> when someone comes forward to make an accusation against the CEO, no one even argues against it. The ladies (and some men) however, are expected to provide evidence, pictures, videos, statements, DNA tests, rape kits, etc.

While I agree with the general sentiment of your comment, I think it's very important to consider the social and legal repercussions of the accusations when taking into account the level of proof required. Being an asshole in general with regard to business is not the same as sexual harassment, much less sexual assault. One can get you labelled as someone bad to work for, but in general many might not care because they are focused on results, while the other can get you ostracized from friends and family or convicted of a felony, depending on circumstance. Regardless of guilt. The burden of proof should, necessarily, be higher when the punishment is so much greater.

This doesn't excuse the behavior of publicly stating guilt or that one party is lying without evidence. That's horrible behavior and happens on both sides.