Once upon a time, in the land of #MeToo and believe-all-women, in a world before the Bad Orange Man came back from the dead, a woman who wanted to destroy an ex-lover could mobilize the forces of an all-powerful DEI machine to exact revenge. How dare you tire of my charms!
This is why the Beaver, back in those dark days of yore, issued a dire Title IX Warning: Never date on campus.
The climate may be warming, but the warning still stands. Wise men should always think with their big head, not their little head. Never date someone subject to the same HR administration. Especially if a “power imbalance” makes it easy to paint a target on your back.
Building a case against a former paramour is as easy as rounding up a posse of sympathetic accomplices, filing vague complaints about “harassment” and “bro culture,” then stepping back to let the DEI administrators do your dirty work.
If you go after an important target, though, it can take lawyers to bring him down. And your target might also hire lawyers. And even after you successfully destroy his life and career, proving once again that hell hath no fury like a woman scorned, lawsuits can drag on. Which gives karmic justice and dogged discovery a chance to turn up formerly undisclosed evidence that, years later, can cut through the fog of calumny.
So where are we, four years after the wanton destruction of one of the greatest scientists of his generation? With new court documents dribbling out for all to see, the sordid tale of he-said/she-said sure looks different than the way it was initially portrayed by the yellow press.
As MIT circles the wagons trying to defend its DEI Leviathan perhaps more people should dig into the details of this cautionary tale and the abandonment of due process in service to an ideology that is way past its expiration date.
Story suggested by TradwivesMyAss