Harassment at Apple: A personal perspective

Wowza, maybe they do have a problem. I'm not sure I agree with all of the complaints there but it does seem they have at least some genuine issues that should be addressed.

Just being completely honest, this reinforces my general opinion to be very cautious around females, avoiding it where possible is probably a wise idea.

Actually, it's gal. Point blank. Not used as often, because the diminutive term passes for an alternative among many.

While it's always an option to sue for payment of unpaid overtime after you left that will still leave a mark on your resume an people may be hesitant to hire. It's also lengthy and risky because it requires solid documentation. And, first of all it requires that you're aware that the clause is overreaching and thus null and void. I often see people not getting paid for time worked because they're unaware. I also fairly often hear about uncompensated non-compete clauses which are also illegal, but people are scared to go see a lawyer. A good union provides both: a check on the contracts in a company and legal advice and professional backing in court when needed.

> This is still entirely the fault of the one who mistakes ribbing for actual team building.

When two people agree that they're engaging in friendly banter with/against each other, and an unrelated third party freaks out with their own misinterpretation of the situation, is it still the people engaging in banter who are to blame? Because I've seen this.

And what about the person who cannot handle having their code reviewed - no matter how softly and kindly the reviewer attempts to approach the topic? Despite making it very clear that minor suggestions for further improvements aren't some kind of slanderous attack against one's personal character?

Look: We agree sometimes someone's just being a dick, even if they weren't intentionally malicious about it, and it's their fault and they need to change their behavior. But it does not follow that absolutely every bit of miscommunication is completely and utterly the fault of the person attempting to convey something. If I misremember the meaning of a word, that's on me. If I willfully twist and misinterpret someone's words, that's on me. If I mistakenly do so, when the other party has communicated quite clearly and in good will? That's still on me. Communication requires the effort of two parties, and completely absolving one of them from any roll in doing so successfully isn't reasonable or helpful.

If I have a habit of ascribing malice where there is none - in an ideal world, someone sits down and we have a conversation where they can successfully convey that, no, pointing out a typo in a doc comment isn't a personal attack on my character, we all make the same mistakes, we're just trying to help each other out and get more stuff done better as a team - they mean to offer me a hand up, rather than to put me down. I'd call this a long winded way of saying: "toughen up." What would you call it, instead? Or do you even agree with me that this conversation should happen? Surely we shouldn't just fire the person giving me a code review, because of my own hangups and hypersensitivities?

> Telling them to knock it off is NOT censoring.

Which is why I suggested it.

On the other hand, we see calls to disinvite people from conferences, ban their social media accounts, fire them, to 'dox' them and harass them off the internet entirely for perceived transgressions. These, perhaps, are attempts at censorship. This I suggest against.

> Because no one has ever faced retaliation for doing just this. No one, upon hearing this from a co-worker, has never ratcheted up the "friendly ribbing".

At which point, you've moved from assumptions of malice to evidence. Yes, there are assholes out there. It sucks. We should try to do something about it. "Doing something about it" should not be pretaliation based on thin assumptions, being an asshole before they can be an asshole.

Teasing is a social thing. And like other social things the reasons are not necessarily concrete and "rational". Why do you smile and say hello to a person you pass in the hall? You don't intend to start a conversion- there's no reason to say hello. There's no "reason" to be friendly at all.

If you look at the social and emotional things happening, maybe it starts to make some sense. Smiling says, "Hi, I recognize you and you are an acquaintance/friend."

Teasing is a way of interacting- of making bonds, of feeling people out. By teasing, you are finding out about someone: How much do they care about the subject of teasing? What kind of person are they? And you are saying, "I know you so I can playfully poke at things you care about." And maybe eventually, "I know you so well, I can poke at you in a sensitive area but not go too far. We can do that to each other because we trust each other's intent and we know how to poke in a way that doesn't go too far." Strangers don't have that kind of bond and trust.

Besides that, teasing is joking. It can be simply harmless and funny and lightens the mood or improve the morale of a group.

So, yes, there are reasons.