In Silicon Valley, some male investors have declined one-on-one meetings with women...

In Silicon Valley, some male investors have declined one-on-one meetings with women, or rescheduled them from restaurants to conference rooms. On Wall Street, certain senior men have tried to avoid closed-door meetings with junior women. And in TV news, some male executives have scrupulously minded their words in conversations with female talent.

In interviews, the men describe a heightened caution because of recent sexual harassment cases, and they worry that one accusation, or misunderstood comment, could end their careers. But their actions affect women’s careers, too — potentially depriving them of the kind of relationships that lead to promotions or investments.

It’s an unintended consequence of a season of sex scandals. Research shows that building genuine relationships with senior people is perhaps the most important contributor to career advancement. In some offices it’s known as having a rabbi; researchers call it sponsorship.

Wow, this is totally ridiculous. So men are too cowardly to even meet with women now?

Other urls found in this thread:

neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=1445120
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

...

i would never have a one on one job meeting with anyone behind a closed door anyway, whether it is a man or woman.

it's not a matter of cowardice but precaution.

>In some offices it’s known as having a rabbi
Imagine my shock.

That's crazy

It's not like their fear is unjustified. All it takes is one accusation of rape or sexual assault to be put out of a job. A company isn't going to go through the trouble of an internal investigation to determine whether you actually did it or not, you are a risk so you're fired. On top of that you may be arrested. If by the grace of God you're found not guilty you still aren't likely to get your job back because it would be controversial and would create a "negative atmosphere." People don't believe you aren't guilty just because a judge says so. Just ask Casey Anthony. There's still people who want her dead even though she was cleared on the charges. Also if your story gets picked up and reported by the media you're name will be all over town, "so and so accused of raping his coworker." However the media will be very quiet when your charges get dropped. There is no follow up. The media outlets won't redact their headline. As far as people are concerned the fact that you were accused makes you guilty.

This is the same problem people who are accused of sexual misconduct with a minor face if they get cleared of the charges. Nobody follows up and sees they were cleared and even if they did people don't believe it.

it' pretty common in human management, you always meet in a public place or set things up so that there's a third person, a coworker or even a secretary, who is present or who enters the room at some point.

you never know who you're interviewing. some people would lie blatantly, lawyer up and trap you.

This isn't Sup Forums, try

This.

Never EVER EVER be left alone in the same room with a female, you don't know their motives and one false sexual misconduct accusation will end your career and your life as you know it.
All professional men know this and it's just the cost of letting women into the workforce.

Actually this is pretty much Sup Forums.

a woman or a man actually, the trap can even be set up by your boss to fire you based on false harassment/exhibition/racism/etc... accusations.

> So men are too cowardly to even meet with women now?
At least in private, where accusations could be made and not refuted.

They need to be a serious upgrade to the defamation laws.
If you get caught lying, you need to be punished with the same end result that would have befallen the man you were trying to frame.
No more slap on the wrist shit for putting 10 people in federal prison over rape allegations.

>Wow, this is totally ridiculous. So men are too cowardly to even meet with women now?

Found the clueless cuck.

In the age of vaginocracy, you better watch your step. And even then, you're not safe, they can claim neglect-rape.

even when dating a new partner you always set the first dates in public places. that's common sense unless you're a /r9k/

>If you get caught lying, you need to be punished with the same end result that would have befallen the man you were trying to frame.

This is actually a great idea. Would enact as law.

That would be pretty nice

Feminism is doing a good job in screwing up social relations between men and women. And also, that's the real goal of feminism.

the only goal they ever had was cultural hegemony, they're already winning
8 out of 10 college graduates are women

To be fair, it's not really a date unless you go somewhere public.

you can avoid most maladies by avoiding white women and americanized women in general.

Source on that? Last I heard it was 6

Some people go /out/, hiking, biking, canoeing, etc. The point is that the first couple dates should be in a public place so he knows she's not going to accuse him of rape and she knows he's not going to murder her and bury her body in the woods.

