It sounds like, in this case, she provided good evidence and they were convinced he really harrassed her. Then they handled it really poorly, including notifying him she had talked to them.

So, for starters, err on the side of protecting her and develop good protocols for not disclosing. Reading up on how HIPAA gets handled may help.

Second, when thinking about how to handle it, start with the assumption that bad people will find some way to twist or abuse your rules and cannot be expected to behave just because you have a code of conduct and reminded them of it. If you feel you have real evidence he has harrassed her, come to terms with the fact that excluding him is the only meaningful way to enforce your claimed standard.

In the mean time, up your game on your own behavior. The best antidote is ultimately to set the example of proper behavior.

If they're tattling on her to him and haven't done anything to hold him accountable, they're not going to make it right except as a token PR play under pressure later. She's got to engage a lawyer and the legal system to protect her.

I have no problem with he said/she said, because I am willing to take a woman at her word when she says "he harassed me".

On the extremely rare occasions I've heard of men complaining of being raped by women, I don't think I've ever heard anyone dismissing his complaint as she said/he said.

>I have no problem with he said/she said, because I am willing to take a woman at her word when she says "he harassed me".

Yeah, let's do away with the burden of proof, presumption of innocence, and all those antiquated things.

>On the extremely rare occasions I've heard of men complaining of being raped by women, I don't think I've ever heard anyone dismissing his complaint as she said/he said.

Even if that's was the case (that nobody dismissed his complaint as she said/he said), that's still no argument. They should have dismissed it in both cases, unless proper proof was given.

http://reason.com/blog/2015/08/12/student-wrongfully-expelle...

I'm a male that's been raped before, and I've told maybe 5 people. And the reaction was very supportive from all but one of them. Interestingly enough, the four supportive point of views were from women, and the one "oh you're just lying to try and find an excuse for cheating" was from a man.

YMMV

Men and women both make up crazy stories all the time to attack other people. It's incontraverible evidence that makes it clear one side isn't lying. It seems like she has good evidence so it's not s/he said situation anyhow.

In the US, we have a long history of dismissing women's complaints about harassment or sexual assault with "she asked for it" or "she didn't fight back hard enough" or "she's making it up".

I'm simply taking the radical step of actually taking women at their word when they say these things, instead of carrying on with the tradition of assuming the woman's lying or embellishing a story.

Is this like the Muslim method of a woman's word being worth a fraction of a man's? Perhaps if 4 men disagree with one woman, then you'll accept that the men are right because their word is worth less? That's grossly unjust.

It seems like in this case there is relatively objective evidence. I agree this is super tricky, but I don't think it has much to do with "he said she said".

I believe the core issue here is that the bad actor has so much clout he cannot be held accountable by anyone involved. I would expect the problem to generalize to way more than just conferences.

This case seems very clear but what is the more general protocol?

I'm not sure there is much the conference can really do, especially without risking the same backlash against our author that she is trying to avoid by not exposing him.

It’s possible the conference organizers are simply unjust or don’t understand, but we should consider why, in this particular example, the conference may have had to be unjust. What if cancelling this speaker would be so detrimental it would stop the conference? As an organizer, what would you do? In a situation like this, especially if some money has been collected and things like that, the organizers may not be allowed to make such a significant change due to competing obligations from the people who paid.

Even if they could evict him, how would the conference describe his removal? Couldn't this description cause the same backlash that's keeping our author from exposing him herself?

One question that’s on my mind is: is there anything criminal in his conduct? Could our author get a restraining order against the guy? Maybe our author can get the restraining order against the man, and then just go to the conference and call the police to remove him. That's my best attempt at a fair solution, but do keep in mind it would involve blind-siding the conference with the loss of a speaker. This might be necessary, as it seems the conference doesn't have the power to stop this guy without their hand being forced in this way. Also, I don't really know enough about law to say this plan is remotely feasible, but it’s the best I can come up with.

Organizers that aren't money-hungry, amoral/weak/lazy aholes. They don't care about protocol.

It's not he said she said. She had screencaps of messages.