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

McClure steps back at 500Startups after internal sexual misconduct investigation

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 201 posts

Re: McClure steps back at 500Startups after internal sexual misconduct investigation

#51

Post by titanomachy »

thanksgiving wrote: post #45
neom wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uhmmm..... "In 2014, Sarah Kunst, 31, an entrepreneur, said she discussed a potential job at 500 Startups, a start-up incubator in San Francisco. 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.”"

Is this sexual harassment? It sounds like calling a party where the food is bad "literally Auschwitz". Reverse the genders. Is this still sexual harassment? If not, then this isn't sexual harassment either. I still think this is in poor taste. The attempts to defend it is worse. However, let us commit to refraining from calling it sexual harassment until it is sexual harassment. Calling this sexual harassment is like…

It's sexual harassment. As a male, I would be incredibly uncomfortable if I were in this situation with the genders reversed. Picture: you're interviewing for a job you're wildly enthusiastic about. The hiring decision lies with an older woman who you are not at all attracted to, and she fires off that line at you. Who would feel comfortable in that situation?

Re: McClure steps back at 500Startups after internal sexual misconduct investigation

#52

Post by kinkrtyavimoodh »

downandout wrote: post #47
devinmontgomery wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the position of power, regardless of intent, that's the problem. It's lonely to be the boss. Don't hit on women you meet in that capacity.

Melinda Gates worked at Microsoft when she met Bill. Should he be publicly tarred and feathered like this? By your logic, he abused his authority and he should not have dated or married his wife because he held power over her - he could have immediately fired her if she had rejected his advances. So where do we draw the line, and why isn't Bill on the firing line in the same way these others are?

Well, one simple heuristic is to wait for the party NOT in power to initiate the relationship.

If this entrepreneur who got hit on had propositioned McClure instead, I don't think people would have minded that.

Re: McClure steps back at 500Startups after internal sexual misconduct investigation

#54

Post by yorwba »

downandout wrote: post #39
rmason wrote: post #2

The one person that I would have never suspected is Dave McClure. Here's a guy who didn't fit the investment world and he was smart and hustled his way in. He started 500 startups with a female co-founder and said he chose her because she was smarter. He saw an opening for himself and talked about playing Moneyball for venture capital. He spoke often in interviews about chasing investments among founders who didn't f…

I'm not sure what McClure actually did, but in the current hypersensitive, politically correct environment, simply asking a woman out that you happen to meet while both of you are involved with a startup seems to be considered "harassment" worthy of destroying careers and businesses. Some of the stories that have surfaced recently clearly step over the line, but many others are vague and lack any clear intent on the…

The problem is that men who happen to be attracted to women that they work with/around sometimes end up using positions of power to intimidate women into doing things they don't want to do, simply by deciding to politely ask them out.

Yes, intent matters, and we should take it into account when morally judging someone; but if you are in the position to severely damage someone's career, you have to realize that any simple request can put them under a lot of pressure. Even if they don't want to comply, they might feel obligated to do so, unless you somehow manage to make very clear that there won't be any repercussions whichever way they decide.

If you are in a position of power and start feeling attracted to a report, you should keep it to yourself. If you really can't bear to stay silent, you should quit your job, or at least move to a different department. When they can no longer feel threatened by you, then you can try to make your advance. Everything else might devolve into harassment without any intent to do so.

Re: McClure steps back at 500Startups after internal sexual misconduct investigation

#55

Post by ajmurmann »

downandout wrote: post #47
devinmontgomery wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the position of power, regardless of intent, that's the problem. It's lonely to be the boss. Don't hit on women you meet in that capacity.

Melinda Gates worked at Microsoft when she met Bill. Should he be publicly tarred and feathered like this? By your logic, he abused his authority and he should not have dated or married his wife because he held power over her - he could have immediately fired her if she had rejected his advances. So where do we draw the line, and why isn't Bill on the firing line in the same way these others are?

