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

861–870 of 882 posts

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

#861

Post by pluma »

xor1 wrote: post #733
pluma wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Donglegate wasn't about false accusations, though. It was about a woman publicly shaming two other attendees for what she considered inappropriate jokes in a public setting and then being caught in the blowback when other people were unhappy with how she handled the situation. Her accusations were factual, although there was discussion about whether they were valid. Also, the people who agree that her accusations wer…

I was responding to this too: >The people getting in trouble right now are not the borderline cases of someone saying an awkward comment here or there. >Also, the people who agree that her accusations were valid, are also likely the people who think that their behavior was indicative of them being serial harassers. Which is completely unreasonable. Do you remember what she complained about them saying? Dongles and fo…

I'm not saying that I'm one of those people. I'm just saying they're generally pretty consistent about these things and they exist.

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

#862

Post by YeGoblynQueenne »

curun1r wrote: post #834
YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #821

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> But because those instances exist and these men have likely witnessed them personally, even if they're rare, they create the possibility in the minds of these men Btw, this does not compute. Those instances are "rare" but those men have "likely" witnessed them? When something is rare, most are unlikely to witness it.

Welcome to the law of large numbers. Winning the lottery is a rare event--more than one in a million. A hard drive failure is a rare event--most drives can have trillions of successful reads and writes before they fail. Yet we've all seen the people holding up those oversized checks and who among us has never had a hard drive fail on us? These guys see hundreds of pitches. There's hundreds of VCs in the valley. Somet…

There's a bit of confusion here with "the law of large numbers". People do win the lottery, but because it's very rare, only very few people do so. Hard drives may fail if they remain in use over a very long time, but only a few drives will remain so.

Accordingly, the "law of large numbers" as you report it, means that either only a handful of those hundreds of VCs in SV have witnessed inappropriate pitch behaviour, or this inappropriate pitch behaviour is not rare.

Regardless of the exact quantities, it remains true that an event is either unlikely to be witnessed, or it is not rare. That an event will be witnessed even though it is rare doesn't mean that it will be witnessed often.

The law of large numbers doesn't say that rare things happen often, is what I'm saying. Because that would be an oxymoron, not a paradox (which that "law" is meant to illustrate).

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

#864

Post by stefek99 »

About sexism - I think it's a problem of culture in general - it is not socially acceptable for a young lad to approach attractive lady and say "I'd like to mate with you".

(it requires courage, game, pre-frame...)

All these VCs and senior managers - they are in position of power - too bad their sexuality is so oppressed - they should get some training how to tactfully deal with it, how to tactfully approach potential partners and maybe introduce "get out of jail free card":

1) I know I'm in position of power

2) You know you are attractive

3) We both know it is inappropriate

4) But hey look, I like you, we could create a great team

5) Because I'm biased I won't be participating in the recruitment process

6) Your recruitment will be purely based on merit

7) If you want to date with me, that's great...

8) ...if not - I'll make sure my attitude won't affect you

9) And BTW I'm in a dating season now, so if you say "no" it's not big deal at all.

That's 9 bullet points, you can add 10th just because:

10) I respect you, if you feel offended for any reason that's OK too (it's OK to be not OK). I act with the highest degree of honesty, transparency and integrity. If you decide to report to TechCrunch remember to get my name right.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Succ%C3%A8s_de_scandale - "there is no such thing as bad publicity"

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

#865

Post by JoeAltmaier »

stefek99 wrote: post #864

About sexism - I think it's a problem of culture in general - it is not socially acceptable for a young lad to approach attractive lady and say "I'd like to mate with you". (it requires courage, game, pre-frame...) All these VCs and senior managers - they are in position of power - too bad their sexuality is so oppressed - they should get some training how to tactfully deal with it, how to tactfully approach potentia…

Too bad several of those things are impossible - "my attitude won't affect you" - "I won't be participating in the recruitment process" - "its not a big deal". Because emotion is involved, there will be fallout from a 'no' (or even a 'yes'). And because of #1, they can't just not participate. Somebody will ask their opinion, or even take their silence as an opinion.

There's a very good reason people in a position of power are strictly not to 'date' folks that work for them, or apply to work for them.

