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

Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

cherylyeoh.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 416 posts

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#311

Post by guildwriter »

michaelmrose wrote: post #294

The obvious answer to avoiding workplace issues seems to be never mix business with pleasure. If the person who you proposition only has to consider the singular question of whether or not they are interested in you their decision will be natural and unforced. Anyone in a workplace has to constantly consider how this interaction will help or harm future prospects and even if no power differential exists may feel pres…

Due to the diversity of human preference and desire, I don't think that's a realistic course of action for a broad swath of humanity. People are going to be attracted to each other irregardless of principle. In fact, you could even argue that by pushing this sort of relationship towards the forbidden or taboo, it highlights the appeal. When people are going to spend hours and hours of time together, there's no helping the fact that feelings are going to happen eventually.

It's also not hard to conceive of a person who wants a power relationship with a strong, motivated, and ambitious person. That being said, where are you likely to meet someone who is grinding out the hours to reach success?

None of this is to say your proposed approach is invalid. It's an approach that works for some people. I just don't think it's realistic to expect that it's going to be widely followed. As this article notes:

"Workplace romances are commonplace. Statistics indicate that anywhere from 40-47% of employees surveyed had been involved in a workplace romance. Beyond the 47% involved, about 20% indicated they were receptive to an office romance."

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/adventures-in-dating/20...

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#312

Post by grey-area »

enriquto wrote: post #310
rectang wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Asking to sleep with someone and trying to kiss her, and then leaving when being told "no", is not sexual assault; That's not an accurate summary of her account. He'd been rebuffed repeatedly and clearly before forcing her into a corner and trying to kiss her. While the exact legal definition of "sexual assault" varies depending on the jurisdiction, if it came down to a court decision I don't like his chances.

> ... forcing her into a corner ... I did nor interpret her text that way. To be fair, the whole text is very confusing for an article that purports to be "shedding light". The sentence that talks about the corner is this: "On the way out, he pushed himself onto me to the point where I was backed into a corner, made contact to kiss me, and said (...)" Now, this is extremely vague and can mean anything. He was already…

Now, this is extremely vague and can mean anything. He was already going out, but she was in the way, and the exit door was on a corner?...This can be construed as assault or as a normal goodbye when leaving the house of somebody.

A normal goodbye is not forced on someone who has repeatedly said no to advances. The account was really quite clear, far clearer than McClure's apology. And yet you feel the need to make up details (where the door was etc) in order to try to excuse his behaviour, and call her a liar. Why is that? Why do you think she would lie in this situation and he would not?

Your response says more about you than her. Also, your incredulous response is the perfect illustration of why this woman didn't go the police and go public with her story years ago - she was in a vulnerable position, and would be slandered and called a liar if she made the claims public, and likely disbelieved by most of the men she worked with and then calumnied in court by well paid lawyers. The woman has zero incentive to lie, and frankly very little incentive in our current society to come forward, it is highly likely she is telling the truth in this situation simply because the balance of power likes with McClure and if she lied her career would be over (it will be harder even if she tells the truth).

The reaction on HN to these stories has been damning (for the global tech industry) - it's clear tech has a long way to go before even confronting these issues truthfully and without prejudice, let alone actually dealing with them.

The first step to dealing with this problem properly is not to write long screeds about how this woman might well be lying (the implication being this is a common occurrence, not an outlier), but to accept her story at face value - leave it to the police or those investigating the incident to verify it.

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#313

Post by pjc50 »

ToadLegs wrote: post #191
thaumaturgy wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try to recall the character of someone who doesn't get accused of assaulting or abusing other people, or making them feel uncomfortable -- someone who is respected by people of all creeds and demographics -- and then behave like that. It's not that hard, really. Just be a grown-up. Put away the childish fantasies of finding self-worth by bedding lots of women and flaunting wealth and power, and treat everyone you int…

It's interesting that you construct a whole evil persona for someone, just for asking a few logical questions on the web. I don't come at this as the pushy sexual conqueror you seem to assume. My perspective is from social anxiety. I already am very hesitant to approach women, because everything seems forbidden and inappropriate. What I hear OP saying is that there is nothing I can do to be sure some woman doesn't fi…

Role models are probably a bad idea; often we find out later that they've been going about it all wrong as well.

> nothing I can do to be sure some woman doesn't find my sexual or romantic propositions inappropriate

You can never be sure of anything in human relations. But I think the shorthand approach is to see it from her point of view. Basically, does she have a safe exit? In the situation described there are two ways in which she does not. Firstly, there's a business context - she's worried that if she says "no" firmly enough, it will jeopardize her contract; secondly, there's a physical obstructing of her and an initial refusing to leave her flat (he is eventually persuaded to).

Remember also the flip side of this: as a woman, there is nothing she can to do be sure that someone she does actually accept a proposition from isn't a rapist. And if she does, there are people who will blame her for it.