I for one don't know any details about what happened between Bill and Melinda. Do you? Maybe they slowly became friends over time and just got closer and closer after they adjust had developed a trusting, non-sexual relationship. If we however would learn that Bill made some remark about feeling sexualy attracted to her the first day they meet then that's a different story and we should be appalled. But we don't know. It certainly is a delicate problem.

There is a reason Captain Picard never plays poker with the rest of the crew.

Re: McClure steps back at 500Startups after internal sexual misconduct investigation

#56

Post by devinmontgomery »

downandout wrote: post #47
devinmontgomery wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the position of power, regardless of intent, that's the problem. It's lonely to be the boss. Don't hit on women you meet in that capacity.

Melinda Gates worked at Microsoft when she met Bill. Should he be publicly tarred and feathered like this? By your logic, he abused his authority and he should not have dated or married his wife because he held power over her - he could have immediately fired her if she had rejected his advances. So where do we draw the line, and why isn't Bill on the firing line in the same way these others are?

That was still a risky move. The key (literally, one of the elements of sexual harassment) is whether the advance is welcome. I'm guessing that Bill used a lower-risk way of finding that out than sending a text message after a job interview.

Re: McClure steps back at 500Startups after internal sexual misconduct investigation

#57

Post by mc32 »

titanomachy wrote: post #51
thanksgiving wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this sexual harassment? It sounds like calling a party where the food is bad "literally Auschwitz". Reverse the genders. Is this still sexual harassment? If not, then this isn't sexual harassment either. I still think this is in poor taste. The attempts to defend it is worse. However, let us commit to refraining from calling it sexual harassment until it is sexual harassment. Calling this sexual harassment is like…

It's sexual harassment. As a male, I would be incredibly uncomfortable if I were in this situation with the genders reversed. Picture: you're interviewing for a job you're wildly enthusiastic about. The hiring decision lies with an older woman who you are not at all attracted to, and she fires off that line at you. Who would feel comfortable in that situation?

A more apt analogy would be if you were a young hetero male not attracted to older females (cougars, in parlance) and she were a loan officer at the bank you want to procure a loan from and she hit on you like that.

It's something you'd likely report to the bank management but it's not workplace sexual harassment (she's not harassing another lower echelon staffer).

Still uncouth and uncalled for and any respectable organization would take corrective action.

[edit] Seeing that that was during staff recruiting process, I can't even imagine how someone would even entertain such a puerile idea in their heads, no less mention it in communication.

There are some people (maybe many) who when they have some power seemingly lose all sense of decency. It's discouraging and boggling.

Re: McClure steps back at 500Startups after internal sexual misconduct investigation

#58

Post by neom »

mc32 wrote: post #57
titanomachy wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's sexual harassment. As a male, I would be incredibly uncomfortable if I were in this situation with the genders reversed. Picture: you're interviewing for a job you're wildly enthusiastic about. The hiring decision lies with an older woman who you are not at all attracted to, and she fires off that line at you. Who would feel comfortable in that situation?

A more apt analogy would be if you were a young hetero male not attracted to older females (cougars, in parlance) and she were a loan officer at the bank you want to procure a loan from and she hit on you like that. It's something you'd likely report to the bank management but it's not workplace sexual harassment (she's not harassing another lower echelon staffer). Still uncouth and uncalled for and any respectable o…

She was being interviewed for a job, not an investment.

Re: McClure steps back at 500Startups after internal sexual misconduct investigation

#59

Post by TheCondor »

neom wrote: post #36
TheCondor wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Women reported it, right? The Times article describes it. Women seeking jobs were propositioned and then denied jobs after rebuffing, sexist comments were made while they were fund raising and suggestive texts were sent. It doesn't seem like rape level stuff but it's still bad and unacceptable. It's never a good idea to approach someone romantically if there is some kind of superior/subordinate relationship. it just…

Why in gods name is RAPE the bar we hold ourselves to regarding how we treat others????? I'm actually sick to my stomach reading HN this evening.

Just to be real clear, I don't think that's the bar. I think it's sick what happened. One of the parents was asking about the details and asked if it was rape or whatever and I tried to answer.

I'm not in any way, shape, or form condoning or down playing what has happened here

Post reply on HN