At a certain point, one has to believe that another's actions are evil, even if that evil is unwitting. One mustn't actively choose to be "evil and predatory" to be so in fact.
So something can become so horrible, that even a mistaken action should be defined as evil? Sorry, but that sounds wrong, and itself willfully vengeful. In that case, shouldn't we just do away with manslaughter and just say everyone who has killed someone is a murderer?
You're making a false equivalence; often, the distinction between murder and manslaughter is the lack of an actual _intent to kill_, not simply the presence of a mistaken belief that the killing would be welcomed as "a really alpha move".
Even in cases where intent isn't there, other factors (for example, hitting and killing someone while driving drunk or too far over the speed limit) can make an accidental killing murder.
I don't think that you can make the argument that any of the men in question did not intend to make sexual advances on these women.
To horribly misuse Aaron Sorkin:
Sam:
About a week ago I accidentally slept with a prostitute.
Toby:
Really?
Sam:
Yes.
Toby:
You accidentally slept with a prostitute.
Sam:
Call girl.
Toby:
Accidentally.
Sam:
Yes.
Toby:
I don't understand. Did you trip over something?
I'm trying to understand the intent of your reference. The scene you're referring to is when Sam finds out after he slept with the woman that she happened to be a prostitute. He didn't pay her as a prostitute. He met a nice woman and they spent the night together. Next morning he finds out she has a job that might get him in trouble.
How is that relevant to your point? It seems like the opposite of your point.
It popped into my head due to the linguistic disconnect - Sam is saying that he accidentally did something, but Toby is clarifying that, no, he did it on purpose; he just might not have been aware of the circumstances and potential consequences.
In other words, while it might be possible to "accidentally sexually harass" a person, there's much more involved than "did the harasser think they were harassing?"
Rather, it matters whether the person in question deliberately chose to perform the actions that compose harassment.
To use programming terminology, sexual harassment is an interface, not a class. One need not deliberately implement it if all the requirements are met.
So something can become so horrible, that even a mistaken action should be defined as evil? Sorry, but that sounds wrong, and itself willfully vengeful. In that case, shouldn't we just do away with manslaughter and just say everyone who has killed someone is a murderer?