From the actual article: ```She was one of six women who organized massive walkouts after reports that Google paid handsome sums to executives accused of sexual harassment.```

I have no idea why her reporting or not reporting these incidents is relevant. Also not sure why this the protest was 'generic'. Your comment comes off as dismissive without any substance. Please feel free to elaborate.

Because it doesn't make sense to protect anybody who mentions an incident of sexual harassment from being fired. Because then everybody would be protected from being fired, because everybody can tell a story of some incident they read in the news. Presumably the law is supposed to protect people who have been harassed and report it.

So...You shouldn't be able to protest something unless you personally experienced it? Like, if my buddy was sexually harassed, and I wanted to change the culture in my company to reduce the likelihood of this happening again, I shouldn't because I didn't have it happen to me? Your argument seems to be making a lot of assumptions that I don't share.

You can protest whatever you want. But it should also be possible to fire you.

Protesting against something doesn't magically turn you into a superior person that is exempt from mundane things like being fired or being disliked.

You are not arguing against the substance of anything I have said.

I can't speak specifically to this case, but yes, that happens all the damn time. Higher-ups are protected in harassment incidents and the victim is retaliated against.