Harassment at Apple: A personal perspective • Hacker News Board

Re: Harassment at Apple: A personal perspective

#281

Post by dep_b » Fri, Dec 16, 2016, 4:41 PM UTC

dm3730 wrote: post #37

dep_b wrote: post #14

Lots of down votes because of uncomfortable truth? I've seen this happen a few times and the only thing you need to do is honestly apply feminist values to all people without discriminating to start condemning it. It's like asking for respect for getting addicted to pills by pharmaceutical industries because that's a part of American culture. Maybe some criticism would be in place despite the "it's our culture" thing…

"Lots of down votes because of uncomfortable truth?" No, downvotes because "the current state of arranged marriages in India" has absolutely nothing to do with the article. You're doing exactly what the author said was done to her. "they made comments about not liking to work with me or with the growing number of Indian tech workers in the company. I also faced hostile remarks about Indian women being subservient and…

Right, I don't like to single out people to put them forward as "spokespeople for their group". As an immigrant myself it's kind of weird that people see me as some kind of representative of my culture/country. I don't see myself as not very typical for my country at all.

Re: Harassment at Apple: A personal perspective

#282

Post by indigo_rex » Fri, Dec 16, 2016, 4:41 PM UTC

xeeeeeeeeeeenu wrote: post #230

mikestew wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Grown women will also refer each other girls. I've heard a similar argument before, in reference to race. The logic is equally weak when crusty old white bigots use it.

> The logic is equally weak when crusty old white bigots use it. Do you realize that you're being a racist?

No, this is a ridiculous claim.

Re: Harassment at Apple: A personal perspective

#283

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Dec 16, 2016, 4:41 PM UTC

beachstartup wrote: post #262

sanderjd wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an indicator of the bubble you're living in. It may be common vernacular amongst all or nearly all of the people you interact with, but it is simultaneously highly disrespectful. It might be worth taking a step back and asking yourself what other things you consider normal might actually be disrespectful.

the more language- and thought-policing you try to push, the more of a right-wing backlash (i.e. trump) you will see from the public at large.

[deleted]

Re: Harassment at Apple: A personal perspective

#284

Post by justaman » Fri, Dec 16, 2016, 4:41 PM UTC

edblarney wrote: post #211

whichdan wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For someone trying to define how harassment should be dealt with, you're certainly keen on dismissively calling women "girls".

I'm not sure I agree. I often call people quite my junior 'boys' and 'girls'. I work with a startup of dudes under 24. I call them 'lads'. I could technically be their father. Is that wrong? No. Neither is using the term Mrs. Ms. or Miss.. In far-left socialist Montreal, where women are not even allowed by law to take their husband's name - people use the French equivalent everywhere: 'Madame' and 'Mademoiselle'. Sam…

I think there is something to be said about "Not Giving A Fuck". People should try it. Sometimes people just speak, and sometimes people get offended. I believe the vast majority of the time, no offense was intended. Words are just words and they cannot relay perfect messages 100% of the time. The best thing anyone can do is keep their ego's in check, do your work and do it damn well. Let your work create the narrative. Nobody's going to shit on someone who carries the team.

Re: Harassment at Apple: A personal perspective

#285

Post by chrischen » Fri, Dec 16, 2016, 4:41 PM UTC

sanderjd wrote: post #247

geoka9 wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest question: what would be the equivalent of "guy" in your opinion when referring to a female in a professional environment (assuming that referring to males as "guys" is acceptable)?

I don't think there is one. One of the results of society being imbalanced for a very long time is that language is also imbalanced. It can be frustrating.

"Gals"

Re: Harassment at Apple: A personal perspective

#286

Post by jalfresi » Fri, Dec 16, 2016, 4:41 PM UTC

geoka9 wrote: post #219

Jtsummers wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A note: Constantly referring to women as girls is a part of the problem. There are certainly women that I know and would use that term to refer to them, for various reason. Familiarity, primarily, as in: "Hey, what are the girls doing tonight?" as a question posed to a female friend about our common group of female friends. But you use girl not just for the specific person (Julie Horvath) but for all women ("If a gir…

Honest question: what would be the equivalent of "guy" in your opinion when referring to a female in a professional environment (assuming that referring to males as "guys" is acceptable)?

Dolls

As in Guys and Dolls. Isn't it a 50s american slang thing?

Re: Harassment at Apple: A personal perspective

#287

Post by scoreponok » Fri, Dec 16, 2016, 4:41 PM UTC

I was sympathetic to her plight up until the 'personal impact' part. It seems to me that the author is using hyperbole when describing her physical/emotional impact on herself and her family to gain some form of sympathy from her audience. With statements like this:

>This strife has shattered all of our lives like nothing else before.

Based on this statement it seems to me the author and her family have yet to face any real travesty. There are varying degrees of severity in harassment and to me this case seems mild to moderate and not in any way a cause for the health effects described. I also believe it also offers some insight into character and possible extreme sensitivity to perceived injustices/slights. I also agree with other posters here in regards to only getting one side of the story, much context is missing.

Re: Harassment at Apple: A personal perspective

#288

Post by pc86 » Fri, Dec 16, 2016, 4:41 PM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #248

tps5 wrote: post #148

I think commenters who are reacting negatively to this story are reacting to the vocabulary rather than the story. Obviously I'm not a witness, but I tend to believe that these events took place more or less as the author describes them. At the same time, words like "sexism" and phrases like "as a minority..." are a big turn-off to some readers, myself included. This isn't because I don't believe in racism/sexism/xen…

> Obviously I'm not a witness, but I tend to believe that these events took place more or less as the author describes them. Why, though? Because people don't lie, exaggerate, or have strange ideas of what others are doing to them?

It's called the benefit of the doubt. You're free to believe one person is telling the truth and one person is lying, or that both people are telling what they believe happened, or whatever, but making that decision before getting both/all sides of a story is not the best way to get the facts.

Just like someone shouldn't read this woman's story and say that everyone above her at Apple should be fired, you also shouldn't read it and say that she's obviously just too sensitive or lying.

Re: Harassment at Apple: A personal perspective

#289

Post by justaman » Fri, Dec 16, 2016, 4:42 PM UTC

throwaway-hn123 wrote: post #274

edblarney wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Complaining about identity politics is how white men practice identity politics. " Are you sure that I'm a guy? Or even white? Your comment is simply bigoted.

>Are you sure that I'm a guy? Or even white? Yes. Yes. Next question, boy?

An example of how NOT to use "boy" or "girl" -- (being a dick)

Its less about the actual word, more about the context.

Re: Harassment at Apple: A personal perspective

#290

Post by lmm » Fri, Dec 16, 2016, 4:42 PM UTC

coredog64 wrote: post #224

BEEdwards wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that this law makes the union pointless. Laws like that are a prime reason unions are dying. Why pay union dues when you get all the benefits for free? Oh sure, the union shrivels and dies and the benefits leave with it, but fuck it you saved $25 off a few paychecks.

When I worked at Boeing, membership in SPEEA was optional. They offered benefits to paying members, but the benefits I received as a "free rider" were pretty minimal.

The real benefits will be things like a decent contract with e.g. proper treatment of overtime, sensible safety policies and so on. Which you absolutely get to free-ride on.