I don't believe you are being honest here, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
'His private life' ceases to be 'private' when it influences others. He harassed multiple woman, and therefore there is no 'private' life involved -- we're talking about actions he took with other people, in which those other people shared there experiences.
There's no 'harasser/harassee privilege'. He did shitty things to multiple women, and they spoke out.
Would you agree that one of the bases of 'truly wrong' things is the concept of consent? That many things we consider 'wrong' are things where one person does something to someone else with out their consent, such as murdering them?
Harassment is not a consensual activity. You want to blur the lines between 'flirting' and 'harassment', just as he does in his statement. Flirting is largely consensual -- the person being flirted on can choose to treat the flirt as a flirt, and reciprocate consensually -- or they can respond as if the flirt was not flirtatious, and respond platonicly -- or not at all.
If someone says 'I like the way your hair looks today' to me, I have the following options:
- If I want to flirt back, I can say 'Thanks! Maybe I'll style it this way more often...' -- This consents to the now less platonic conversation/relationship.
- If I am not interested in the person, but want to remain platonic, I can say 'Thanks.' -- By not flirting back, I did not consent to the attempt to reframe the relationship as more than platonic.
- If I really don't like the person, I can say nothing -- making it very clear how I view them.
There is no consensual aspect to harassment -- once someone says to me 'show me your tits' there's no walking back to a platonic place -- they've forced their way through to a sexual place I did not agree to.
That's what differentiates flirting and harassment, and makes harassment wrong.