït?
Do you know? Is that one of the things you are sure of?

Continue flying into conclusions just to support your train of thought

Right back at you.

Nope, this is you and all you



I[b]'m glad the people out protesting don't have this funny mindset where a situation cannot be considered sexual assault just because the people involved were in a relationship and the lady wanted to end it, neither do they believe that just because you are the father of electricity you can be protected regarding sexual harassment [/b]

I think misogynistic Nigerians need this mindset.

They aren't just protesting because of Andy, they are protesting for all the cases and I applaud them for coming out to protest.
They are doing good.

Rubin, the Father of Android, whose inventions bring in tens of billions annually is not equivalent to some canteen chef working in a campus eatery. That canteen chef if a sexual misconduct claim is made is not going to get a $90m severance package under the exact same circumstances as Rubin.

In the wake of the Times' piece, Google CEO Sundar Pichai sent an email to all employees saying the company had fired 48 people over the last two years for sexual harassment, including 13 "senior managers and above," and that none had received an exit package.

"Senior managers and above".
Skipped this part because it didn't fit into your canteen chef theory right?

None of those employees was an executive.

Richard DeVaul, a director at Alphabet's research lab X, left without an exit package,

DeVaul was one of several current and former Google or Alphabet executives whose inappropriate workplace behavior was highlighted by The Times,

In a statement to the Times, DeVaul said he was sorry for the "error of judgement."


Yep, you're right.
None of those employees were executives.
Richard DeVaul was a canteen chef

I don't need to ask them to clarify anything. They've done exactly what they should have. Dismiss him for flouting company policy and paying him a severance package which he deserved

Seems this is what Google actually did.

[quote author=LordAdam16 post=72623981][/quote]
Never knew you had mental issues and I have probably aggravated the symptoms.
I am at fault for quoting you. I should have known that a person who thinks sexual assault and affairs are the same
thing has problems.

Daeylar:
[s]

Yes it's BS, because there is absolutely no way, no way in hell, that a man can sexually harass/assault, at any point in time in a sexual relationship, his girlfriend, mistress, wife or any one he is in a sexual relationship with, absolutely no way. .
No Way at all.
Such things don't exist and are only fantasy.
Suddenly there is no such thing as marital rape anymore.

Very cute, let's imply that there is no way a Lady can be sexually assaulted just because the person who assualted her is her boyfriend, Husband, Someone she had an affair with, e.t.c

SMH

You don't know if it is true or not. Just stop.




Now you're sure of what the wife thinks. She thinks she is a bitch. What else does she think? Does she think her ex husband is a lying, disgusting, cheating, sexual harassing piece of shït?
Do you know? Is that one of the things you are sure of?

Continue flying into conclusions just to support your train of thought


Nope, this is you and all you


I'm glad the people out protesting don't have this funny mindset where a situation cannot be considered sexual assault just because the people involved were in a relationship and the lady wanted to end it, neither do they believe that just because you are the father of electricity you can be protected regarding sexual harassment

I think Nigerians need this mindset.

They aren't just protesting because of Andy, they are protesting for all the cases and I applaud them for coming out to protest.



In the wake of the Times' piece, Google CEO Sundar Pichai sent an email to all employees saying the company had fired 48 people over the last two years for sexual harassment, including 13 "senior managers and above," and that none had received an exit package.

"Senior managers and above".
Skipped this part because it didn't fit into your canteen chef theory right?


Richard DeVaul, a director at Alphabet's research lab X, left without an exit package,

DeVaul was one of several current and former Google or Alphabet executives whose inappropriate workplace behavior was highlighted by The Times,

In a statement to the Times, DeVaul said he was sorry for the "error of judgement."


Yep, you're right.
None of those employees were executives.
Richard DeVaul was a canteen chef





Seems this is what Google actually did.[/s]

Let me quote directly from the NYT article, because I've gone on too long on this.

When Google combined management of Android with its Chrome division in 2013, Mr. Rubin lost a power struggle to Mr. Pichai, Google’s current chief executive.

He remained highly valued. That year, Google offered Mr. Rubin a one-time bonus of $40 million in stock and an additional $72 million of stock over the next two years, said two people with knowledge of the terms.

Mr. Rubin built a robotics division within Google named Replicant. During a six-month span in 2013, he spent an estimated $90 million to buy eight robotics firms.

Around that time, Mr. Rubin was casually seeing another woman he knew from Android, according to two company executives briefed on the relationship. The two had started dating in 2012 when he was still leading the division, these people said.

