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

We Still Let Harassers Participate in Our Community

kovalc.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 67 posts

Re: We Still Let Harassers Participate in Our Community

#11

Post by prolways »

sunir wrote: post #6
prolways wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like in this case there is relatively objective evidence. I agree this is super tricky, but I don't think it has much to do with "he said she said". I believe the core issue here is that the bad actor has so much clout he cannot be held accountable by anyone involved. I would expect the problem to generalize to way more than just conferences.

This case seems very clear but what is the more general protocol?

I'm not sure there is much the conference can really do, especially without risking the same backlash against our author that she is trying to avoid by not exposing him.

It’s possible the conference organizers are simply unjust or don’t understand, but we should consider why, in this particular example, the conference may have had to be unjust. What if cancelling this speaker would be so detrimental it would stop the conference? As an organizer, what would you do? In a situation like this, especially if some money has been collected and things like that, the organizers may not be allowed to make such a significant change due to competing obligations from the people who paid.

Even if they could evict him, how would the conference describe his removal? Couldn't this description cause the same backlash that's keeping our author from exposing him herself?

One question that’s on my mind is: is there anything criminal in his conduct? Could our author get a restraining order against the guy? Maybe our author can get the restraining order against the man, and then just go to the conference and call the police to remove him. That's my best attempt at a fair solution, but do keep in mind it would involve blind-siding the conference with the loss of a speaker. This might be necessary, as it seems the conference doesn't have the power to stop this guy without their hand being forced in this way. Also, I don't really know enough about law to say this plan is remotely feasible, but it’s the best I can come up with.

Re: We Still Let Harassers Participate in Our Community

#12

Post by interpol_p »

LeHatBad wrote: post #7

So: In the writer's own words, she did not respond honestly to his advances as she hoped to advance her career through his acquaintance: > While I tried to politely decline his advances, he was in a position of power over me in this industry. He said he knew my bosses, he knew where I worked, and he promised he’d help advance my career. I felt it best to stay in his “good graces” and not be flat out rude. She did fin…

> And responded as she should have first. With the result that he stopped pestering her

She responded correctly at the beginning: she politely declined his advances. He didn't get the point. He didn't stop bothering her. That's not on her, and it's not something we blame her for.

> because SHE HOPED TO GAIN FINANCIALLY AND PROFESSIONALLY BY DOING SO.

You shout the last bit as if you're angry that this woman didn't want to destroy her professional career over putting up with her harasser. That's disgusting. She should never have been put in that situation to begin with.

The fact that she politely declined this man's advances from the beginning should have been the end of it. It is preposterous that you can blame this woman for not being outright aggressive and cold to her harasser when that is an extremely hard thing to do — especially if it involves souring a professional relationship and hurting your career.

Re: We Still Let Harassers Participate in Our Community

#13

Post by prolways »

LeHatBad wrote: post #7

So: In the writer's own words, she did not respond honestly to his advances as she hoped to advance her career through his acquaintance: > While I tried to politely decline his advances, he was in a position of power over me in this industry. He said he knew my bosses, he knew where I worked, and he promised he’d help advance my career. I felt it best to stay in his “good graces” and not be flat out rude. She did fin…

Even if you're right (which I disagree) you need to be way more tactful with this type of thing or you stoke the "programming is misogynist" fire.

Responding more directly:

> "I tried to politely decline"

> she strung him along

It could be interesting to see the exact conversations, but I don't think she "strung him along" as much as just never told him to stop "forcefully enough". Regardless, even if she had been banging the guy, stop means stop. Besides that, she shouldn't have had to decline anything in the first place... This is why you don't ask out women in professional settings: there is no good way for them to say "no".

Re: We Still Let Harassers Participate in Our Community

#14

Post by meric »

Frondo wrote: post #9
LeHatBad wrote: post #7

So: In the writer's own words, she did not respond honestly to his advances as she hoped to advance her career through his acquaintance: > While I tried to politely decline his advances, he was in a position of power over me in this industry. He said he knew my bosses, he knew where I worked, and he promised he’d help advance my career. I felt it best to stay in his “good graces” and not be flat out rude. She did fin…

She turned him down, and you're saying she didn't turn him down firmly enough, and did so to string him along? Why does that sound like a variation on "she was asking for it, she didn't fight back hard enough" or any other kind of victim-blaming?

