Ending someone's employment because of a sexual encounter with a superior is the very definition of sexual harassment in the workplace, huckelberry.
Marcus,
Have you found some legal language which says this is the case? I have been looking any haven’t found anything which applies directly to Dehlin. It’s usually quid pro quo, which in this case John was not asking for sex but for a breakup.
watching hockey but grabbed this quickly
Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It includes unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature that explicitly or implicitly affects an individual's employment, unreasonably interferes with an individual's work performance, or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment.
Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted).
This is a very problematic analysis. The victim's mindset is thoroughly 'understood' (not really, rather just assumed), but the predator's mindset is not even examined. The predator's mindset, based on their statements, is taken as is. The victim's mindset is not. Why is this bias being proposed as legitimate?
What victim and what predator?
"I have learned with what evils tyranny infects a state. For it frustrates all the virtues, robs freedom of its lofty mood, and opens a school of fawning and terror, inasmuch as it leaves matters not to the wisdom of the laws, but to the angry whim of those who are in authority.”
While I appreciate your quoting my comment, please note that my irritation over rosebud's overgeneralizations is about her overgeneralizations.
My opinion on the other matter, which I have stated repeatedly, is that Dehlin had a subordinate fired as a result of a sexual interaction with her, and that I consider that to be sexual harassment.
How badly the victim behaved, which seems to be kishkumen's approach, does not mean they cannot be a victim. Personally, I find K's support of Dehlin through victim blaming to be pretty sickening. I thought we were past that but apparently not.
The fact is that Open Stories Foundation fired both Dehlin and Rosebud and was going to rehire both of them as contract workers. Rosebud did not like that, so she proposed to Dehlin the coup plan. He refused to go along with R’s coup plan.
I do not agree that Rosebud is a victim. Ergo, there is no victim blaming. I find your loose treatment of the facts appalling, but it is clear that you are determined to get mileage out of supporting Rosebud’s false claim that she is a victim.
Last edited by Kishkumen on Sun Jun 16, 2024 3:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
"I have learned with what evils tyranny infects a state. For it frustrates all the virtues, robs freedom of its lofty mood, and opens a school of fawning and terror, inasmuch as it leaves matters not to the wisdom of the laws, but to the angry whim of those who are in authority.”
Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It includes unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature that explicitly or implicitly affects an individual's employment, unreasonably interferes with an individual's work performance, or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment.
Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted).
I haven’t seen any evidence to suggest that Dehlin’s sexual advances were unwelcome. I haven’t seen anything that Dehlin did that R evidently did not want to continue as was evident in her soliciting him for sex in the text messages we saw. Her plan to take over Open Stories Foundation with John clearly shows she was eager to continue working with John as a romantic partner.
"I have learned with what evils tyranny infects a state. For it frustrates all the virtues, robs freedom of its lofty mood, and opens a school of fawning and terror, inasmuch as it leaves matters not to the wisdom of the laws, but to the angry whim of those who are in authority.”
I don't take it personally, I just think you're misremembering. I find it odd that you feel you were among the minority on the issue, when you were clearly in the majority. Because of that the thread as a whole seems a bit vindictive and like beating a dead horse.
I don’t think you and I are engaging in an actual conversation here, drumdude. There is nothing vindictive about this at all. And I don’t think I am misremembering anything. If you are not interested in the point of the thread, that is your prerogative. I am not here to indulge your misdirections and distractions.
There’s no need to take my posts personally, Kish.
You’re welcome to disagree with me, and I don’t think anything I’ve posted is any kind of distraction. Those reading can chime in if they think it is.
However, it’s your thread, so I’ll bow out without any further disruption.
I’ll just wade in that I support Kiskumen and what he has posted. I think there is a point to distinguish and not cheapen actual predators. I originally came to this board around a Rosebud blow up and I listened to her “forensic interview” and looked at what I could cause I wanted to know (as best I can) myself without having anyone else tell me. “John Dehlin had a subordinate fired” just doesn’t fit the contemporaneous and other documents we have. I don’t think JD comes out good, and yes as a superior he had the bigger responsibility.
This is all how I felt before she came here and stated of her own free will that she had been seeking an affair.
There’s no need to take my posts personally, Kish.
Infantile mirroring tactics noted.
You’re welcome to disagree with me,
Whew! What a relief!
and I don’t think anything I’ve posted is any kind of distraction.
Only to the extent that it was irrelevant.
"I have learned with what evils tyranny infects a state. For it frustrates all the virtues, robs freedom of its lofty mood, and opens a school of fawning and terror, inasmuch as it leaves matters not to the wisdom of the laws, but to the angry whim of those who are in authority.”
This is all how I felt before she came here and stated of her own free will that she had been seeking an affair.
Yep. She is not a victim. She was looking for an affair and she had one. Dehlin was not preying on her. Two willing participants in the romance until Dehlin decided he needed to bow out.
"I have learned with what evils tyranny infects a state. For it frustrates all the virtues, robs freedom of its lofty mood, and opens a school of fawning and terror, inasmuch as it leaves matters not to the wisdom of the laws, but to the angry whim of those who are in authority.”
...But everything I have seen indicates the two of them mutually stumbled about a sort of affair which John decided was a mistake. He then realized he could not continue working with her so ended the employment...
Ending someone's employment because of a sexual encounter with a superior is the very definition of sexual harassment in the workplace, huckelberry.
Even if the encounter was consensual? Not disputing, genuinely asking. Just to clarify, I am not asking with reference to rosebud and dehlin. In general, is it considered harassment if a superior fires an employee after regretting a consensual relationship of sorts?
From what I read, I do not consider rosebud to be a victim whereby dehlin was the predator. I do believe she has been hurt by him though. I think she may have put in a lot of work for the company that perhaps she should have been more recognised for that. Perhaps unfair dismissal could be considered. I wouldn't call unfair dismissal harassment though. I wouldn't call it sexual harassment either. There were mutual feelings and it is clear from her own words that she wanted a relationship. I do not think dehlin went out of his way to initiate what happened. I do think he should have done better to be responsible as a boss and should have anticipated a messy situation. Cheating on your wife even emotionally is wrong. But that isn't our problem. That is between his wife and him to figure out which I assume they have given that this is ancient history.