By 2013, she had cooled on him and wanted to break things off but worried it would affect her career, said the people. That March, she agreed to meet him at a hotel, where she said he pressured her into MouthAction, they said. The incident ended the relationship.

The woman waited until 2014 before filing a complaint to Google’s human resources department and telling officials about the relationship, the people said. Google began an investigation.

In September 2014, a few weeks into the inquiry, Google’s board awarded Mr. Rubin a stock grant worth $150 million, to be paid out over several years, said three people briefed on the decision. It was an unusually generous sum, even by Google’s standards.

Mr. Page typically recommends how much senior executives are paid, said three former Google executives. Over the years, Mr. Page had told people he felt Mr. Rubin was never properly compensated for his contribution to Android, two people who spoke to him said.

The $150 million stock grant to Mr. Rubin was approved by the Google board’s leadership development and compensation committee — composed of Paul Otellini, Intel’s former chief executive who died in 2017, and two of Google’s earliest investors, John Doerr of the venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins and Ram Shriram of the venture firm Sherpalo Ventures.

It is unclear if Mr. Page or the board knew of the investigation into the harassment complaint when Google approved the $150 million grant for Mr. Rubin. Mr. Page, 45, did not respond to a request for a comment; Mr. Doerr and Mr. Shriram declined to comment.

Google’s inquiry ultimately found the complaint against Mr. Rubin credible, said the two company executives familiar with the incident. Mr. Rubin denied the accusation, but it became clear that — at the very least — the relationship was inappropriate, they said. Mr. Page decided Mr. Rubin should leave, they said.

The $150 million stock grant gave Mr. Rubin an enormous bargaining chip when he started negotiating his exit package about a month later. That is because an executive’s stock compensation — and how much of it they would leave behind — is often taken into consideration during settlement talks.

When Google fires lower-level employees, it typically marches them out immediately and pays little, if any, severance. But for senior executives, Google weighs other factors, said former executives. A wrongful termination lawsuit could mean unwanted media attention for Google and the victims of a misconduct case, with a loss resulting in significant damages.

In the end, Google paid Mr. Rubin $90 million, said two people with knowledge of the terms. The package was structured so that he received $2.5 million a month for the first two years and $1.25 million a month for the following two years.

A provision in the separation agreement precluded Mr. Rubin from working for rivals or disparaging Google publicly, they said. Google also delayed repayment of the $14 million loan.

The company then went out of its way to make Mr. Rubin’s departure seem amicable, including Mr. Page’s public statement of gratitude.

Afterward, Google invested in Playground Global, a venture firm Mr. Rubin started six months after leaving the company. Playground has raised $800 million. He also founded Essential, a maker of Android smartphones.

In summary,

* B*tch was having an affair with him. And the only time he harassed her or any woman in his life, was the last BJ she gave him after she wanted to end the relationship. I absolutely cannot f*cking believe her. I'm not stup*d. She's a f*cking, blackmailing liar! No court will convict Andy of sexual harassment based on that excuse of a story.

None of that sh*t is consistent with sexual assault in ongoing relationships.

* Page didn't think Rubin had been duly compensated for the contribution of Android. Same thing I've repeated.
* He got the $150m in stocks as an executive as part of that due compensation.
* The $90m is settlement for the $150m in stocks he received as part of his compensation. Same thing I've repeated severally. And also to avoid the blow back of a wrongful termination suit.
* Google found his affair to be an "inappropriate relationship" and was the central reason why he was asked to resign. Same thing I've repeated severally as it was against company policy for him to not disclose the relationship.
* Google pays little or no severance to lower-level employees. Andy Rubin was not a lower-level employee.
* Google has continued to pay him and invest in his ventures since he's left.

I'd say this for the last time. I believe Andy Rubin did not sexually harass that lady. I believe Google did the right thing by compensating him for his contributions to Google through his invention, as clearly stated.

Every competent court will throw her allegation out the window. If she doesn't think so, you and all those protesters can contribute money for her legal fees and let her sue him as well as Google for having her sign an NDA.

Andy Rubin runs Essential now and is worth $350m, she can go dig for gold and see how much she gets.

You guys can go stick your mumblings where the sun doesn't shine.

PS: Oh and DuVaul resigned 3 days ago after the NYT article. Unfortunately, he didn't invent an OS that made $22b in profits. All fingers are not equal. It's all business dear, no hard feelings.

I've got nothing further to add.

-Lord

LordAdam16:

Let me quote directly from the NYT article, because I've gone on too long on this.

FINALLYYY!!!!!
I've been tired.

