Silicon Valley Women, in Cultural Shift, Frankly Describe Sexual Harassment • Hacker News Board

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

#531

Post by rargulati » Sat, Jul 01, 2017, 8:59 AM UTC

Here we are, a moment where history changes, but human nature doesn't.

It is true: these women are brave and correct in action. The men failed in their professional responsibilities. Silicon Valley has the advantage of being the keeper of a market where the individuals in the labor pool have greater rights than their counterparts in Hollywood and Wall Street (where similar ongoings are typically kept hush-hush).

Yet what will be the outcome? Will the men with money now be afraid to take a professional meeting with a woman for fear of their own desires OR for fear that something negative will come of it? If the risk of a meeting may now include the risk of a lawsuit / losing your position and reputation, the calculus doesn't work out.

This could lead to a strange dystopian outcome: segregated funnels. Women VCs / Male VCs - some overlap may occur, but most end up meeting with their own gender.

Or not. Just a thought experiment on incentives and outcomes. Most likely we'll go back to regularly scheduled programming in a few months time. Some folks get kicked out, and a new batch will be there to replace 'em.

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

#532

Post by wruza » Sat, Jul 01, 2017, 8:59 AM UTC

likelynew wrote: post #445

sokoloff wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. In taking a new role several years ago, I had selected a woman to be part of my new leadership team. I was counseled by a peer (of sorts) to never take a closed-door 1:1 meeting with her; that it was simply too risky. How the hell am I supposed to run a department without ever having a closed-door 1:1 meeting with 1/4 of my leadership team? I ignored the warning and things of course played out just fine, but it…

I also think the same way. In my experience, most single guys can be divided into two categories, ones who have predatory attitudes for girls or the ones who has fear talking to females. Both are actually bad for the girls.

Your experience seems to be unique, because there are lots of single guys who don't have both. As if you stated that being single is a deviance at least.

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

#533

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jul 01, 2017, 9:01 AM UTC

ronilan wrote: post #95

dkarl wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think cringe is the wrong word. We cringe when we watch The Office and see people make social mistakes without meaning to. These are not unwitting social mistakes. This is people being assholes because they know they can get away with it. Furthermore, not having met any of these people but speculating based on my experience, I would guess that their motivations go beyond just looking for sex and knowing that one ti…

> This is people being assholes because they know they can get away with it. Nope. These people are being assholes because they ARE assholes. Never attribute to rational decision making what can be attributed to rotten character.

[deleted]

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

#534

Post by thinkfurther » Sat, Jul 01, 2017, 9:01 AM UTC

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #168

dkarl wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think cringe is the wrong word. We cringe when we watch The Office and see people make social mistakes without meaning to. These are not unwitting social mistakes. This is people being assholes because they know they can get away with it. Furthermore, not having met any of these people but speculating based on my experience, I would guess that their motivations go beyond just looking for sex and knowing that one ti…

I know many people like that, and no, they don't derive an enjoyable power trip out of being rejected at all. 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. They think that this is how the game is played, and these things are a form of peacocking. They th…

> They don't understand boundaries, and they don't understand that women have to deal with that shit from other guys who also think that, everywhere they go.

At this level of lack of empathy and thought, I see no functional difference between malice and inability.

> There are no doubt some actual predators out there, but they need to be dealt with very differently than the dumbasses.

How so? Both need boundaries first and foremost. When they don't respect boundaries voluntarily, those need to be enforced, always preferably by the persons whose boundaries they are violating and every witness to it.

Beyond that there are the differences. With a dumbass, they may learn not to sting, with someone who got turned into a scorpion, you might have to always wear a glove when feeding them, forever. Which is okay, but it's not okay to leave out the glove because for some of those you're handling without gloves, they might stop stinging at some point.

Though I agree in that you should not label people as dumbass or scorpion before hand. Enforce boundaries, explain your reasoning and emotions firmly and repeatedly. As if to your little dumbass brother, theoretically a peer you love lots, but right now someone you put in their place because you love them and they just won't stop kicking dogs or hurting other kids or drinking bleach. This has to be true, this cannot be faked, you have to muster the love too, not just the anger; and even only some will be able to notice and believe that. It will trickle into some, completely wash over others -- but you can only find that out by doing it. This also implies giving everyone the chance(s).

But don't go by their words. Don't trust user input, treat all of it like potential exploits. Do what you have to do anyway, and in this case you can go "great, then you won't mind these changes, if you had this Come To Jesus moment. If that was just a bluff, you'll shit bricks, enjoy". Cooperation is very desirable and should always be welcome, but it is not required.

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

#535

Post by mirimir » Sat, Jul 01, 2017, 9:01 AM UTC

Yes, this is it, I think. I knew this guy, many years ago, who bragged about walking up to random women, and asking if they'd like to have sex. He said that he got slapped a lot, but also had lots of sex. I think that he was just BSing, but who knows?

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

#536

Post by photik » Sat, Jul 01, 2017, 9:03 AM UTC

abalone wrote: post #488

stcredzero wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh. Who would've thought that allowing wealthy frat bro types to run amok, wield power over others, and construct cults of personality would engender a culture of sexism and abuse?* Power is a dangerous thing. This is why we must also be careful of the power in evidence-free accusations and abrogation of "innocent until guilty." Not saying that is necessarily happening here. However, such urging to "listen and belie…

> we must also be careful of the power in evidence-free accusations and abrogation of "innocent until guilty." Not saying that is necessarily happening here. But you are strongly implying it. In a case where many of the men admitted their guilt, nonetheless. Your comment is just "men's rights" activist talking points.

