>"The suit included a screenshot of an August 2015 email Mr. Rubin sent to one woman. “You will be happy being taken care of,” he wrote. “Being owned is kinda like you are my property, and I can loan you to other people.”"

I don't understand why Americans are so concerned with what happens in somebody else's bedroom. I don't give a single flying f about what two consenting adults decide to do in a bedroom. There are all sorts of sexual kinks that I find disgusting and sometimes disturbing - but it turns out it's not really any of my business. The second you introduce a non-consenting adult, or someone not old enough to consent, then we've got a problem.

Otherwise - why do you care? It's none of your business.

> Otherwise - why do you care? It's none of your business.

When your boss is sleeping with one of your co-workers, how do you know that they are not in a quid-pro-quo relationship?

This isn't an American thing - this is a workplace thing.

If you're a manager, there's seven billion other people in the world, who don't report to you. You'll probably find your soulmate, or whatever the hell you're looking for - outside of your reporting chain.

>When your boss is sleeping with one of your co-workers, how do you know that they are not in a quid-pro-quo relationship?

And as I've said in just about every post I've made, he should've been fired for sleeping with a subordinate. There are countless reasons that's not OK. I was responding to and quite obviously referring to the guy making a big deal about him telling someone he "owns them" - or whatever terminology he used. Do I think that's disgusting? Sure. But that's between him and whomever he has that relationship with. If she's consenting and willing, so be it, not my place to judge.

Though I can't find the exact context at the moment, I believe that was from his divorce. Most of the world seems to think it is your spouse's concern whom else you get involved with, both for health reasons and financial ones.

First off, why do you assume I am american? And my point is that this kink of his, which involves dominating and "owning" his employees, should raise alarm bells considering the accusations levied against him.

There are totally fine sexual and romantic relationships involving consenting "ownership". That part shouldn't necessarily make him sound creepy. The part where he managed to make it all the way up to the executive level at a company like Google and still be dumb enough to have those kinds of relationships with employees is the part that deserves attention.

As others have already pointed out, any relationship with an employee in that kind of environment is exploitative by nature.

I'm amazed all the women at Essential haven't bolted....I mean...gross....