In summary,

I give zero fuçks. I understood when you tried to be reasonable, I just stayed to rein you in anytime you tried to go out of line with your funny theories just because you want to support Andy.
At least it's over

None of that sh*t is consistent with sexual harassment in ongoing relationships

Consistent or not. You don't know what happened.

Google pays little or no severance to lower-level employees. Andy Rubin was not a lower-level employee.

Nice that even though this is the rule, a higher level employee, an executive recently resigned and was given no exit package.

PS: Oh and DuVaul resigned 3 days ago after the NYT article. Unfortunately, he didn't invent an OS that made $22b in profits. All fingers are not equal. It's all business dear, no hard feelings.

At least they started from somewhere, Forgot again where they specifically stated that senior managers and above were included?

From "None of those employees was an executive" to "all fingers are not equal" .
The ball must enter. Just keep shifting the goalpost

Like I keep saying. I'm glad those protesting keep doing so. If it would make things change that would be nice.

I've got nothing further to add.

All right, I'm done also

Daeylar:


FINALLYYY!!!!!
I've been tired.



I give zero fuçks. I understood when you tried to be reasonable, I just stayed to rein you in anytime you tried to go out of line with your funny theories just because you want to support Andy.
At least it's over



Consistent or not. You don't know what happened.



Nice that even though this is the rule, a higher level employee, an executive recently resigned and was given no exit package.


At least they started from somewhere, Forgot again where they specifically stated that senior managers and above were included?

From "None of those employees was an executive" to "all fingers are not equal" .
The ball must enter. Just keep shifting the goalpost

Like I keep saying. I'm glad those protesting keep doing so. If it would make things change that would be nice.

All right, I'm done also

You really are funny. Are you just trying to get on the guy's nerve or just playing around? Hahahah.

Daeylar:

Nice that even though this is the rule, a higher level employee, an executive recently resigned and was given no exit package.


At least they started from somewhere, Forgot again where they specifically stated that senior managers and above were included?

From "None of those employees was an executive" to "all fingers are not equal" .
The ball must enter. Just keep shifting the goalpost

Like I keep saying. I'm glad those protesting keep doing so. If it would make things change that would be nice.

I want to assume you don't have issues understanding the English language.

All C-level execs have severance packages etched into their contracts directly.

Mid-level execs, junior level execs, and lower do not have severance packages etched into their contracts for good reason. Even most senior-level execs don't get it. They're disposable. Like that canteen chef, stated for emphasis.

DeVaul was a junior level exec. Even as of 2018 He and Rubin of 2013 are not at the same level. That's 5 years he had to climb the ladder. Rubin was a senior-level exec who was just shy of becoming a C-level exec. It's why Rubin didn't have a severance package etched in his contract prior to the allegation. His equivalent in DeVaul's division (X) as at today is Astro Teller the CEO of MoonShot, DeVaul is only a director.

Google made a special case to give Rubin $150m in stock because they didn't think he was compensated enough for his contribution via Android. That was what he settled to $90m payable over 4 years when he resigned. Harassment or no harassment, he'd get his cash out any day of the week. He had $150m in stocks separate from the stock packages he got when he sold Android and got promoted to a become a senior-level exec.

Execs is a word that's loosely thrown around. I meant C-level execs and their equivs (Rubin counts, Whatsapp former founder and Instagram former founders count), not a director. Google signed an NDA with Rubin not to go to any competitor and continues to support his ventures to this day as part of that agreement. You don't sign that kind of agreement with a mere director.

Google did not even sign such a contract with Marissa Mayer who left and later became Yahoo CEO. As I said, it's business, nothing personal.

If an allegation of sexual harassment is made against Pichai today, he'd get a mammoth sized nine figure severance package. It's in the contract he signed. DeVaul asked to give his accuser a back rub. Sergey Brin asked three ladies for sex. One is out. The other is President of Alphabet with over $40b in Google stock.

Now can you understand why I first quoted you, or do you want me to share the organization chart of a 75,000-strong company.

I feel like I'm talking to a wall.

TL;DR: Rubin got his $90m because he's the father of Android and wasn't duly compensated prior to his resignation. If he wasn't, he'd have got nada like every non C-level exec employee who doesn't have a severance package. Harassment or no harassment. Drummond the other exec highlighted in the NYT article is the CLO. In his contract, dude has $200m in stock that'd have to be settled if he resigned today.

-Lord

lawkenoz:


You really are funny. Are you just trying to get on the guy's nerve or just playing around? Hahahah.

