By the same token, why are you disenfranchising the choices made by a married woman to sleep with her boss?

Probably because of the power dynamic makes it really hard to see how free that "choice" really is.

And also puts doubt on any decisions by the boss that affect the employee - companies don't want people "sleeping their way to the top" as that's not putting the business' needs first.

"All men command women, we command all men, and our women command us." - Cato

This is a very successful woman, career wise. She’s clearly not incapable of navigating high stakes power dynamics and you shouldn’t just absolve her of responsibility in this.

(Your second statement carries far more weight)

We don't really have the ability to judge the power dynamic without intimate knowledge of the people and their personal lives, we don't even know when things started and what place their lives were in then.

It's why we generally frown upon relationships if there's any direct business link.

Because a boss has the power to reward the otherwise lesser competent women he is sleeping with over someone else who is otherwise better at the job but not sleeping with the job. If I'm a shareholder of the company I care about that, and the person wronged also cares.

As an aside, the above applies to any one of any gender sleeping with their boss (again of any gender)

Didn't we have a whole movement a couple years ago, "me too", where everybody was up in arms about men abusing power to sleep with women?

You think the women that have caused Jensen to come undone this week are passive and powerless victims of him abusing his power? Except for his wife, it seems like it’s the opposite.

I am not talking about the spy, but the women who reported to him. Being powerless or weak is irrelevant. He had power over her and that was what "me too" was calling out.

I think the power imbalance is actually quite slight. Has she lost her job and her husband today? Hard to say.

If she didn't sleep with him would she have had the same position, received the same bonuses, etc? We don't know. Even if he wouldn't have gone after her if she refused she may have thought it could have happened.

Why should anyone care about that?

Because it’s actually misogynistic to cast women as passive and subservient victims of power abusing men, when for millennia women have been doing all they can to get as close as they can to men with the most power, money and status. This is the most recent example.

> it’s actually misogynistic to cast women as passive and subservient victims

What the hell are you talking about? Why are you even bringing culture war garbage into this conversation?

Obviously over your head. Please don’t flame and cast peoples takes as “culture war garbage”. I was responding to the OP’s framing as the women as passive participants in this saga. Hard to believe that’s the case.

> Please don’t flame and cast peoples takes as “culture war garbage”

You're the one that's flaming by introducing culture war garbage where none is necessary.

> I was responding to the OP’s framing as the women as passive participants in this saga.

I don't know who you think you're talking about, but you responded to my comment, and I didn't say or suggest anything like that.