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

Silicon Valley Women, in Cultural Shift, Frankly Describe Sexual Harassment

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 882 posts

Re: Silicon Valley Women, in Cultural Shift, Frankly Describe Sexual Harassment

#261

Post by stale2002 »

robbrown451 wrote: post #220
svwc wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A witness statement is evidence. Evidence isn't only things you can touch. A photograph isn't any more evidence than a witness statement is. A photograph isn't inherently more credible than a witness statement. You should consider the credibility of each piece of evidence regardless of what type of evidence it is. A statement made by a trustworthy employee should be taken seriously, "he said she said" is not a valid…

Sure but if it is denied by the other employee, you've got directly contradicting evidence. That's what "he said she said" is. I suppose the right word is "hard evidence." And yes I would say a photograph is, in general, more credible than a witness statement. I say this as someone who just went through a long trial (representing myself, while the other side had an attorney), with a lot of "he said she said", and whe…

Recently the cases that have hit the news, have rarely been borderline grey areas.

If someone comes forward it is because they are being serially harassed, have documentation to back it up, and there are multiple other people who have also been victims.

He said she said situations will likely result in a warning or no action at all.

Re: Silicon Valley Women, in Cultural Shift, Frankly Describe Sexual Harassment

#262

Post by anarazel »

Apocryphon wrote: post #15

How is it that the old money industries of Wall Street and Hollywood, no vanguards of gender egalitarianism themselves, seem to have less flagrant sexual harassment issues? Do they keep them under wraps or are they just more mature by now?

> How is it that the old money industries of Wall Street and Hollywood, no vanguards of gender egalitarianism themselves, seem to have less flagrant sexual harassment issues? Do they keep them under wraps or are they just more mature by now?

Not quite Hollywood, but look e.g. to what's recently happening at Fox News for an industry where that's also pretty extreme...

Re: Silicon Valley Women, in Cultural Shift, Frankly Describe Sexual Harassment

#263

Post by fasquoika »

xor1 wrote: post #221
zzalpha wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think building a policy based on the possible existence of a vanishingly small group of bad actors is a great way to make excuses for avoiding solving real problems...

https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/prevalence/border... I don't consider 1.6% among the general population to be "vanishingly small". That's easily approaching and I think even exceeding 1/100 when you factor for women only, since the majority of BPD diagnoses are for women. This isn't really insignificant when you think about how many people you will run into during a typical career. This also doesn't accoun…

Why do you seem to be under the impression that BPD is a good proxy for whether someone will make false accusations of sexual harassment?

Re: Silicon Valley Women, in Cultural Shift, Frankly Describe Sexual Harassment

#264

Post by robbrown451 »

stale2002 wrote: post #261
robbrown451 wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure but if it is denied by the other employee, you've got directly contradicting evidence. That's what "he said she said" is. I suppose the right word is "hard evidence." And yes I would say a photograph is, in general, more credible than a witness statement. I say this as someone who just went through a long trial (representing myself, while the other side had an attorney), with a lot of "he said she said", and whe…

Recently the cases that have hit the news, have rarely been borderline grey areas. If someone comes forward it is because they are being serially harassed, have documentation to back it up, and there are multiple other people who have also been victims. He said she said situations will likely result in a warning or no action at all.

That's why I'd recommend people make recordings. The tough thing is, in California, it is illegal to record unless you have their permission, or if it is a felony in progress. (which it was in my case)

Re: Silicon Valley Women, in Cultural Shift, Frankly Describe Sexual Harassment

#265

Post by sokoloff »

ngneer wrote: post #103

These are horrible stories. Interesting to see if folks on HN have had the experience of being attracted to an interviewee/interviewer, or investee/investor, and how they dealt with it given the complexities involved.

Of course I have. I've also found waitresses or bartenders or other people attractive. If there wasn't a drive for sex programmed into us (as a species), we (as a species) probably would have been out-competed in evolution.

How you deal with it is by ignoring it when it would be inappropriate to act on it (or at most, treat as a pleasant-but-valueless part of your day).

Now (being married and holding very strict views on monogamy) it's perhaps even more clear/easier than when I was single, but even then it was clear that you don't hit on your waitress as an example. That easily extends to interviewees and subordinates at work or anywhere else where someone can't freely and without consequence say "Hey, maybe I'm flattered, but I'm definitely not interested."

(For full disclosure, I have dated colleagues before and know of and support intra-company romances where there is no supervisory relationship. You don't have to close your eyes and pretend you will never find anyone at work to be subjectively attractive. You just have to not ever be an asshole about it, and that's not that hard a goal.)

Re: Silicon Valley Women, in Cultural Shift, Frankly Describe Sexual Harassment

#266

Post by yawaramin »

theseatoms wrote: post #123
notjack wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then why does their behavior disproportionately affect women, who have less power to complain about their behavior? If this were entirely an aspect of their character or personality they'd be an asshole to everyone equally, not opportunistically take advantage of people who have less ability to stop them.

