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

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

#871

Post by solidsnack9000 » Mon, Jul 03, 2017, 8:56 PM UTC

meredydd wrote: post #59

austenallred wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While there's something to your comment, and I fully recognize I was in the wrong here, I would still have a really hard time believing in a constant murmur of bad behavior. Give credence enough to investigate and consider much more fully that I would have previously, absolutely, but I draw the line before "believe." Maybe that's just semantics.

Yep. What I'm saying we should learn from this, and Uber, and all the rest is that we should treat "a constant murmur" as much stronger evidence than we currently do. (Not necessarily a slam dunk - but, in Bayesian terms, it should shift your priors much more now than it would have before these stories came out.) Edit: Although really, what stronger evidence will you ever get? I suppose you could get a personal accou…

Regarding the edit:

It certainly depends on your position relative to the person; but many people who are in a position to do something are also in a position to investigate -- they can take correspondingly stronger action, on the basis of an investigation.

For example, Teo had plenty of resources available to him, if he wanted to follow up on the rumors he had heard. He just chose not to do so.

The same is true at Uber: within the company there was a wealth of information available, and it was certainly feasible for Kalanick and many other people to look into the available complaints, emails, performance reviews and transcripts to determine if something was amiss.

It is true that people outside of Uber, and people not as well connected as Teo, would not have these resources available -- but then again, those people are not actually going to go into Uber and start firing people (for example), though they might refuse to associate with people they had heard rumors about.

When you say "we should treat 'a constant murmur' as much stronger evidence than we currently do.", I would ask you, evidence with regards to what? What would you do based on this kind of evidence?

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

#872

Post by qb45 » Mon, Jul 03, 2017, 10:08 PM UTC

bogomipz wrote: post #869

qb45 wrote: post #842

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 O…

I'm glad that you liked "weaponized linguistics".

I don't have any problem accepting "sex worker". I think it's a fine and intuitive way to describe somebody doing, well, sex-related work. I only don't find it intuitive at all that it must necessarily be somebody working willingly. I think it's an assault on grammar rules and logic to insist that people believe so. Three others appear to agree with me, or at least upvoted that post for whatever reason.

The esoteric acronym is of minor relevance, feel free to disregard it if your time can be better spent than researching this issue.

Note that I took a great care to rant in third person ("they"). Nothing personal.

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

#873

Post by robbrown451 » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 12:38 AM UTC

Atheros wrote: post #746

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…

"he said she said" is a third party statement. For example, "Bobby was talking to Veronica and he said she said that she doesn't like you."

That is not what "he said, she said" means.

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

#874

Post by stefek99 » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 2:53 PM UTC

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #865

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…

> And because of #1, they can't just not participate

1) I know I'm in position of power

The moment the "get out of jail free card" is used, there are no further comments so that silence is not an opinion.

> take their silence as an opinion

We can improve the exact wording, we can iterate on that.

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

#875

Post by brandmeyer » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 11:18 PM UTC

02399diii8d8 wrote: post #653

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Ughh... this becomes so complicated. In my line of work, which involves authority positions, I see this sort of thing happen a lot (not most of the time, but regularly): Junior female supervisee becomes romantically involved with male supervisor. It's consensual, not predatory at all. Two people working closely together in closely related positions (I'm not talking CEO-secretary here, I'm talking something more close…

I think fits the US military's definition of Fraternization: A senior-subordinate relationship that is unduly familiar and does not respect differences in grade or rank. They are strictly forbidden, and while they do happen anyway, they are also regularly punished when discovered. A personal relationship between a direct supervisor and their subordinate would be considered inappropriate fraternization regardless of how close together the parties are in rank.

Fraternization is different from harassment. Among other things, consent is irrelevant. It also covers a broader scope than romantic relationships. The inappropriateness of the relationship comes from the disruption in the chains of command and responsibility, and the conflicts of interest that are inherent in the relationship.

I think that the military is correct in forbidding this kind of relationship, because of the effects you mentioned. It doesn't have to be confusing. It just needs to also be considered inappropriate by the organization.

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

#876

Post by soineuh » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 3:23 AM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #744

xor1 wrote: post #742

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People aren't really interested in discussing the issue or taking it seriously because it exposes a vulnerability in their platform, and they can't handle that. All of my comments have been flagged even after the thread was detached, and only one person followed through in a response chain. Shrug.

You're mistaken. Your comments border on bigotry. People don't want to engage with someone who has a closed mind. Pretty much everything you've said about borderline PD is fucking nonsense. There's no point responding to someone who so clearly demonstrates they don't know what they're talking about. None of the stuff you've mentioned has any link to borderline personality disorder. If you're going to use mental healt…

If this a professional opinion: You are complicit in a great deal of harm, and if you've come to this conclusion after thorough research and consideration, you should consider a different profession.

If this is a sentiment borne of personal association: She's going to burn you, brother. Leave now.

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

#877

Post by jackcn » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 7:15 AM UTC

dang wrote: post #316

jackcn wrote: post #249

Marissa Mayer?

We've banned this account for trolling. If you don't want to be banned on HN, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and promise to follow the rules in the future. We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14674763 and marked it off-topic.

Scratch one for freedom of speech - many people consider her to be an objectively poor CEO:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikemyatt/2015/11/20/marissa-ma...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2017/01/10/marissa-...

http://www.growthbusiness.co.uk/the-worst-ceos-in-corporate-...

I suggest you get off your high horse.

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

#878

Post by zeratax » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 3:27 PM UTC

refurb wrote: post #216

For everyone who is wondering why these people act the way they do, the answer is that their actions work some of the time . Otherwise, why would they do it if they continually strike out? What one person might see as harassment, another might see as an exciting "chase". I've known women who have had guys be very aggressive (it's a fine line) and they were quite taken by it. This of course is not excusing the behavio…

This also "worked" with Ms. Meyer who tolerated being groped, but not because she was "quite taken by it".

But I definitely see your point, though I'd argue that in this kind of position you should use different dating strategies if even at all.

These kind of power dynamics taken to an extreme are for me the biggest reason why incest has to be illegal. Similar to a parent child relationship, you don't have any common ground for consent with your subordinate.

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

#879

Post by notyourday » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 6:04 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #541

mirimir wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To get rid of them. Me, I start going on about the benefits of trepanning, and invite them out to the workshop ;)

I see :). Life pro tip: just say them in a calm, explicit and direct manner that you are not interested in receiving their visits and information from them. They respect that. They might show up after a year or so, just to check out if this is the same family living under the number. They're pretty organised and respectful in what they do, so polite and direct works best.

I prefer to open a door in leather pants with no shirt and say "Ah yes, did you bring me the virgins?"

You have never seen slow walkers move that fast from the building.

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

#880

Post by ubernostrum » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 11:33 PM UTC

speedplane wrote: post #853

ubernostrum wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

dudes really need special courses on how to not be harassers? Given the many first-hand accounts of ordinary everyday harassment and men who flat-out do not seem to understand what is and isn't inappropriate, or what the words "no" or "I'm not interested" or "leave me alone" mean, yes, it does seem there is a significant population for whom this type of basic education is absolutely and vitally necessary. Think of it…

I agree that this education is "absolutely and vitally necessary", however I disagree with you that this education is "basic" or that it should be relegated to just subset of the population. Knowing how to communicate with people who are different from you, knowing how to disagree with another without insulting them, knowing how to check sexual desires in inappropriate settings, knowing when you are operating from a…

I didn't say "it should be relegated to just [a] subset of the population". I said a justification for imposing it universally is to observe a subset of the population and come to the conclusion that yes, this is needed.