# Woman blogs about sexual assault at tech conference **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [November 7, 2010, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766 "2010-11-07T03:56:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![tumbleddown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@tumbleddown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tumbleddown)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2010, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/81 "2010-11-08T15:59:37Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > From her description of the evenings events prior to her trip to the restroom, it seems likely that she was inebriated. She admits (the blue part) that she may _not_ have been perfectly clear that she was rejecting his advances, but she _thinks_ she was clear. Here’s the thing, she tried to get away from him when he **kissed** her. Whether she fumbled away, shoved him away, tried to wiggle away (because he was holding onto her) or just turned her head away, whether she said “no” or “stop that” or “ick” or “gross” or “fuck off” or didn’t say anything with full words at all, she did not (or tried not to) let him continue to kiss her. _That alone is a pretty clear and key bit of evidence that she did not want him to try to jam his fingers into her vulva._ When someone turns down a _kiss_, it is **not reasonable** to assume that they’re okay with an act that is considerably more sexual, more invasive and more intimate. > [@bengangmo](#): > > And no, I don’t think dressing or acting slutty justifies rape, but I don’t have so much sympathy if she allows “Act A” earlier in the night, but when this guy tries it he gets in shit. Where do you get the belief that earlier in the evening she allowed this man to put his hands on her genitals? And where do you get the belief that once someone lets someone touch their genitals, that means that they cannot decide that they no longer wish to be touched? > [@bengangmo](#): > > I also believe though that there’s something to be said for consistency of behaviour. Consistency of behavior is irrelevant. When someone says no, or makes it clear that they do not want to be kissed, touched or groped, it doesn’t matter if it’s an initial decision or a change of mind. Consent can be revoked. Consent can be conditional upon the nature of the act, the circumstances, the surroundings or a combination of all of the above. No means no, period, not with conditions. ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2010, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/82 "2010-11-08T16:00:16Z")
> [@Lynn\_Bodoni](#): > > To put it another way, if I am known to various panhandlers as a soft touch, and I give out money to whoever asks\*, does that mean that a new panhandler can just come up to me and reach into my purse for a handout? Absolutely not! The new panhandler should get the same punishment as if I was a notorious hard case who never gave out money. Well considering that NONE of the other panhandlers reached into your purse, and you never said such a thing was ok, I don’t find it a particularly apt analogy. However if, and again I don’t know that its the case, **random** guys regularly had their hands down her pants (I am not saying this is the case, just IF), then he has less (not no) culpability. I guess I am a little sensitive about it because I don’t think she should have gone so public - by doing what she did, we only hear her side of the story. Of which there is one thing I am very certain, it will present her in a relatively positive light. The guy in this instance cannot defend himself, cannot reply, is not even facing his accuser. So I do find it one sided, and am possibly trying to compensate for that a bit. But in any case, arguing about such a thing like this is not going to change my mind, nor yours, so I guess we should just agree to disagree ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2010, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/83 "2010-11-08T16:13:09Z")
> [@tumbleddown](#): > > Where do you get the belief that earlier in the evening she allowed this man to put his hands on her genitals? I don’t / didn’t have that belief. That’s why I have been consistently using the conditional case…you that “if” that I even took the time to capitalise? > [@tumbleddown](#): > > Consistency of behavior is irrelevant. When someone says no, or makes it clear that they do not want to be kissed, touched or groped, it doesn’t matter if it’s an initial decision or a change of mind. Consent can be revoked. Consent can be conditional upon the nature of the act, the circumstances, the surroundings or a combination of all of the above. No means no, period, not with conditions. Yes consent can be conditional, and yes the lady can change mind even “mid thrust” and should be able to have her wishes respected. I am **not** suggesting that what this guy did was anything other than a sexual assault. What I suggesting is that, the totality of her behaviour that night (as reported by the others that were there, and make good witnesses) can make the difference between (for example) aggravated sexual assault, sexual assault and a case of unwanted sexual contact. To say once again also, the fact that she has gone so public with this, before it has been rigoursly examined, and without giving the guy a right of defense or reply makes me want to side with him all the more, and loses major sympathy votes from me. If she had gone direct to the police, and was making this information public after a suitable investigation I would be a whole lot more on her side. ---