It's light handed. I think this is the first issue we're openly disagreeing on in NL.

She's a feminist, I'm a realist. Many times we agree, sometimes we don't. Life goes on.

-Lord

LordAdam16:


It wouldn't quadruple. All of this is part of a laser-focused, concerted campaign to get more women into high-level tech positions, whether they deserve it or not. As well as a campaign to emasculate men, in the name of eliminating toxic masculinity.

We are heading for a future where men are sissies and do all the crap jobs while women mostly stay in air-conditioned offices running things as they deem fit. That's why most men in mining go underground in unsafe conditions, while the women mostly sit in the mining offices doing the paperwork. You'd never see a short-haired feminist raise a placard to protest that there is no gender parity amongst miners.

-Lord

My lord and personal saviour. And they complain about gender pay gap when it does not exist.

hucienda:
[i]LA don vess. dey gbadun your fact-based logical take for dis mata.

Long and short of all this, if these people continue crying wolf at any slight provocation, real or imagined, the public would gradually stop taking them serious. For example, in the US, any republican running for POTUS or any office is unofficially labeled 'racist' - whether true or not true. Bob Dole? Racist! George Bush 43? Racist! John McCain? Racist! Mitt Romney? Racist! By the time Hurricane Trump came along ... [You can complete the ellipsis].

Another classic example - the recent elections in Brazil. The liberal order especially in the west would gradually recede to the background if these sort of excesses and abuse are left unchecked

...and that I think will be the decline of western civilisation and countries in Asia (China, Japan, India, Indonesia etc.) will be world powers.

This is the kind of thread I would love to see Oga Sagamite make some contributions.

LordAdam16:


It's light handed. I think this is the first issue we're openly disagreeing on in NL.

She's a feminist, I'm a realist. Many times we agree, sometimes we don't. Life goes on.

-Lord

ohh! feminist you say? now I understand where her displeasure is coming from. Your responses were quite clear and concise to me, I thought she was just trolling.

Gerrard59:


...and that I think will be the decline of western civilisation and countries in Asia (China, Japan, India, Indonesia etc.) will be world powers.

This is the kind of thread I would love to see Oga Sagamite make some contributions.

If you asked these bunch of foooools that what is the "sexual harassment" they are protesting about, majority of them would have no fucking clue.

Most are just "Virtue Signalling" and the rest are a bunch of woosies who have a herd mentality or cannot stand against a majority.

Now it is not like if I stand for sexual harassment in the workplace or anywhere else, but as someone that knows what excessive liberalism has turned many Western countries into, when I hear claims/accusations of "sexual harassment", I want to know the SPECIFIC acts and events that justifies this tag before I comment.

It is in the same West, that one cretin called Charlotte Proudman said she was "sexual harassed" based on a man much older than her saying her picture on LinkedIn is "stunning". And the liberal press carried it as a "sexual harassment" news report.

"Sexual harassment" is not being interpreted as unwanted advances by women (even when no contact is made and is not persistent).

If the advance is wanted, then it is "Romantic".

The liberal movement have turned a big issue into a power platform for women (especially moronic feminists) to engage in their misandry.

Walk out? ........Get the fck out here. I would sit at my desk until someone explains to me the act/event and why Google lawyers saw it necessary to pay off!

Giddyperson:

Yeah the saying goes, don't try to get your honey where you make your money or something like that. But maybe these guys spend so much time working that that they have no social life. The sick part should be that most of these top execs are married, their wives are home waiting for them while they go chasing girls that would finally put them in trouble.

Nonsense!

A large portion of marriages, if not most, are between people that met at work.

Adiwana:


I swear Bruh.The Me too movement is making it very difficult for real sexual harassment victims.One cannot even take a glance or approach a lady without them crying blue murder.But same women commit same harassment on men but any man that speaks up is deemed weak and soft.Women do this all the time and get away with it.So much for the double standards and equality.smfh

Exactly!

vislabraye:


Exactly !! Excessive liberalism indeed. That's the problem with the West.

Well said! (along with @hucienda)

It is a pleasure to see their ideology now collapsing because around the world they are being rejected.

From USA, UK, Austria, Holland, France, Germany, Sweden etc. all the way to Brazil, while the liberal Western press keep on whining about "Far Right" and "Populism".

They brought it to fore. They are destroying their societies with the sole silly aim of being seen as "Nice"! Fcking idiots!

jaxxy:


$90mill was just retirement benefit for a father of android. He case was judged and addressed which meant he had to resign or be sacked depending on the severity of the allegations against him. Wat more do people want? That he shud get a dime after all his contributions to google?