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#314

Post by grey-area »

orthoganol wrote: post #171

I like it - the all or nothing approach is terrifying as a guy, and defining levels of inappropriateness with exact descriptions of actions is very helpful for those who are freaked out they are going to unwittingly harass someone they are attracted to even just acting naturally. I'm hopefully not belittling the recipients of undesired advances of VC assholes like McClure, but I hope it's also not wrong to say these…

If you find this sort of example terrifying, imagine for a moment what it'd be like to be on the other end of aggressive advances from a guy who could make or break your career and wanted you to submit to sex.

Hopefully that puts your terror as a guy in perspective.

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#315

Post by enriquto »

grey-area wrote: post #312
enriquto wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... forcing her into a corner ... I did nor interpret her text that way. To be fair, the whole text is very confusing for an article that purports to be "shedding light". The sentence that talks about the corner is this: "On the way out, he pushed himself onto me to the point where I was backed into a corner, made contact to kiss me, and said (...)" Now, this is extremely vague and can mean anything. He was already…

Now, this is extremely vague and can mean anything. He was already going out, but she was in the way, and the exit door was on a corner?...This can be construed as assault or as a normal goodbye when leaving the house of somebody. A normal goodbye is not forced on someone who has repeatedly said no to advances. The account was really quite clear, far clearer than McClure's apology. And yet you feel the need to make u…

I do not believe the author is lying. I honestly do not understand the relevance problem that she is reporting. She cried after an awkward interaction? This happened to me all the time when I was younger, no big deal really.

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#316

Post by grey-area »

ryandrake wrote: post #181
Zikes wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please review my recent comments on this post, which have been flag killed. If you believe they were fairly downvoted and deserve to be flagged, then please delete or permanently ban my account.

Out of all the topics that come up from time to time on HN, this one is pretty much unique in that there is strictly one point of view acceptable to put forward, and every other one is guaranteed to get you instantly flag-killed under the guise of "wanting high quality discussion". If I valued my Internet Points, I'd just steer clear of these altogether and go click through to a React vs. Angular discussion instead.

I'll second dang in saying this is not true (thanks dang for the moderation by the way, it really does help, even if no-one agrees with every decision). Here's an example of a viewpoint you probably think of as part of the orthodoxy being voted down and flagged:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14677258

There definitely is not only one viewpoint allowed on these threads, with others flagged or voted down.

The threads attract more flagging and up/down voting wars than usual, but the votes are not all one way, and frankly if anything I think the comments on HN on these threads are pretty male dominated and hostile to the women concerned, plenty of those comments are allowed to stand.

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#317

Post by sumedh »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #108
ithinkinstereo wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Enough to keep on doing it year after year after year.

Which is the part that puzzles me. Successful guy, plenty of money. Get a high priced call girl, go on a sex site and get a woman who wants what you want. I mean I used to be in a band and it was easy to have a woman in nearly every city you could call when you feel lonely. If he was after something deeper, hire a dating consultant and find something worthwhile. It just amazes me that people who have both the means a…

> It just amazes me that people who have both the means and ability to get what they want do foolish stuff like he's doing.

"when you’re a star, they let you do it" - President Trump

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#318

Post by sumedh »

afeezaziz wrote: post #134
jacquesm wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good luck as a foreigner in Malaysia approaching the local police to file a complaint for assault based on a forced kiss against another foreigner who happens to be a millionaire. But that doesn't make it right. Note that it is extremely hard to get these cases to go anywhere in the West where you know the law and where the lines tend to be drawn rather sharper than in Asia (unless there is drugs involved).

I do not believe that Malaysian police take a laidback attitude to sexual assault reports sd you have implied here. Even cases of a woman being sexually assaulted by another woman is also taken seriously in Malaysia. I think you need to stop having preconceived ideas about South East Asian countries. They might look similar but they are not.

> I think you need to stop having preconceived ideas about South East Asian countries.

I am not familiar with Malaysia but since you clubbed all South East Asian countries, let me share an anecdote.

I personally know someone who was raped in Indonesia and when she reported it to the Police, they literally laughed at her and said you were drinking you deserve it.

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#319

Post by raleighm »

tptacek wrote: post #114
harryh wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a matter of law you are incorrect (at least in the United States). "Sexual assault is any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without the explicit consent of the recipient. Falling under the definition of sexual assault are sexual activities as forced sexual intercourse, forcible sodomy, child molestation, incest, fondling , and attempted rape." https://www.justice.gov/ovw/sexual-assault

That's what the DOJ says. But the standards in the individual states, where these cases are certain to be prosecuted if at all, vary wildly . In some, the assault has to involve an intimate body part. In some, the contact has to be (ugh) "penetrative". In some, any form of coerced touching done for sexual arousal will qualify.

Also interpretations of "coerced," "unwanted," "consent," etc vary, so even when standards appear similar their applied meanings may differ.

Just to state the obvious though, behavior that is legal can be nonetheless morally deplorable. Not saying that's inconsistent what with anyone in this thread is saying (I can't see what crispytx wrote). But some HN comments over the past few days seem to view the putative wrongs in exclusively legal terms, as if legality is dispositive of morality.

Post reply on HN