**Author:** ![Peeta\_Mellark](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/bc8723/32.png) [@Peeta\_Mellark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peeta_Mellark)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2010, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/84 "2010-11-08T16:20:02Z")
> [@bengangmo](#): > > Hasn’t it been suggested elsewhere in the thread that “she **thinks** she was clear”? The blog entry is linked in the OP. It doesn’t need to be suggested in the thread. The woman’s own words can be read: > [@](#): > > He brought me in to the snug, and sat up on a stool. He grabbed me, pulled me in to him, and kissed me. I tried to push him off, and told him I wasn’t interested ( **I may have been less eloquent, but I don’t think I was less clear** ). He responded by jamming his hand into my underwear and fumbling. Bolding mine. “Less eloquent” but clear implies she probably told him to fuck off. And since her descriptions of the rest of the evening are _in no way sexual_ suggesting that she let other people put their hands down her pants is ludicrous. ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2010, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/85 "2010-11-08T16:29:18Z")
> [@Peeta\_Mellark](#): > > The blog entry is linked in the OP. It doesn’t need to be suggested in the thread. The woman’s own words can be read: > > Bolding mine. “Less eloquent” but clear implies she probably told him to fuck off. > > And since her descriptions of the rest of the evening are _in no way sexual_ suggesting that she let other people put their hands down her pants is ludicrous. Well, I guess we can close down that pesky court system and save taxpayers a whole bunch of money then, if “her descriptions” are a true, full and accurate accounting of what went on that evening. NOT to suggest that the events were sexual, merely that SHE controls the blog, SHE decides what goes up on it, it is not neccessarily a statement of fact - although I would be willing to accept it until contrary evidence comes about,like say, a statement from the guy involved. Oh, sorry, that’s right, he hasn’t had a chance to defend himself on HER blog… ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2010, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/86 "2010-11-08T17:12:29Z")
> [@tumbleddown](#): > > Here’s the thing, she tried to get away from him when he **kissed** her. Whether she fumbled away, shoved him away, tried to wiggle away (because he was holding onto her) or just turned her head away, whether she said “no” or “stop that” or “ick” or “gross” or “fuck off” or didn’t say anything with full words at all, she did not (or tried not to) let him continue to kiss her. _That alone is a pretty clear and key bit of evidence that she did not want him to try to jam his fingers into her vulva._ When someone turns down a _kiss_, it is **not reasonable** to assume that they’re okay with an act that is considerably more sexual, more invasive and more intimate. Normally I would agree with you, but what we have here is not fact, it’s a recollection by a woman who was inebriated. A woman who in the very next sentence admits that she may not have been clear in her verbal rebuke. The only reason I can see for her not clearly recollecting or not being clear in the first place is the alcohol she had imbibed. This calls into question both her recollection of “tried to push him off” and the action of pushing him off itself. Perhaps her “push” wasn’t much of a push: she was drunk at the time, and her memory of the incident is admittedly “not clear”. Also, as **bengangmo** points out, we only have her side of the story: an admittedly unclear recollection of at least some of the events, in which she is controlling the presentation and content. As such, I think it was stupid for this woman to post this to her blog. It’s going to affect her career, her social life, etc. If the guy is ever charged with a crime and found guilty, she’ll no doubt come out on top as a heroine of sorts. If he isn’t charged, or is charged and found innocent, she will prolly be seen as a pariah. Who wants to work with or be around someone who would attempt to destroy another person like that? Like her night of drinking, I don’t think she thought this through very well. ---
**Author:** ![lexi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lexi/32/6806_2.png) [@lexi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lexi)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2010, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/87 "2010-11-08T17:38:22Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Normally I would agree with you, but what we have here is not fact, it’s a recollection by a woman who was inebriated. Does she say anywhere in her blog that she was inebriated to a point where she does not recollect events of the night? No? I didn’t think so? > [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > A woman who in the very next sentence admits that she may not have been clear in her verbal rebuke. The only reason I can see for her not clearly recollecting or not being clear in the first place is the alcohol she had imbibed. This calls into question both her recollection of “tried to push him off” and the action of pushing him off itself. Perhaps her “push” wasn’t much of a push: she was drunk at the time, and her memory of the incident is admittedly “not clear”. I take her quote “I may have been less eloquent, but I don’t think I was less clear” as saying that she was less eloquent - meaning she told him to F\*ck Off - her use of language here does not sound at all like she is saying she’s not sure what she said - it sounds like she is saying was very clear - and less eloquent. Your interpretation sounds VERY strange to me. > [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Also, as **bengangmo** points out, we only have her side of the story: an admittedly unclear recollection of at least some of the events, in which she is controlling the