Truly a classic. At that time it was said that Sup Forums was dying, but I enjoyed that distorted trollface era.

Or that he's going to rape her

What kind of dating environment is this if nobody trusts each other?
Thanks a lot, feminism.

Feminism and women in the workforce makes people behave as Sharia dictates people should do to avoid uncomfortable situations with female strangers. Don't be alone with them in a room.

What about the women who actively oppose the mindset and environment that feminism is pushing? Are they evil as well? Broad strokes of how entire sexes act and treat others is what got us into this mess in the first place

sharia law is unironically better than what's going on now

No it's not. I, and many other not Muslims, would rather not be demonized for not being a pig fearing religion. Sharia law is fucking stupid

Yes, feminism labels them as harboring "internalized oppression" or some shit.

but anime is haram...

You just blindly trust people you don't know?
Bold strategy, Cotton.

enjoy your feminism then

This is a smart move regardless of gender. In any kind of professional meeting, always make sure there's a third party present. Keeps you safe from lawsuits and internal politicking.

Enjoy getting stoned to death for having sex before marriage. Enjoy higher taxes for not being Muslim, enjoy unfair treatment across the board for not being Muslim. Enjoy needing to stop what you're doing 5x a day to pray to a cube. As much as I hate feminism, Sharia law is far worse for everyone who is not a Muslim man.

Is neogaf, dare I say it, cucked?

neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=1445120

Only one of those is actual sharia law.

Meanwhile, feminism is worse for everyone.

>No true Sharia law fallacy

>first reply
>nigger avatar
>retarded extreme cuck full brainwashed response
>next 5 responses are like i'm reading /twoxchromosomes/ cuck version

Definitely cucked.

Women should always wear full hijab and accompanied by her guardian when meeting any men anyway

>getting stoned to death for having sex before marriage
this should be the default everyone desu
in fact it is, before all this modernism shit rolled in. no single religion or philosophy ever see premarital sex as positive.

This

WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU SAYING

DELETE THIS GOYIM

Funny, I don't recall needing to check my privilege or face punishment of jail time or doxxing
My philosophy sees it as a not issue as long as one isn't stupid about it and has kids before they're ready. That doesn't mean you should be stoned to death for it.

Child alimony should not exist. If a woman turns single and can't pay for his kid, she should give it to the father (if he accepts) or give him away to the state.

This allows succesful males to be more liberal about spreading their genes, which produces more quality offspring.

Nobody cares about your philosophy. Show me a relevant philosophy, i.e. one that's underpinned a successful civilisation for centuries, that doesn't oppose casual sex. Oh right, they all do, because it's a cornerstone of a functioning society.

It's not my job to prove your point. From my point of view you are a monster for thinking people should be killed for having sex. It's not their fault you're not getting any and I think most people would appreciate a little less of your kind of barbarism in the world

I'm not the first person you replied to, and I even used to have a girlfriend, but that's not the point. Let's say stoning is too harsh a punishment. Fact remains, encouraging women to only engage in sex as part of a long-term relationship (usually though a combo of positive and negative reinforcement) is a trait found in long-lasting cultures across history. Definitely seems like a recipe for success.

>wanting a well adjusted society is barbarism
>pepul shud jus hav seks, dats all life's bout

Ask me how I know you are a very good goy.

what is neglect rape?

What does sex have to do with being well adjusted? I'm not saying everyone should go nuts and fuck someone new every day of the week. I'm just saying that sex before marriage isn't the sole determining factor of society being shit or not. Also, the US was built on a philosophy that's worked out wonderfully and it's not against premarital sex. If they were it would be in the Constitution.
>Claiming I support the Jews when I just think people should stop wanting to kill others over stupid fucking bullshit. Kill yourself you regressive religious nutcase
I guess. But I'll still need to see a source for that claim.
>Let's say stoning is too harsh
No, it is. Killing someone as punishment when they didn't kill other people is too harsh a punishment, always. There is no "let's say" as if you're giving up that point just to prove another.

