Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Non-Sexist Behaviour Guidelines?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–89 of 89 posts

Re: Ask HN: Non-Sexist Behaviour Guidelines?

#81

Post by macho_pikachu »

macho_pikachu wrote: post #4
Jemaclus wrote: post #2

I was talking to one of my best friends who also happens to be a coworker the other day, and I said "Hey, if you're ever a victim of sexual harassment, what can I do to make you feel comfortable with coming to me so that I can attempt to help?" She said "Nothing, really. The problem is that most harassment isn't blatant, it is hidden and not obvious. It's like a feeling that you get from someone. I can't tell you how…

Networking is the most straightforward answer there. Every time you make a new hire let her know first. Let her know that you understand that feeling isolated in the workplace can happen for a lot of reasons, but if you are of a legally protected status there are steps as her manager you can take to alleviate that. Give preference to candidates she recommends and feels comfortable with.

I'm not sure why I'm being down voted here? Maybe it was my phrasing but here is a much better articulated and nuanced explanation of my argument over at medium: https://medium.com/message/no-nate-brogrammers-may-not-be-ma...

I would further posit that the norms of tech culture that isolate some and include others and this culture as it intersects with hiring is basically just a way to normalize, refine, and study turnover in tech business by managers and CEOs.

I remember when I had my, "a-ha!" moment working at a coffee shop in highschool. "why?" I thought, "would my employer show a blatant disregard for sexual harassment, sexist hiring policies, hazing, poor scheduling, and offer few benefits that attract long term employment?"

Because turnover is good for business. Lower salaries make coffee shop margins possible and fresh faces bring more customers.

Re: Ask HN: Non-Sexist Behaviour Guidelines?

#82

Post by powertower »

smeyer wrote: post #79
powertower wrote: post #51

In all honesty, the way it works is like this - 1. Attractive male opens door for female. Female blushes, there is no problem. 2. Unattractive male opens door for female. Female reports unwanted behavior. ( "attractive" does not have to mean "physically attractive", it could be another quality ) And I'm not being smug here with the above. No matter what, life is a popularity contest. Outside of that example, with gre…

Have you actually seen someone in your workplace reported to a manager or HR representative for holding open a door outside of a larger pattern of behavior? I've never in my life seen anyone get more than a dismissive look for holding a door, regardless of gender or attractiveness.

That part was meant to show the general bias of it all through a figuratively made example. I didn't think anyone would take it literally.

Re: Ask HN: Non-Sexist Behaviour Guidelines?

#83

Post by smeyer »

powertower wrote: post #82
smeyer wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you actually seen someone in your workplace reported to a manager or HR representative for holding open a door outside of a larger pattern of behavior? I've never in my life seen anyone get more than a dismissive look for holding a door, regardless of gender or attractiveness.

That part was meant to show the general bias of it all through a figuratively made example. I didn't think anyone would take it literally.

>And I'm not being smug here with the above.

That's what threw me off, so sorry with the confusion. I can also state that it doesn't fit my personal experiences even in a figurative sense, but that's a comparison that I don't think is easy to make in a few comments back and forth online.

Re: Ask HN: Non-Sexist Behaviour Guidelines?

#84

Post by sevilo »

Mz wrote: post #61
mistermann wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it is simply true that wearing a low cut top to the office is not suitable attire. I would tend to agree, but I believe there are many that would consider that comment "blaming the victim", or in other words, any comment at all about a female's appearance is discriminatory.

I think if women want to be taken seriously as professionals, they have some obligation to take responsibility for their appearance. A woman whose boobs are falling out of her clothing at work is not dressed professionally. I don't think that's discrimination. We don't let men show up in "muscle shirts" either. We allow women to show a LOT more skin than men and still call it "professional." I think this one restrict…

I'd agree, but i also think this applies to both genders, it doesn't make sense for women to show too much skin for a professional environment and men shouldn't be wearing beach clothing to a meeting etc. However that being said, women shouldn't feel like they're not being taken seriously just for wearing a dress/skirt (appropriate length) or anything that resembles their gender. That's when it falls in the line of sexism, I have heard some stories on how female developers got "brushed off" at conferences for wearing a dress.

Re: Ask HN: Non-Sexist Behaviour Guidelines?

