21–30 of 219 posts
"Molly tablets that have been molded into the logos of some of the hottest tech companies" I'm going to call bullshit.
One question I have as a recent grad who moved to Silicon Valley to work in tech is how do I get invited to one of these parties. Setting aside all the social implications, they sound really fun.
I can't imagine this is emotionally healthy for most of the folks involved. The once socially-exiled men trading wealth and drugs and (implicit) promises of career advancement for sex. The women who hope to leverage their looks for access to a better life, but risk ruining their reputations due to societal double standards. Being aware of these facts, would either party feel good about the encounters?
Orgies are fine. I've never been to one and have no desire to go to one. The real issue here is the power-asymmetry between the men and women involved. It reminds me of someone like Harvey Weinstein inviting an aspiring actress up to his hotel room and making an advance. It puts the women in a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't situation. Just extending the invitation itself can be vaguely threatening to a lot of people.
Techmeme summary: Emily Chang / Vanity Fair: An excerpt from Emily Chang's upcoming book Brotopia, on Silicon Valley's drug-fueled sex parties attended by powerful investors and well-known entrepreneurs
Could those who downvote this comment please explain why you did so? I try to provide extra context for those who come across this submission, which I get from Techmeme.
One question I have as a recent grad who moved to Silicon Valley to work in tech is how do I get invited to one of these parties. Setting aside all the social implications, they sound really fun.
Be an attractive female with the right connections or be a powerful male with the right connections.
“I see a lot of men leading people on, sleeping with a dozen women at the same time. But if each of the dozen women doesn’t care, is there any crime committed? You could say it’s disgusting but not illegal—it just perpetuates a culture that keeps women down.” How does it keep women down? Sleeping with a guy is a built in option women have to better their lives, that men don't have. Otherwise they're just like the res…
This is a complicated issue, and there's a lot to unpack here.
That technique may be used for women (and, heck, men too -- I'm the female 'breadwinner' of my household, although I didn't meet my husband at a sex party...) to better their lives, but those gains may be sporadic, and they depend on the continued cooperation of the man they're sleeping with.
I was in a "trophy girlfriend" relationship when I was young and my entire life revolved around "keeping" this guy. After a while, he broke up with me, I had to ask my parents for rent money (I had taken a first class trip to Europe the month before, but what was I going to do, ask him to put the money into my emergency savings account instead?), my entire life sort of fell apart. I went to parties with his friends, lived in his apartment, had a credit card on his account. Making sure he was happy was a job, but the skills weren't entirely transferable and there was no security. Not a situation I wanted to be in again, and I didn't.
Having a job, skills are easily transferable between employers, resources in my own name, and a relationship built on mutual respect and kindness, gives me far more freedom and security than sleeping with guys for the lifestyle perks. Even with alimony and child support in the picture (in which case you need to "get him" to marry you and/or have children) there is no facet of your life or lifestyle that is insulated from the whims of a single person. No, you may not starve after a divorce, but, especially if there's a pre-nup involved, the "betterment" in your life will always be temporary gain during the length of the relationship while his will be a permanent one.
Now, I'm not saying women shouldn't go to these parties or sleep with these men if they want to, or that considering a man's private jet ownership when debating about whether or not you want to sleep with him is an immoral choice. But saying "This is a built-in option for women that men don't have... the rest of us poor schmuck dudes actually have to go to work everyday" is an incredible simplification that makes the two choices sound like equivalent things, when they're absolutely not.
On a side note: The presence of these particular sex parties, and the fact that they're so closely intertwined with business in Silicon Valley, I think is an problem. As the article paints it, there's sort of a "damned if you do and damned if you don't" issue that they're introducing for women working in certain companies or who are seeking VC funding.
One question I have as a recent grad who moved to Silicon Valley to work in tech is how do I get invited to one of these parties. Setting aside all the social implications, they sound really fun.
Be an attractive female with the right connections or be a powerful male with the right connections.
“I see a lot of men leading people on, sleeping with a dozen women at the same time. But if each of the dozen women doesn’t care, is there any crime committed? You could say it’s disgusting but not illegal—it just perpetuates a culture that keeps women down.” How does it keep women down? Sleeping with a guy is a built in option women have to better their lives, that men don't have. Otherwise they're just like the res…
I'm sure there are enough gay or bi VCs that would give men a chance as well, if they'd just ask the right way. So you, too, can use that option to better your life. Feel free to try!
“I see a lot of men leading people on, sleeping with a dozen women at the same time. But if each of the dozen women doesn’t care, is there any crime committed? You could say it’s disgusting but not illegal—it just perpetuates a culture that keeps women down.” How does it keep women down? Sleeping with a guy is a built in option women have to better their lives, that men don't have. Otherwise they're just like the res…
"Sleeping with a guy is a built in option women have to better their lives, that men don't have." This is a complicated issue, and there's a lot to unpack here. That technique may be used for women (and, heck, men too -- I'm the female 'breadwinner' of my household, although I didn't meet my husband at a sex party...) to better their lives, but those gains may be sporadic, and they depend on the continued cooperation…
It's absolutely a job. Why wouldn't it be? My point is that it's always an option for an even marginally attractive women that average dudes don't have, (which may be the reason the homeless population of women is such a minority.)
Not a lot of plump hairy average dudes wearing yoga pants with the word sexy and a midriff shirt trying to keep their rich man happy(gay or straight).
So my point remains....it's an extra option always available to women.
I don't understand how that could be considered "keeping women down". It's more like women always have an option available to them that the rest of us don't.
“I see a lot of men leading people on, sleeping with a dozen women at the same time. But if each of the dozen women doesn’t care, is there any crime committed? You could say it’s disgusting but not illegal—it just perpetuates a culture that keeps women down.” How does it keep women down? Sleeping with a guy is a built in option women have to better their lives, that men don't have. Otherwise they're just like the res…
Women aren't a homogeneous subgroup. Your phrasing is also offensive, but I've dealt with many neuro-atypicals so I'm sympathetic . I suspect you are asking what is the social contract expectation from women ? In this period of deep social unrest, I don't think people could give a unified answer.
The fact remains. All Women and some hot gay guys... ALWAYS have an out by being a trophy wife or just a standard housewife.
It's probably why there's so few homeless women..because they have a built in fallback plan.