Putting aside everything else on the blog post, because the conference organisers seem inept -

As long there are "wanted advances" in workplaces, there will be "unwanted advances" also. To eliminate "unwanted advances", you must eliminate "advances" in general. For example: if she found him hot, we wouldn't be reading this post.

As long as "advances" are still permitted in the workplace, there needs to be social education in the corporate environment so that "brush-offs" aren't interpreted as "try harder".

Re: We Still Let Harassers Participate in Our Community

#16

Post by Mz »

sunir wrote: post #4

What is the right protocol? As a conference organizer I would like advice. Getting past he said she said is a delicate problem.

It sounds like, in this case, she provided good evidence and they were convinced he really harrassed her. Then they handled it really poorly, including notifying him she had talked to them.

So, for starters, err on the side of protecting her and develop good protocols for not disclosing. Reading up on how HIPAA gets handled may help.

Second, when thinking about how to handle it, start with the assumption that bad people will find some way to twist or abuse your rules and cannot be expected to behave just because you have a code of conduct and reminded them of it. If you feel you have real evidence he has harrassed her, come to terms with the fact that excluding him is the only meaningful way to enforce your claimed standard.

In the mean time, up your game on your own behavior. The best antidote is ultimately to set the example of proper behavior.

Re: We Still Let Harassers Participate in Our Community

#17

Post by Mz »

LeHatBad wrote: post #7

So: In the writer's own words, she did not respond honestly to his advances as she hoped to advance her career through his acquaintance: > While I tried to politely decline his advances, he was in a position of power over me in this industry. He said he knew my bosses, he knew where I worked, and he promised he’d help advance my career. I felt it best to stay in his “good graces” and not be flat out rude. She did fin…

You are all kinds of wrong. Unfortunately, I am about to log off, so I do not have time to explain why in any kind of substantive way. The nutshell version is that this is such a rampant problem, women can either try to be polite and diplomatic in the face of it or outright starve. A woman essentially cannot make money at all without putting up with this shit to some degree. We need better answers than always blaming the victim. Some men are so powerful, you essentially cannot avoid them and keep working in your industry. If a man like that sees you as just a piece of ass, even crazy levels of diplomatic skill will not shield you from negative repercussions.

Re: We Still Let Harassers Participate in Our Community

#18

Post by Retra »

meric wrote: post #14
Frondo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She turned him down, and you're saying she didn't turn him down firmly enough, and did so to string him along? Why does that sound like a variation on "she was asking for it, she didn't fight back hard enough" or any other kind of victim-blaming?

Putting aside everything else on the blog post, because the conference organisers seem inept - As long there are "wanted advances" in workplaces, there will be "unwanted advances" also. To eliminate "unwanted advances", you must eliminate "advances" in general. For example: if she found him hot, we wouldn't be reading this post. As long as "advances" are still permitted in the workplace, there needs to be social educ…

>For example: if she found him hot, we wouldn't be reading this post.

You don't know that. It is an unreasonable and unfair assumption, and reflects the expectation of your own immaturity as a gold standard.

Re: We Still Let Harassers Participate in Our Community

#19

Post by meric »

Retra wrote: post #18
meric wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Putting aside everything else on the blog post, because the conference organisers seem inept - As long there are "wanted advances" in workplaces, there will be "unwanted advances" also. To eliminate "unwanted advances", you must eliminate "advances" in general. For example: if she found him hot, we wouldn't be reading this post. As long as "advances" are still permitted in the workplace, there needs to be social educ…

>For example: if she found him hot, we wouldn't be reading this post. You don't know that. It is an unreasonable and unfair assumption, and reflects the expectation of your own immaturity as a gold standard.

Your comment only serves to distract from the point - No woman is going to post a blog post talking about "wanted advances", even though we know they exist, from friends we know who met in workplaces.

Re: We Still Let Harassers Participate in Our Community

#20

Post by butthackerz »

LeHatBad wrote: post #7

So: In the writer's own words, she did not respond honestly to his advances as she hoped to advance her career through his acquaintance: > While I tried to politely decline his advances, he was in a position of power over me in this industry. He said he knew my bosses, he knew where I worked, and he promised he’d help advance my career. I felt it best to stay in his “good graces” and not be flat out rude. She did fin…

> she strung him along for what she could get out of him.

If by "stringing him along" you mean declined every single advance made by him.

"No thanks" should be more than enough.

Post reply on HN