Herman Cain And False Sexual Harassment Accusations

This story is interesting.  Several woman claim that Herman Cain sexually harassed them, when he was working at his pizza business.  They settled, and as part of the agreement, they agreed to never publicly discuss the issue.

I was once the victim of a false sexual harassment claim.  I’m very sympathetic to someone who claims he was falsely accused.

Now that Herman Cain is running for President, those women could cash in even more by giving mainstream media interviews.  However, the settlement agreement bars them from publicly saying anything.

However, Herman Cain is giving awkward vague statements, rather than saying “Just because there was a settlement, that doesn’t mean I did anything wrong.  It’s cheaper to settle than go to trial.”  The unfortunate bit is that Herman Cain seems wishy-washy when discussing the issue, more than anything else.

I never liked the fact that out-of-court settlements typically include a clause that bars one person from ever publicly disclosing their side of the story.  That seems unfair.

Out-of-court settlements are common, because trials are expensive and appeals can drag on for years.  If the legal system was efficient, most claims would be resolved via trial, rather than via a settlement.

In other words, the inefficient legal system coerces people into accepting settlements that bar them from publicly discussing the issue.  If a trial could be resolved quickly, then people wouldn’t need to accept settlements that bar them from ever publicly disclosing their side of the story.

It’s also unfair that women can use the legal system to extort money.

I wish Herman Cain would say something like this:

It’s very easy for women to make a false sexual harassment claim.  The legal system encourages women to make false claims.

Just because there was a settlement, that doesn’t mean I did anything wrong.  My lawyers advised me that it was cheaper to settle, rather than to go to trial and risk losing even more and having to pay a lot in legal expenses.

Now that I’m a Presidential candidate, these women want to cash in even more, by giving interviews that slander me.  They shouldn’t have used the legal system to extort money.  Now, they want to cash in for even more.

Most people think that sexual harassment is an explicit quid pro quo, “Have sex with me or you’re fired!”  There are many innocent-seeming activities that can be called sexual harassment.

Based on what I read so far, Herman Cain isn’t accused of an explicit sexual demand.  He’s accused of “making women feel uncomfortable”.  WTF?

Also, the settlements seem to have been for $50k or less, which makes it seem like a minor offense.  If it was really bad, the settlement would have been $1M or more.

Sexual harassment cannot occur in a really free market.  Why not?  In a really free market, if your boss is a jerk, you’ll just find another job.

In the present, the State makes it hard for workers to find a new job.  The employer has leverage over the employee, due to State restriction of the market.  This enables your boss to make unreasonable demands.

Also, the CEO isn’t usually the sole owner.  If the CEO abuses his subordinates, he’s wasting the shareholders’ money and not his personal money.

Also, in a really free market, you’d be able to easily hire a prostitute, rather than trying to coerce subordinates.  It’d be better to hire the best worker, and then separately hire a prostitute.

I was once the victim of a false sexual harassment claim, so I’m very sympathetic to someone who is falsely accused.  Did Herman Cain really do something unethical?  Were women cashing in on a corrupt legal system?  There haven’t been enough details disclosed to be sure.

The State legal system encourages women to make false sexual harassment claims.  Having already cashed in once, these women are now trying to make even more money by giving interviews slandering Herman Cain.  Due to inefficiency in the State legal system, many plaintiffs are coerced into settling, and those settlements typically bar them from publicly discussing the case later.  That aspect of the story is unfair.  The offensive part is that Herman Cain doesn’t explicitly say “The legal system encourages women to make false sexual harassment claims.”  It shouldn’t be illegal to say something that “makes someone feel uncomfortable”.  Sexual harassment cannot occur in a really free market, because an abused worker would easily switch jobs.  In the present, State restriction of the market enables employers to abuse employees.

2 Responses to Herman Cain And False Sexual Harassment Accusations

  1. FSK,
    I read where one woman claimed he got her in his car, touched her genitals and tried to force her head down to his crotch. If true, that borders on sexual assault.

    • Is that the woman who waited until just recently to make a claim or tell anyone about it? This one?

      It is possible that both Cain is a scumbag, and also that the woman is a scumbag. I haven’t met either of them, so I can’t be sure. I don’t trust the mainstream media to report accurately.

      That’s the problem with claims like this one. There are only two witnesses, the accuser and the accusee. That makes it practically impossible to determine what actually happened.

      I was abused many times at jobs. I concluded it was impractical to sue and moved on.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>