How not to write a convincing defense (a thread)
Step 1 - Spend a lot of time trying to explain that you were in a location your university's rules don't apply.
Step 2 - Talk about about how some women didn't report you. Impressive to hear a prominent "rational" "skeptic" make this argument without thinking about the EEOC's actual statistics on retaliation.
Step 3 - Simply assert that the women did complain are "not credible."
Step 4 - "All that being said, I *never* shared sexually explicit fan mail with staff unless they asked to see or read it." Ummm
Step 5 - "Neither of your are pregnant, right? Don't get pregnant" Krauss: "I certainly would not say this to anyone I WAS MEETING FOR THE FIRST TIME even as a joke." (emphasis mine, qualifier his)
Step 6 - "So even if I did say that a transgender woman was 'hot', it was in the context of preparing for an Origins event focused on gender identity and issues, and falls within my academic freedom."
Step 7 - "'In April of 2016, Dr. Krauss suggested than an employee dress like a hula girl and stand on one of the University's malls to advertise an event.' This was clearly not a serious suggestion ... "
Step 8 - ".. he told two staff members that he hoped they did not get pregnant; he offered to buy birth control pills for an employee..."; Krauss: "I do not remember making either of these comments. But if I did, no reasonable listener would think I was serious"