presentation and content. Again - where does she say she has poor recollection? Only your interpretation of her words “I don’t think I was less clear” would lead to that. I am sure most everyone else here sees those words as merely a figure of speech and not an admission of memory loss. > [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > As such, I think it was stupid for this woman to post this to her blog. It’s going to affect her career, her social life, etc. If the guy is ever charged with a crime and found guilty, she’ll no doubt come out on top as a heroine of sorts. If he isn’t charged, or is charged and found innocent, she will prolly be seen as a pariah. Who wants to work with or be around someone who would attempt to destroy another person like that? I agree she shouldn’t have posted on a blog and left things up to the police - but every where else you are really stretching things. > [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Like her night of drinking, I don’t think she thought this through very well. To me this sounds like victim blaming. I guess women are supposed to avoid having a couple drinks because if they do, the are now at fault if they are assaulted? ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2010, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/88 "2010-11-08T18:12:19Z")
> [@lexi](#): > > Does she say anywhere in her blog that she was inebriated to a point where she does not recollect events of the night? No? I didn’t think so? Of course she doesn’t say that. It would be counter to the intent of her blog post, to deliberately paint herself in a bad light. But I read the blog, and from the description of the night’s activities, I can’t figure out how she wouldn’t have been inebriated. I’ll point out that she never says in her blog “I was sober” or " I was not drunk". > [@lexi](#): > > I take her quote “I may have been less eloquent, but I don’t think I was less clear” as saying that she was less eloquent - meaning she told him to F\*ck Off - her use of language here does not sound at all like she is saying she’s not sure what she said - it sounds like she is saying was very clear - and less eloquent. Your interpretation sounds VERY strange to me. I don’t think what I wrote sounded strange. Parse that. > [@lexi](#): > > Again - where does she say she has poor recollection? Only your interpretation of her words “I don’t think I was less clear” would lead to that. I am sure most everyone else here sees those words as merely a figure of speech and not an admission of memory loss. You’re “sure”? Well, if she was “sure”, she should have said so. But she didn’t. She said “I don’t think I was less clear”, which is obviously open to interpretation, as evidenced by you and I both seeing different meanings. If you had said “I don’t think most people see it differently than I do” that leaves chinks in your statement that can be examined as some doubt about the accuracy of your statement, just like, IMO, her’s does. > [@lexi](#): > > To me this sounds like victim blaming. I guess women are supposed to avoid having a couple drinks because if they do, the are now at fault if they are assaulted? To me this sounds like trying to attack _me_ now, because I don’t agree with you. I’m not blaming her, because I’m not sure the events, as described, actually happened. And from my reading of her blog, I’m not sure she is sure, either. I said in my first post in this thread, I’m not trying to excuse the guy’s actions, if in fact they transpired. My only comment has been that this woman did a stupid thing to post this on her blog for all the world to see when she herself gives the impression that a) she was inebriated and b) she is unclear on exactly what she did and said. ---
**Author:** ![AClockworkMelon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aclockworkmelon/32/10803_2.png) [@AClockworkMelon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AClockworkMelon)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2010, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/89 "2010-11-08T18:30:15Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > She admits (the blue part) that she may _not_ have been perfectly clear that she was rejecting his advances, but she _thinks_ she was clear. Jesus fucking Christ. ---
**Author:** ![lexi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lexi/32/6806_2.png) [@lexi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lexi)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2010, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/90 "2010-11-08T18:39:18Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > You’re “sure”? Well, if she was “sure”, she should have said so. But she didn’t. She said “I don’t think I was less clear”, which is obviously open to interpretation, as evidenced by you and I both seeing different meanings. If you had said “I don’t think most people see it differently than I do” that leaves chinks in your statement that can be examined as some doubt about the accuracy of your statement, just like, IMO, her’s does. Ok - Personally I think you are parsing things in a very literal manner, and are totally missing what she said. I’m putting that to a poll - because I think your interpretation is in the minority. > **[Norin's quote "I may have been less eloquent, but I don't think I was less...](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=584801)** > > From this thread, http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=13116318#post13116318 Snowboarder Bo interprets that statement as meaning, Norin is NOT clear. My interpretation is - she was VERY clear and most likely said something akin to... ---
**Author:** ![tumbleddown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@tumbleddown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tumbleddown)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2010, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/91 "2010-11-08T21:31:36Z")
> [@bengangmo](#): > > I don’t / didn’t have that belief. That’s why I have been consistently using the conditional case…you that “if” that I even took the time to capitalise? Then why bother with your spitballing at all? Your “if” is a lousy framing for a hypothetical that isn’t supported by the story that’s being discussed. > [@](#): > > What I suggesting is that, the totality of her behaviour that night (as reported by the others that were there, and make good witnesses) can make the difference between (for example) aggravated sexual assault, sexual assault and a case of unwanted sexual contact. In what jurisdiction do the fundamental elements of these crimes (or any sex crimes) include the victim’s behavior? I’m looking for a cite here. > [@](#): > > To say once again also, the fact that she has gone so public with this, before it has been rigoursly examined, and without giving the guy a right of defense or reply makes me want to side with him all the more, and loses major sympathy votes from me. I’m pretty sure that she’s not looking for sympathy from you or anyone else who thinks that there **can be** a defense for putting your hands down the pants of a person with whom you do not have an ongoing sexual relationship and from whom you do not have expressed consent, especially while in a room full of people. ---
**Author:** ![Red\_Barchetta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/da6949/32.png) [@Red\_Barchetta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Red_Barchetta)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2010, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/92 "2010-11-08T21:34:11Z")
> [@AClockworkMelon](#): > > Jesus fucking Christ. I didn’t see that mentioned in the OP. ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2010, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/93 "2010-11-08T23:04:12Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > I dunno what it is. I mean, guys in high school punch each other in the dicks _for fun!_ We’re retarded when it comes to dicks. It’s just so far from something sacred, I can’t imagine caring if some guy’s dick got grabbed. Think about yourself, and think about some really gross, intimidating person. Don’t picture some skinny gay kid grabbing your dick, picture some huge, burly, smelly gay trucker who is grabbit your dick to make it pretty clear he’s interested in penetrating you whether you like it or not. Dont picture some cute girl grabbing your dick, picture a scabby, towering, angry, cracked-out street prostitute who could probably do you some harm. ha ha. ha ha. You might try to laugh it off to your friends, but if this happened in real life, it probably actually would “ruin your day.” ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2010, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/94 "2010-11-08T23:09:51Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Who wants to work with or be around someone who would attempt to destroy another person like that? Wow. Posting a clear and truthful account of someone’s wildly inappropriate and mildly illegal actions is now “destroying another person?” HE’S THE ONE THAT DID IT. He did the bad thing. All she did is report what happened (and no, I don’t buy that she’d randomly make this up- if she was doing a smear campaign she’d come up with something a bit more odious and would express more than the annoyance that she conveys on her blog). If his life is destroyed, he did it himself by feeling like he can shove his hands down a girl’s pants when she has said “no.” Does that count for any other crime? If my workmate stole my iPod and for some reason I had no recourse, would posting about it on my blog be “destroying another person” I doubt it- it’d be calling out an asshole. What is it about sexually assaulting a woman that is sacred? ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2010, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/95 "2010-11-08T23:13:58Z")
> [@Lynn\_Bodoni](#): > > A lot of guys misread women’s actions, they mistake friendliness or even courtesy as sexual interest. And even if she’d been having sex on the pool table with a bunch of other guys, that doesn’t mean that she has given up her right to refuse any particular man. No means no, and from her account, he didn’t respect her refusal of him. Is it your position, then, that there is no responsibility on the woman no matter what she does, as long as she says no at some point? IMO we need “levels” of sexual assault, just like levels of murder. Assuming things happened the way the blogger stated, the guy is definitely guilty of sexual assault but she is not totally innocent. ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2010, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/96 "2010-11-08T23:47:43Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > Is it your position, then, that there is no responsibility on the woman no matter what she does, as long as she says no at some point? IMO we need “levels” of sexual assault, just like levels of murder. Assuming things happened the way the blogger stated, the guy is definitely guilty of sexual assault but she is not totally innocent. She is not totally innocent because…? Why? She flirted with some guys (who weren’t even this guy?!) She drank? She went to the bathroom unattended? It’s not like this is crazy voodoo. It’s actually quite straight forward. You are doing something with a woman. She says, or otherwise makes it clear, “Stop, I don’t want to do this.” Do you: A. Continue to do it B. Stop These are the only choices- and there is only one right one, in all circumstances. If you choose “A”, congrats, you just