Why should he have had to be taught not to hit women's bottoms? Why should he have got away with it? He shouldn't have to be told that is inappropriate at work! It doesn't take much intelligence to know it's inappropriate any time!
You open yourself up to nothing if you keep your hands to yourself. This kind of thinking is so gross.
Here come his buddy boys! I can't wait to hear all the smears on the women involved. 
But which men? And how am I, as a woman, supposed to know? I can't read minds. Creeps, rapists and sexual abusers don't have such character traits marked on their forehead. How many reactions to "XYZ assaulted me/raped me/was creepy to me" start with "Oh, but he seems like such a nice guy!"
A third party firm already investigated. Careful sitting on that fence, you'll get splinters up your butt.
Not touching a colleague's bottom seems obvious. But we live in a world where a woman can agree to sleep with a man, regret in the next day and then claim rape so context is everything. We have famous stars (including Keanu Reeves) refusing to touch women so there can be no 'misunderstandings'.
This guy was apparently in a relationship with one of the women. How do we know he didn't do something he habitually did and was deemed acceptable until it wasn't because she changed her mind, maybe without telling him?
Most of these cases are not matters of outright rape or assault or even clear creeping on women but gestures that are not appreciated by the receiver. Which makes them still cringe worthy and deserving of a 'don't do it again' talk but not worthy of sacking the person over IMO. I have heard co-workers gossip in ways that are just as harmful or hurtful as touching a bottom. Guess how many of them only get a slap on the wrist if even that....
And dismissing anyone speaking up for this guy as his buddy boy and not worthy of consideration...Disgusting!
Maybe he actually knows what was going on? He certainly seems to indicate there is more to the story in his tweet.
Your ignorance of corporate shenanigans speaks clearly when you wave the third party investigation around as some kind of smoking gun. These people are only called in to deflect blame and absolve the upper management. They are given their marching orders and will then produce the required response, just like outside consultants are hired to give the management the excuse they need to do what they already decided to do...
I will refer to the Dutch junior Minister of Education Wiersma who by all accounts is a flaming asshole who likes to belittle subordinates and cannot control his anger when things don't go his way. Civil servants filed complaints but he was too valuable (apparently) for his party to drop so he was counseled, did a lot of inner searching, is working on bettering himself and because he has finally recognized his flaws and is willing to talk to his victims, he can stay in his job. After he was somewhat exonerated by a third party investigation that found that, while certain incidents certainly took place, they were not sufficiently severe to lead to his immediate sacking. The investigation was not made public due to privacy requirements and the Ministry refuses to discuss it further......
We don't know if this commentator is indeed guilty or not. We don't know if upper management just want the issue to go away and used an 'independent' investigation as a smoke screen. We don't know if he is admitting guilt because he is indeed guilty or if he is hoping a quick confession and promise to work on himself will save his career (doing a Hugh Grant I believe its called). We just don't know. So please spare us the sweeping condemnations.
This topic is locked