When you avoid being around a female, talking to her and such.

>Also, the US was built on a philosophy that's worked out wonderfully
bait
>>Claiming I support the Jews when I just think people should stop wanting to kill others over stupid fucking bullshit. Kill yourself you regressive religious nutcase
bait or new here

Do you enjoy loosen up whores or something? Nothing wrong with sex after marriage, mate.

Stoning should be reserved for adultery, though.

Objective morality doesn't exist, kiddo. If you want to discuss morality, you have to start by laying out some positions you can both agree on.

>Killing someone as punishment when they didn't kill other people is too harsh a punishment, always

Gonna have to disagree here, acid attacks (and torture generally) can warrant the death penalty.

>Killing someone as punishment when they didn't kill other people is too harsh a punishment, always.

So what do you do with, say, a serial rapist who rapes and tortures his victims? Do you feed him and sustain his life on a prison cell like a literal cuck or do you get rid of him and be done with the problem?

>Also, the US was built on a philosophy that's worked out wonderfully and it's not against premarital sex. If they were it would be in the Constitution

Your concept of society is too government-centric. Christianity was fundamental to US society and condemns premarital sex.

they should locate outside the US and do an ICO. if they product/project is viable, they can raise money from all over the world

no need to bounce their tits in front of soggy knees

Nice arguments there user. Again, sex before marriage != Fucking someone new every night.
>People should be killed for doing things I don't like
Sorry user, but my girl encourages me fucking other women and I don't think she'd appreciate me being killed for it.
Okay, those things are pretty terrible and I'm convinced that attacks meant to kill or maim many people should be met with harsh punishment. But sex should not.
>Objective morality doesn't exist
Then why the fuck want everyone to live by some "save yourself for marriage only with the one you love" bullshit?
Case by case basis, but in general sending him to mine space asteroids alone is a better use of our time and his life. If that's not an option then I guess murder is fine. Again though, he's doing terrible things to others against their will and that's nowhere near the severity of premarital sex.
Not everyone is Christan though and the US acknowledges that. pushing one religions values on everyone living in your country is wrong.

>Not everyone is Christan though

This doesn't change the fact that the US population was overwhelmingly Christian for most of its history. Therefore the US is a society which told women not to have sex outside marriage for most of its history. If current religious trends continue and the US becomes overwhelmingly secular and sex-positive, and hundreds of years later is still successful, you'll have a counterexample. Right now I still feel secure in saying long-term successful societies discourage sex outside marriage.

>create atmosphere of suspicion and hatred toward men
>shocked when men react to defend themselves from female sexism.

>Sorry user, but my girl encourages me fucking other women and I don't think she'd appreciate me being killed for it.

Now you've blown off your cover, of course you have these retarded ideas since you have a mentally ill cuck partner. And if you still are the partner of said cuck, you're probably fucked in the head too.

How are you even debating about the pillars of a society? Enough wasting my time.

The population of the country is irrelevant. If I'm not Christan then you have no right pushing your Christan values, which are not laws, onto me.
Not an argument. Killing people for having sex is immoral. And if you disagree you're no better than the sex negative feminists

My father is a Christian pastor. For decades he has NEVER let himself be alone with any woman besides my mother. Any time he must do pastoring things where females are involved he brings along either my mother or someone else from the church.

It's not even necessarily about the fear of the woman being a disgusting lying venomous snake that wants to poison your life with her vitriol and hatred (as the vast vast VAST majority of Western women tend to be). It's just plain appearances. Never even give the chance to APPEAR to be sinning is how he saw it. The military is somewhat the same way. It doesn't matter if you were sleeping or not. What matters is that you LOOKED like you were sleeping, and that's why you ass gets beat.