The lady signs a non disclosure cos the case was settled out of court and she equally gets a handsome reward so? If she doesn’t want that she can go to court and still have him convicted on good grounds bt if u collect a settlement fee u will sign a non disclosure cos it’s a mutual agreement negotiated not forced.

Couldn't be said better!

But some fcking bunch of liberal idiots just want to virtue signal and look "cool and funky".

katniss:


This is actually wrong. It's sounds sexually implied

On what basis?

And so?

KalakutaRepubli:

exactly my point, women are now using this rubbish, because they feel they have an upper hand, personally, I think laws should be made for severely punishing women who falsely accuse innocent men of such.. Because many women are now using same against many people.

EXACTLY!

Victimhood has now become the power platform for misandry!

Elder0001:



Just stop hiring women!

That would be the eventual outcome for a large portion of small-mid scale entreprenuers who need their profits reinvested to grow their business instead of paying lawyers and female employees off.

The younger and attractive the female is, the less likely she would be able to get a job in these SMEs because of these kind of issues and the fact one has to give her free money for each year she decides to procreate.

But many of these liberal cretins don't see the wider implications and outcomes until it happens. Just like Trump happened to them and they keep whining!

VeeVeeMyLuv:

This is what happens when plenty of resources is allocated to a single man whether deservedly or not. The next thing the man starts thinking of is to shamefully sleep with all the WOMEN (FEMALES) in the COMMUNITY.

actually i don't blame some of these men, it is the women that willingly and wilfully throw themselves at or totally offer their bodies to the successful men for pleasure in return for some form of gratification.

If you are a successful guy especially physically handsome , women will chase you even enter fire.

You are a cretin!

What is "shameful" about sleeping with all the women in the community and the next (as long as the women are freely participating)?

LordAdam16:


It wouldn't quadruple. All of this is part of a laser-focused, concerted campaign to get more women into high-level tech positions, whether they deserve it or not. As well as a campaign to emasculate men, in the name of eliminating toxic masculinity.

We are heading for a future where men are sissies and do all the crap jobs while women mostly stay in air-conditioned offices running things as they deem fit. That's why most men in mining go underground in unsafe conditions, while the women mostly sit in the mining offices doing the paperwork. You'd never see a short-haired feminist raise a placard to protest that there is no gender parity amongst miners.

-Lord

They would not, and if they did, that company will most likely eventually fail.

Feminists and liberal cretins should realise that "because you don't like a fact does not mean it is not a fact".

Sagamite:


They would not, and if they did, that company will most likely eventually fail.

Feminists and liberal cretins should realise that "because you don't like a fact does not mean it is not a fact".

Well, California has it as a law to install women as members of the board not because she's qualified but because of the gender.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/to-shatter-the-glass-ceiling-dont-force-it-1536379201

Here's the hypocrisy, if we've 88 (heard it has reduced to 40?) genders (fluidity, intersex, binary, social construct etc.), why should a particular gender be backed by the law on its way to the boardroom?

And another one by the "Native American" Elizabeth Warren, companies must include workers into their boards.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/companies-shouldnt-be-accountable-only-to-shareholders-1534287687

A UniofChicago professor criticised the bill.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/elizabeth-warrens-corporate-illogic-1536705547

Gerrard59:


Well, California has it as a law to install women as members of the board not because she's qualified but because of the gender.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/to-shatter-the-glass-ceiling-dont-force-it-1536379201

If it is merely on the Board, then that is not really a problem.

Boards meet, on average, every 3 months to supervise the activities of the Executive team and safeguard shareholder interests.

They are not running the company.

Gerrard59:

Here's the hypocrisy, if we've 88 (heard it has reduced to 40?) genders (fluidity, intersex, binary, social construct etc.), why should a particular gender be backed by the law on its way to the boardroom?

88 kilo pe? (88 what did you call it?)

88 genders?

88 genders?

WTF?

Olorun oba, ko ni da fun all this Justin Trudeau-type liberals. (For God sake, I curse all this Justin Trudeau-type liberals)

Gerrard59:

And another one by the "Native American" Elizabeth Warren, companies must include workers into their boards.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/companies-shouldnt-be-accountable-only-to-shareholders-1534287687

A UniofChicago professor criticised the bill.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/elizabeth-warrens-corporate-illogic-1536705547

I think they already practice this model in Germany.

Not too bad, it controls capitalistic wealth gaps where executives pay the workers minimum wage but then pay themselves $90m a year.

this is my comment