By your definition of "asshole", are openly bigoted people not assholes because they're not "an asshole to everyone equally"?

But that's not the definition that was given:

> These people are assholes because they know they can get away with it.

So yes, openly bigoted people are assholes. But if they knew their bigotry wouldn't fly, they would at least not be open about it and not be assholes to people.

Re: Silicon Valley Women, in Cultural Shift, Frankly Describe Sexual Harassment

#267

Post by xor1 »

fasquoika wrote: post #263
xor1 wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/prevalence/border... I don't consider 1.6% among the general population to be "vanishingly small". That's easily approaching and I think even exceeding 1/100 when you factor for women only, since the majority of BPD diagnoses are for women. This isn't really insignificant when you think about how many people you will run into during a typical career. This also doesn't accoun…

Why do you seem to be under the impression that BPD is a good proxy for whether someone will make false accusations of sexual harassment?

I don't understand your question. What do you mean by proxy?

Are you asking if I think that someone with BPD is more likely to make false accusations of sexual harassment than someone without it (or any of the other Cluster B disorders)?

Re: Silicon Valley Women, in Cultural Shift, Frankly Describe Sexual Harassment

#268

Post by kchoudhu »

api wrote: post #43
rl3 wrote: post #7

This entire article is a smorgasbord of cringe: > During the recruiting process, Mr. McClure, a founder of 500 Startups and an investor, sent her a Facebook message that read in part, “I was getting confused figuring out whether to hire you or hit on you.” One would think having the phrases "hire you" and "hit on you" in the same sentence when communicating with someone undergoing recruitment at your company would be…

I am white and male and the misogyny I've observed in tech has annoyed me . If it annoys me it must be intolerable to women. I believe every word of it and I could tell a few stories of things I've seen. I've seen a lot of other kinds of assholery too. Tech has an underbelly just like any other major industry. FWIW I've heard Hollywood and Wall St. are worse.

The one sexual harassment case I saw on Wall Street in the decade I worked there was dealt with viciously by HR, in favor of the victim.

My network informs me that similar efficiency exists across the Street. I'd encourage any women skeezed out by SV to apply for Wall Street jobs: more cash, less groping.

Re: Silicon Valley Women, in Cultural Shift, Frankly Describe Sexual Harassment

#269

Post by pharrlax »

taytus wrote: post #69
kartD wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heads are already rolling https://500.co/making-changes-at-500/ https://medium.com/@sacca/i-have-more-work-to-do-c775c5d56ca...

He turned off comments on his super creepy post.

He touched someone's face once like eight years ago "in a way that made her feel uncomfortable". A stupid, asshole, casually sexist move? Yup. Worthy of being raked over the coals despite bending over backwards to make amends in the years since? Uhhh... no, not really.

Don't get me wrong. The other stories are really, really bad. Insanely evil, even. But the idea that Sacca's extremely minor dick move almost a decade ago deserves to be lumped in with the monstrous stories of serial stalking and sexual battery is pretty ludicrous. Makes me think the writer just wanted to shoehorn in a TV star to inflate the piece's reach.

Re: Silicon Valley Women, in Cultural Shift, Frankly Describe Sexual Harassment

#270

Post by haikuginger »

stcredzero wrote: post #252
haikuginger wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Theybdon't know they can get away with it. They don't know that they are doing it. These people are rarely evil and predatory. They usually genuinely believe that the behavior they are exhibiting is desireable. At a certain point, one has to believe that another's actions are evil, even if that evil is unwitting. One mustn't actively choose to be "evil and predatory" to be so in fact.

At a certain point, one has to believe that another's actions are evil, even if that evil is unwitting. One mustn't actively choose to be "evil and predatory" to be so in fact. So something can become so horrible, that even a mistaken action should be defined as evil? Sorry, but that sounds wrong, and itself willfully vengeful. In that case, shouldn't we just do away with manslaughter and just say everyone who has ki…

You're making a false equivalence; often, the distinction between murder and manslaughter is the lack of an actual _intent to kill_, not simply the presence of a mistaken belief that the killing would be welcomed as "a really alpha move".

Even in cases where intent isn't there, other factors (for example, hitting and killing someone while driving drunk or too far over the speed limit) can make an accidental killing murder.

I don't think that you can make the argument that any of the men in question did not intend to make sexual advances on these women.

To horribly misuse Aaron Sorkin:

Sam: About a week ago I accidentally slept with a prostitute.

Toby: Really?

Sam: Yes.

Toby: You accidentally slept with a prostitute.

Sam: Call girl.

Toby: Accidentally.

Sam: Yes.

Toby: I don't understand. Did you trip over something?

Post reply on HN