>Okay, those things are pretty terrible and I'm convinced that attacks meant to kill or maim many people should be met with harsh punishment

"Harsh punishment"? Stop pussyfooting around; is the death penalty ever justified in these cases? Yes/no.

>>Objective morality doesn't exist
>Then why the fuck want everyone to live by some "save yourself for marriage only with the one you love" bullshit?

Bit of an assumption there, assuming I believe in One True Love™ marriages, but whatever. There isn't a boolean choice between believing in an objective morality and not believing in anything. You can recognise morality is objective, but still feel attached to your culture and want it to survive, therefore encourage the values that you believe will lead to its long-term survival.

>Killing people for having sex is immoral.
Uh, no. Adultery is immoral, adultery is having sex. Try logic next time.

>The population of the country is irrelevant. If I'm not Christan then you have no right pushing your Christan values, which are not laws, onto me

You've completely missed the point. I'm not pushing anything, I'm making a historical observation. Countries that discourage women having sex outside marriage (whether through the state or religion or tradition or whatever) are the historically successful societies that endure. It seems like this is a necessary trait of a society that's able to reproduce itself.

(If I had to guess, you're an extremely individualist person (like most modern Westeners) who instinctively considers topics such as morality on an individual level, rather than a long-term social level, which explains why we're talking at cross purposes)

>in some offices it’s known as having a rabbi
Americans

>All women are evil (except my pure Christan waifu)
>somehow different than "all men are evil"
> Wanting a solid choice on death penalty
Yes, people who shoot up music festivals or drop horribly augmenting weapons onto people, innocent or otherwise, should be killed. People who have sex should not, especially if the sex is consenting. These aren't even on the same level of how terrible they are though. You realize that right?
Again, not everyone subscribes to your religious beliefs.
>Adultery is immoral. Adultery is having sex
By your own logic even sex after marriage is wrong. Do you want to rephrase that?
I'm individualist for things like personal choice and autonomy. I want humanity to survive and claim the star. While culture is important, I think that individual rights, freedoms, choice, are more important

t. rabbiless goy

Sorry kids, breeders must be purged from this planet. Anything else is immoral.

Claim the stars* we're not meant to live and die on this rock

>Yes, people who shoot up music festivals or drop horribly augmenting weapons onto people, innocent or otherwise, should be killed. People who have sex should not, especially if the sex is consenting. These aren't even on the same level of how terrible they are though. You realize that right?

You dodged the question for a second time. Is the death penalty ever warranted for non-lethal torture, such as disfiguring acid attacks? Yes or no?

>apart from having a mentally ill partner and having a deviant worldview, he is a manchildren that dreams of muh spayss travels

$5 dollars say you found this place through /reddit/.

Are there seriously non-virgins on this website? If so, get the fuck out normie.

Your question falls under my "horribly augmenting weapons" answer.
I don't even go on reddit, thanks for the attempted identity politics. I can play this game too, watch. Your views have an air of regressive left feminism. This site isn't for you, you feminist

>All women are evil (except my pure Christan waifu)
Where did I say that? I'll have you know I am not my father. I am a staunch orthodox 2Dcon.

>Nekopara
Good taste

>Your views have an air of regressive left feminism.

The bible literally says what I'm arguing for.
Is the bible regressive left feminism?

>I'm individualist for things like personal choice and autonomy. I want humanity to survive and claim the star.

Ah, the clichéd sentiment of every fourteen-year-old who watched Interstellar.

>While culture is important, I think that individual rights, freedoms, choice, are more important.

Well, I guess that's where we disagree. As far as I'm concerned, any halfway advanced society requires certain behaviours to be widespread and normalised. Personal freedoms etc are luxuries we can afford once basic tenets like "you need to get married and have kids and raise them well" have been met. If these behaviours falter, individualism and moral relativity have gone too far and need to be curtailed. Either this happens, or the culture dies out and is replaced by one capable of maintaining a healthy birth rate. In the long run it doesn't matter which of the two scenarios occurs, the end result is the same. But as a biased individual I'd like my culture to survive.

