This is not possible for most people who work in these industries. Like, literally not possible. And shouldn’t be expected.

Also see: “if she didn’t want it, then maybe she shouldn’t have dressed that way”

Or did you mean this:

Actually, I’m pretty sure businesses are legally responsible to protect their workers from harassment and threats at the workforce, both external and internal.

Except for the part where that’s not the account she used for Nintendo PR.

“Leave your drama at home.”

Because he doesn’t have to prove his innocence. It’s what a ton of people forget in cases like this. The crown must prove his guilt. If his lawyers feel like they haven’t proved his guilt, why put him on the stand?

Sorry, this needs to be responded to. The right against self-incrimination is INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. If the court can hold an accused’s person right to silence against them, then the entire burden of proof in criminal matters shifts. The right against self-incrimination is a crucial part of the foundation of living in…

It seems what he meant to saw was that their case relied wholly on witness testimony and the credibility of the witnesses had been badly damaged by their reporting to the police and to the Crown only selective peices of information.

If the standard is beyond a reasonable doubt, and all you have is testimony of people who have been objectively proven to have lied in court during the same trial, then no, that's not enough.

The Metropolitan Police (UK) recently dropped its official policy on sexual assault of “a victim should always be believed” due to the impact this has had on high profile cases where there were members of parliament who were maliciously targeted.

The judge also said ‘ having reasonable doubt is not the same as saying the events did not occur’.

But he is right. There is a vocal set of people who are committed to “believing survivors/accusers” based on nothing other than the fact that they have accused someone of sexual assault. This describes many commenters here on Jezebel. It ignores any interest in finding the actual truth and is a bananas way of going…

Author here (IN THE GREYS). A couple points. First, then-Senator Obama’s support for a filibuster was based on his gripes with Justice Alito’s ideology. So far, it looks like any GOP filibuster would be based on...running out the clock on any nominee regardless of their beliefs. It’s OK for senators to disapprove of a…

If the Senate wants to filibuster a vote, fine, that’s a tactic that they can use if they feel it’s necessary. What’s not okay is not even holding hearings. The Senate should hold hearings with Judge Garland, and can then decide from there whether to vote no and/or filibuster him. That’s the scenario that you’re…

She didn’t say anything dumb? How about calling for someone to be fired with limited information? That isn’t classified as dumb to you? She means well and is trying to fight for victims, which is great. However, you can’t call for people to be fired with limited information. That’s bad form.

Maybe, but it was also his job. He followed standard journalistic practices, you know the thing that ethical journalists are supposed to do. Because, you know, ethics in journalism is very important.

She sounds like an asshole in those last few tweets, tbh. She wrote back a statement to him, and he’s right, there was no mention of going off-record, so it was fair game for him to quote her on that.

Because Gamergate craves legitimacy above all else - they need outside validation to prove to everyone that this is actually the dire philosophical battle they believe it is, and not just fanwanking over their hobby and their persecution complex. So when someone who has like a graduate degree or holds a officious job…

Actually no, she argues that the international pressure to apply North American laws to Japanese culture and legal process is potentially damaging and undermines a program that’s actually been more succesfulin preventing child abuse and trafficking (in her mind) than ours. She doesn’t advocate for a universal…