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

#866

Post by stcredzero »

abalone wrote: post #854
stcredzero wrote: post #844

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is like arguing "I'm just saying there should be equal rights for white people" on a post about white-on-black harassment because MLK Jr had "much to say about equality." No, it's more like mentioning how people should be judged on the contents of their character, not the color of their skin. It's more like citing the importance of understanding the ideological basis of activism in the protection of individual r…

You've misrepresented the dismantling of sexism and racism as "tilting the playing field 'the other way'", a fabricated quote. You've also utterly missed the point on MLK Jr. Using his words to suggest that racial oppression goes both ways on anything near the same level is a transparent attempt to deny the existence of white privilege. Popping up on threads about the oppression of women with non sequiturs about the…

You've misrepresented the dismantling of sexism and racism as "tilting the playing field 'the other way'", a fabricated quote.

That's not a quote. That's putting three words in quotes. It's not really "the other way." It's really the same kind of injustice, hence "the other way" in quotes. What we have here is a fabricated charge.

MLK Jr. Using his words to suggest that racial oppression goes both ways on anything near the same level

Sorry, but where do I say that? I never said anything about the magnitude of oppression, and my argument doesn't require it. Please provide a quote, or you are putting words into someone's mouth? (Hint: you are putting words in someone's mouth!) Racial oppression doesn't have to go both ways at the same level to make artificial unfairness problematic.

Here's another hint: If you constantly have to willfully distort the other party's words to support your side of the argument, you might be in the wrong. On the other hand, my argument is made by your words and precisely the point you are trying to make.

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

#867

Post by stcredzero »

photik wrote: post #536
abalone wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

Are you suggesting that bias should exists against Y chromosomes?

Many 2nd wave feminists are against such a bias. However, there are 3rd wave feminists who openly advocate this, even to the point of openly advocating the abrogation of innocent until proven guilty -- which is possible through the proceedings of non-judicial organizations (like school disciplinary systems) and by district attorneys in local jurisdictions in the US. Innocent until proven guilty isn't directly enshrined in the US constitution. It's inferred from some other parts of the constitution.

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

#868

Post by greglindahl »

qb45 wrote: post #858
greglindahl wrote: post #848

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, for example, let's say you're an activist and you use "SJW" with the general public. Is that an example of overestimating familiarity with your jargon?

Yes :) I now feel compelled to explain myself. My use of it was only in a secondary remark, non important for the main point of my post. And I think somebody versed in the nuances of sex work advocacy may have heard of this concept too. If not, well, not much loss. Interesting that you caught SJW and missed virtue signaling. This is more obscure I think and, admittedly, it was a part of my main point. So, from google…

I didn't miss "virtue signaling". I was being concise.

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

#869

Post by bogomipz »

qb45 wrote: post #842
bogomipz wrote: post #841

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The term has actually been promoted by sex workers specifically to distinguish it from the cooered version of sexual employment.

Yeah, weaponized linguistics. The problem is, as any weapon, it can backfire. General public doesn't give a rat's ass about jargon churned out by all those activists. And I'm absolutely not singling out sex workers here, SJWs tend to be the biggest offenders now. If public familiarity with some subtle, nonobvious definition of "sex worker" is an important point of their strategy, they are probably doing it wrong. If…

Its really amusing you have chosen to make up your own ridiculous term - "weaponized linguistics" yet you have a hard time accepting the rather mundane and intuitive term "sex worker." Even more laughable than your own made up term is your use of an esoteric acronym(and no, I don't know or even care what it means.)

Also I was not promoting the term or any agenda I was simply explaining the nature of the term to the OP because they asked. Maybe you should go back and read the context.

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

#870

Post by solidsnack9000 »

adrienne wrote: post #857
solidsnack9000 wrote: post #812

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can't really be treated as "evidence". Maybe it's "probable cause" for looking into something -- but that's different in a couple of important ways: * One needs real and credible evidence to carry through with depriving another person of any liberty or property. * Probable cause never trumps or adds to evidence -- if you investigate and find nothing, that's it. One of the most confusing and unfortunate memes of th…

In a court of law, personal testimony is evidence . It isn't necessarily compelling by itself, but the idea that it isn't evidence because you don't like it is not actually how the legal system (or culture) works.

A "constant murmur" isn't testimony. Testimony includes specifics like the people involved, the time and place of the incident, and what precisely happened. A murmur doesn't need any of that. Not the least, because no one goes on the record for a murmur.

    ...the idea that it isn't evidence because you don't
    like it is not actually how the legal system (or
    culture) works.
What does this have to do with whether I like it or not?
Post reply on HN