>>Killing someone as punishment when they didn't kill other people is too harsh a punishment, always

Didn't take long for you to directly contradict your '''''objective''''' morality.

Given some of the horror stories I've come across I don't blame them.

The Bible is a meme and not a valid arguing point since you need to prove that it has authority to begin with.
>Interstellar
>Not Warhammer 40k
Even so, there is nothing wrong with wanting to see humanity get to space. That way everyone can have their own entire planet dedicated to their belief systems, in any combination of what should be applied or not. I've wanted to see space colonies since I was a kid watching Gundam
I think there's more to life than getting married and having kids, but I do agree that if we differ on that point our discussion won't really go anywhere new.
It goes to show that talking in absolutes makes you look stupid. Next time I'll be more nuanced. At least I can admit it

pfff, it's a pseduo american problem. europe doesn't have this problem despite the us and a shills telling we are the cucked ones... lol.

kek
manchild confirmed

Lol muslim confirmed

Your opinion is a meme and not a valid arguing point since you need to prove that you have authority to begin with.

BTFO
T
F
O

Dude, I filed for a restraining order, was denied. Moved into my own home. Was continuously harassed, Poisoned, assaulted, threatened with death, accused of rape, framed for drug possession, and finally it all resulted in a failed home invasion/kidnapping attempt during which the female I am referring to was shot in self defense.

After all that, I completely understand why this article exists and I commend the writer.

IME, women are not fit for anything greater than getting pregnant and offering sexual favors. In nearly every single interaction I have had since a child there have been genuine affirmations of this.

Women are not fit to socialize/mingle with men in a work environment. Ever. Their place is as a mother or as a whore. Sad to say but that is where they shine.

Females consistently fail to meet the basic standards of physical and mental fitness required to perform at the same level as men.... Without incident.

do you mind if I save this?

How is that winning? They hold the debt after all that schooling. They are destined to fail.

>has no counter argument
>oh, I know, I'll just tell him his opinion doesn't matter too
>That'll convince him that the Bible has moral authority over everyone

this is what we call toxic masculinity and I'm happy we are doing a great job eliminating and hunting down little nazi trumpets like you. but le ke

Could you post the link for these images or something?

Oh and not to mention, I got to spend five days in jail, the story got spun and leaked to the inmates who felt it necessary to question me about it which almost got me jumped...

Females are not fit to mingle with men, women are to be utilized for procreation and child rearing if they are so fit but the majority of women IMO are unfit and should not be mating, at all.

You're a pretty cool dude user.


>
>>I'm individualist for things like personal choice and autonomy. I want humanity to survive and claim the star.
>
>Ah, the clichéd sentiment of every fourteen-year-old who watched Interstellar.
>
>>While culture is important, I think that individual rights, freedoms, choice, are more important.
>
>Well, I guess that's where we disagree. As far as I'm concerned, any halfway advanced society requires certain behaviours to be widespread and normalised. Personal freedoms etc are luxuries we can afford once basic tenets like "you need to get married and have kids and raise them well" have been met. If these behaviours falter, individualism and moral relativity have gone too far and need to be curtailed. Either this happens, or the culture dies out and is replaced by one capable of maintaining a healthy birth rate. In the long run it doesn't matter which of the two scenarios occurs, the end result is the same. But as a biased individual I'd like my culture to survive.

Well if a man says to another man "nice shirt" it's taken as a compliment. If a man says to a woman "nice shirt" it's taken as sexual harassment. Of course the men are afraid of hiring women if every encounter could be a sexual harassment charge. You can't tell who is a bitch like this. So don't hire any of those bitches.

No, but I have a few on feminism, which relates directly to this thread.

Agreed

I farted on my friends face during out christmas party.. he was passed out. I have to admit with the fart a little poop came out. we later all shook hands and had a laugh about it. I wonder what would have happened the friend was a female.. hmmmmm