Re:A Difficult Situation
by harel on Thursday March 21, 2013 @07:30PM
(#5420125)
Such a lawsuit would be a confirmed kill on her career though. At least now she has a chance to someday salvage her work. Adding a lawsuit to the mix will probably mean she'll never be hired by anyone (who can read and is on the web) again.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Adding a lawsuit to the mix will probably mean she'll never be hired by anyone (who can read and is on the web) again.
It's actually illegal to research job applicants in some jurisdictions. For instance, Finland.
https://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2006/11/15/finnish-emp...
I doubt the legality of that will prevent anyone from doing a quick Googling of prospective employee while considering their employment.
I don't have to tell you I'm not hiring you because I Googled your past and did't like it. I can just tell you that you're not a good fit for our company.
Re:A Difficult Situation
by rollo_tommasi on Thursday March 21, 2013 @08:25PM
(#5420472)
It's unlikely she'll be moving to Finland, and full third-party background checks are de rigueur for many jobs in the United States.
At least she'd be certain that her future employers care about womens rights as much as she does.
She doesn't really care though. This was an ego move, first and foremost. Calling it a women's rights issue is an insult to women.
It's quite radical old-school feminism, a style I myself consider no longer deem called for that often, but it is feminism and I therefore would consider it a women's right issue.
Being offended by crude jokes(or finding crude jokes "wrong") is feminism? How so?
I think unwanted sexualization is a recurring theme in feminism and in Adria's perception this was an instance of that.
Most people wouldn't and hence it's reserved for more radical feminists, but it's definitely done under the banner of feminism and thus I'd consider it part of it.