That's fairly dismissive. He was asserting an unbiased approach at accusation. How is that a "men's rights" activist talking point? Are you suggesting that bias should exists against Y chromosomes?

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

#537

Post by manfredo » Sat, Jul 01, 2017, 9:03 AM UTC

watwut wrote: post #500

manfredo wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Communications that are subtle and ambiguous are highly likely to be misinterpreted, and it is not reasonable to assume that the recipient reached the intended conclusion. Depending on what the above poster meant by escalating to "This situation is making me uncomfortable" I may or may not agree with the above commenter's statement that the person being approached acted irrationally. If the person being approached fo…

I assumed literal "you are making me uncomfortable" - I think it is best to go with what parent wrote. The "you're harassing me with repeated advances after a rejection" does not sound how real people talk. I also think that saying whatever gets the person away is rational - through it might be rude in context. I mean, you assume that saying something insulting or exaggerated is irrational, but that is not how we jud…

I really doubt you truly mean "whatever gets the person away is rational". Is it okay for me to call anyone who asks me out harassers in order to discourage subsequent approaches? There's a vast difference between a firm rejection and accusing a co-worker of a fire-able offense - potentially even a crime. If somebody is insulted by the former then the have their only their own insecurity to blame. On the other hand, even if no complaint to HR is made the latter statement is going to make people stress over the possibility of losing their job, potentially even facing legal repercussions.

> I think that the expectation that women should be the nice one is what creates a lot of problems. It is teaching girls ineffective communication (which leaves them thinking only two options are HR or leave). People on the spectrum honestly don't get nice, people who test boundaries don't see nice as boundary and jerks find nice funny.

This is essentially what I'm trying to say. The hesitation to unambiguously accept or reject advances and instead expect people to communicate indirectly by "reading the signs" is an inherently broken situation because it's inevitable that those ambiguous signs will be misinterpreted at some point.

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

#538

Post by watwut » Sat, Jul 01, 2017, 9:04 AM UTC

sbergot wrote: post #480

watwut wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. Are you trying thay rape culture is a thing and dudes really need special courses on how to not be harassers? That does not describe or culture or majority of dudes in any way. Our culture is full of signals that harassment is wrong. It is also quite unlikely that people who climb the ladder and successfully play "impress investors and people around" social skills game are so clueless magically when they are al…

I have witnessed at least 3 people that were in a manager position and had unacceptable behavior. What lawnchair_larry described matches almost perfectly my perception of them. One of them would casually explain in conversations the software he had written to crawl dating website. We was very open with things such as the mirror above his bed, sharing pictures of it. Before leaving the company at last, he had received…

"Before leaving the company at last, he had received multiple sanctions including an interdiction to get too close to some women who had worked with him."

That sounds quite far away. He did not get info after first two and still honestly does not understand his behavior is not welcome? I mean, if you get the note from HR that you are not allowed to approach person x anymore, then maybe the seducing strategy does not work? Then again, people are not all that rational in general.

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

#539

Post by bt4u2 » Sat, Jul 01, 2017, 9:12 AM UTC

hanspeter wrote: post #525

bt4u2 wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are comments like this allowed? Putting fingers in your ears and scream "no!!!" over and over is not very useful or constructive

Some statements are so fundamentally wrong, this is really the only way to respond.

Nope nope nope

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

#540

Post by watwut » Sat, Jul 01, 2017, 9:12 AM UTC

manfredo wrote: post #537

watwut wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assumed literal "you are making me uncomfortable" - I think it is best to go with what parent wrote. The "you're harassing me with repeated advances after a rejection" does not sound how real people talk. I also think that saying whatever gets the person away is rational - through it might be rude in context. I mean, you assume that saying something insulting or exaggerated is irrational, but that is not how we jud…

I really doubt you truly mean "whatever gets the person away is rational". Is it okay for me to call anyone who asks me out harassers in order to discourage subsequent approaches? There's a vast difference between a firm rejection and accusing a co-worker of a fire-able offense - potentially even a crime. If somebody is insulted by the former then the have their only their own insecurity to blame. On the other hand,…

> Is it okay for me to call anyone who asks me out harassers in order to discourage subsequent approaches?

The word harassment does not even appear in parent comment. Neither is HR. You added it to shift the topic which is an open and easy to see lie. "You are making me uncomfortable" and "fire him hr please" are not nearly the same.

For that matter, rational is different category then "fair". Unfair or even unethical dudes don't get to be called "irrational" (unless someone defend their harassment by calling them dumbass).

> This is essentially what I'm trying to say.

In this story she unambiguously informed him that he is making her uncomfortable. That is not even as open rejection as can be, but also feedback on what the reason for not continuing conversation is. You are extrapolating her rejection to entirely different things as words says. That is expecting her to walk the fine line, guess in advance how you re-interpret words and come up with answer perfectly tailored to your personality.

She tried nice as overwhelming majority of dudes would understand correctly, did not worked, she started to be direct. But she apparently should not be too direct.