(01-13-2020 11:10 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 11:03 AM)mrbig Wrote:  The Fourth Circuit has something to say on the topic.

We are just going to have to agree to disagree. Harris is clearly a public figure, and there is truth to the allegation/implication. As for your 4th Circuit case, the word "false" is prominent there.

I disagree that the word "false" is important to the case. Give it a read. To quote the Fourth Circuit:

Quote:As alleged, the rumor was that Parker, a female subordinate, had sex with her male superior to obtain promotion, implying that Parker used her womanhood, rather than her merit, to obtain from a man, so seduced, a promotion. She plausibly invokes a deeply rooted perception - one that unfortunately still persists - that generally women, not men, use sex to achieve success. And with this double standard, women, but not men, are susceptible to being labelled as "sluts" or worse, prostitutes selling their bodies for gain. [citations omitted].

(01-13-2020 12:07 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Harris is a person of low moral character who has exchanged sexual favors for personal advancement. You can use whatever term you want to describe that.

What is the evidence she explicitly exchanged sexual favors for personal advancement? If there is nothing explicit then it seems like you are projecting some assumptions onto her conduct. Which is exactly what the Fourth Circuit says was wrong. Even if the woman in the Fourth Circuit case had actually had an affair with a supervisor, under my reading of that opinion, calling her a skank or slut or prostitute or whore would have most certainly still constituted sexual harassment.