assaulted someone. If you choose “B”, congrats, you are a decent human being. That is really all there needs to be. It’s not a difficult decision. A guy who doesn’t want to assault someone can expect to always, 100% of the time, not assault someone. If you do choose to assault someone, then yeah, you assaulted someone. I can’t even figure out why you would argue otherwise, unless you think that people don’t deserve 100% of the decision of who, where and what sexual activity they engages in. Most guys can give an assurance that they will never, ever choose “A”. Can you? Are you making excuses for yourself or trying to give yourself an “out” in the future? Do we have levels of theft? Is it different if I let you borrow my iPod in the past, or if I had my iPod out and was letting people play with it at a party? Or if I let a bunch of other people who are not you use my iPod? Of course not, if you take my iPod when I say you can’t, it’s theft. If you touch my genitals when I say you can’t, it’s assault. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2010, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/97 "2010-11-09T00:58:37Z")
> [@even\_sven](#): > > She is not totally innocent because…? Why? She flirted with some guys (who weren’t even this guy?!) She drank? She went to the bathroom unattended? I need help with this question as well. I admit there may be some details to this story that I’m missing. ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2010, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/98 "2010-11-09T01:05:02Z")
> [@even\_sven](#): > > Wow. Posting a clear and truthful account of someone’s wildly inappropriate and mildly illegal actions is now “destroying another person?” Uhmmm…who has judged that its clear, truthful and complete? Her? You? Maybe the court system? Or none of the above? Like it or not, allegations (and that’s what these are at this point in time) of sexual abuse are highly damaging, whether the guy is found innocent or not. Personally, I think the guy is probably guilty of some sort of assault, so I would hardly cry him a river, but I do think care needs to be taken in such cases. ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2010, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/99 "2010-11-09T01:08:56Z")
> [@even\_sven](#): > > Do we have levels of theft? Is it different if I let you borrow my iPod in the past, or if I had my iPod out and was letting people play with it at a party? Or if I let a bunch of other people who are not you use my iPod? Of course not, if you take my iPod when I say you can’t, it’s theft. If you touch my genitals when I say you can’t, it’s assault. I don’t know about your jurisdiction, but where I am, yes we do. There is theft, grand theft / larceny, theft as a servant, and some other funny law about how if you lend something to someone, its not theft if they don’t return it (I don’t understand it either) ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2010, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766/100 "2010-11-09T01:23:14Z")
> [@even\_sven](#): > > Wow. Posting a clear and truthful account of someone’s wildly inappropriate and mildly illegal actions is now “destroying another person?” > > HE’S THE ONE THAT DID IT. He did the bad thing. All she did is report what happened (and no, I don’t buy that she’d randomly make this up- if she was doing a smear campaign she’d come up with something a bit more odious and would express more than the annoyance that she conveys on her blog). If his life is destroyed, he did it himself by feeling like he can shove his hands down a girl’s pants when she has said “no.” Whoa. Slow down. You quoted me out of context. You left out the “if” and the “prolly”. I hate to stomp on your outrage, but those two parts make a big difference between what you’re mad at and what I actually said. > [@Bo](#): > > As such, I think it was stupid for this woman to post this to her blog. It’s going to affect her career, her social life, etc. If the guy is ever charged with a crime and found guilty, she’ll no doubt come out on top as a heroine of sorts. **If he isn’t charged, or is charged and found innocent, she will prolly be seen as a pariah**. Who wants to work with or be around someone who would attempt to destroy another person like that? I notice you didn’t bother to quote the sentence before the bolded part, and call me out for having the (to you) correct take on things there. The fact is, none of us knows what happened. We only know what she blogged. > [@even sven](#): > > Does that count for any other crime? If my workmate stole my iPod and for some reason I had no recourse, would posting about it on my blog be “destroying another person” I doubt it- it’d be calling out an asshole. If you _thought_ your co-worker stole your iPod and you publicly accused them without proof, things could go either way for you: crime-fighter or asshole. If it turned out they had your iPod, you’re a hero. If it turns out it was the janitor, you’re an asshole. > [@even sven](#): > > What is it about sexually assaulting a woman that is sacred? That’s just rude of you to insinuate, imply or outright state that I ever did said anything like that. I’ve never, not once, condoned the alleged actions. Not fucking once. You and **lexi** can yell and scream (or type in boldface, etc.) that I condone rape and sexual assault all you want, but it won’t make it true. Nor will starting thinly disguised Pittings as polls in other forums about what an insensitive jerk I might be. I never have done that, and never will. Frankly, I think you owe me an apology, first for twisting what I wrote and second for characterizing me as some sort of worshipper of rape. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-blogs-about-sexual-assault-at-tech-conference/559766.md?page=6)