#85

Post by Mz »

sevilo wrote: post #84
Mz wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if women want to be taken seriously as professionals, they have some obligation to take responsibility for their appearance. A woman whose boobs are falling out of her clothing at work is not dressed professionally. I don't think that's discrimination. We don't let men show up in "muscle shirts" either. We allow women to show a LOT more skin than men and still call it "professional." I think this one restrict…

I'd agree, but i also think this applies to both genders, it doesn't make sense for women to show too much skin for a professional environment and men shouldn't be wearing beach clothing to a meeting etc. However that being said, women shouldn't feel like they're not being taken seriously just for wearing a dress/skirt (appropriate length) or anything that resembles their gender. That's when it falls in the line of s…

It's a complicated topic. There isn't a simple, one-dimensional solution. It will take both sides working together to get it working better.

All I am saying is that a woman covering her cleavage isn't some crazy, ridiculous, sexist standard. Men also are expected to cover their chest at work.

Re: Ask HN: Non-Sexist Behaviour Guidelines?

#86

Post by jheriko »

JohnBooty wrote: post #77
jheriko wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i'm sorry, but i think this is BS. why is it that men are allowed to do this and women not? equal rights and opportunities only work to solve this problem if exercised. men have negative consequences from confrontation too... its just unfortunate that they are often raised in a way that makes them more comfortable to make that trade off and deal with the consequences than women ('being a man about it') few things are…

At least until things are a heck of a lot more equal than they are today, men have a crucial role to play here. 1. The men who struggle with this the most are also tend to be men who are dismissive to women or have other communication issues with women. Extreme example: if a man thinks it's okay to smack a female coworker on the ass, do you actually think that man is going to listen to a woman's opinion? He'll think…

thanks for the thoughtful reply. :)

you highlight issues that society needs to resolve very astutely.

Re: Ask HN: Non-Sexist Behaviour Guidelines?

#87

Post by wtbob »

> You can end up hanging out privately with your superiors or subordinates and this can eventually lead to various personal and romantic entanglements.

That's typically a bad idea anyway. I know that we in the hip, cool developer world like to pretend that an organisation can be flat and rankless—but it really can't.

I think it's completely appropriate for superiors and subordinates to socialise in groups (and kudos to the tech world for keeping that tradition alive when so many organisational cultures are stomping it out), but private socialisation should be limited to those who are on the same level.

As for specifically sex-related issues, the only thing I can think makes sense is to scrupulously treat every team member the same, and don't date within the organisation—and if, despite one's best intentions, one does form a relationship, then one or both parties should leave.

Re: Ask HN: Non-Sexist Behaviour Guidelines?

#88

Post by dang »

ierio wrote: post #71
Jemaclus wrote: post #2

I was talking to one of my best friends who also happens to be a coworker the other day, and I said "Hey, if you're ever a victim of sexual harassment, what can I do to make you feel comfortable with coming to me so that I can attempt to help?" She said "Nothing, really. The problem is that most harassment isn't blatant, it is hidden and not obvious. It's like a feeling that you get from someone. I can't tell you how…

>I can't tell you how many meetings I've been in where the person on the other side of the table is regularly looking at my boobs. What am i supposed to do about that This is just blatant non-sense. I am immigrant working in US. I can't tell you how many times women have brushed my arms or tried to grab my ass. I am male and have english accent. What are people supposed to do when you are sitting at exact opposite si…

> This is just blatant non-sense.

This violates the HN guidelines.

Telling someone that their factual recounting of their own experience is "blatant non-sense" is a serious breach of civility, which is the #1 rule people are required to abide by here.

Re: Ask HN: Non-Sexist Behaviour Guidelines?

#89

Post by minopret »

thomasahle wrote: post #12
minopret wrote: post #5

> has anybody with legal and/or HR credentials and some ethical sense written any definitive guide what is OK and what is not specifically in the context of the modern office? Yes, they have. I am NOT one of them. I don't have one of those guides. But I've received enough mandatory training to have a layperson's understanding of the baseline in my national jurisdiction which is USA. The baseline is twofold, it is fai…

I think got most of it, but I missed the connection between "people who are sexually attractive to you" and "people who are uncomfortable with glamour photos of models". Or is "people who are sexually attractive to you" just a lawyer term for "people of a sex you might want to have sex with"?

My bad. It's not a lawyer term. I really don't know enough to be clear and accurate about that point.
Post reply on HN