zlacker

I mean, they can be, but is there any reason to believe they are? Have male leaders of similar protests been treated better? Surely it's not right to infer gender bias just because the victims are women.

>>SpicyL+(OP)
> I mean, they can be, but is there any reason to believe they are?

Yes, there is: women stepped forward.

> Have male leaders of similar protests been treated better?

Men either haven't experienced the same, or they are keeping their mouth shut.

In both scenarios, women should be supported. If men step forward, so should they. They didn't so far (or at least, not in large enough numbers for such a protest to be reported), so based on the data we have available to us, the problem affects women way more than it affects men.

>>r3bl+85
I don’t really understand the response. Is your claim that, if something bad happens to a woman without simultaneously happening to a man, that automatically makes it a gender bias issue?

>>SpicyL+(OP)
There haven't been male leaders of a similar protest (that is, a protest claiming repeated sexual harassment). At least, not to my knowledge...

>>SpicyL+X6
You do understand it, you just refuse to understand it.

But to answer your question, yes. If enough women were affected that they felt compelled to step out, and men didn't, that's clearly a gender bias issue.

>>r3bl+9e
Would you please stop posting in the flamewar style to HN? You've done that repeatedly in this thread, including crossing into personal attack. That helps nothing and only makes this place worse, regardless of how bad another comment is or how right you feel you are.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html