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

Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 216 posts

Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber

#31

Post by dangus »

raxxorrax wrote: post #27
dangus wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reminds me of an incident on a bus recently. This one white guy told a black guy trying to get on that there was no more room on the bus, which was generally true, but it could have definitely looked like (from the tone and wording) that the white guy was talking down to him. The black guy got very upset and claimed that the white man wouldn’t have said this to a white guy, and wouldn’t have said this if the bus…

> is people have been oppressing the person in question for centuries, so he’s not really in a position to be able to honestly say that he isn’t being racist or generally isn’t. Since we dropped collective punishments a longer time ago, this statement is false. On the contrary, it a big problem on the topic of racism. I would escalate that argument any time. edit: it is additionally false, because "the person in ques…

Escalation never helps.

I think we have to acknowledge that discrimination and oppression will be followed by retaliation. Even if white people and men are treating black people and women, respectively, with perfect equity (spoiler alert, they’re still not), those groups have already been wronged and have been conditioned to understand that those people consider them to be sub-human. It is logical for women and black peoples to continue to distrust men and white people, respectively.

So, we have to accept that there will not be be a world without bias and discrimination until we treat people like we would want to be treated, and stop escalating.

Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber

#32

Post by wavepruner »

komali2 wrote: post #21
ecmascript wrote: post #4

Cry me a river, the overwhelming majority of sexism in the IT-industry is towards men and white men in particular. Men also don't get the privilege of getting any media outcry or changes for the sexism against them. Just to give a few examples on top of my head: There has been no conferences that has been [1] shut down or postponed [2] because of the skin color or sex of the speakers. It has definately been so for me…

> and white men in particular It's difficult for a man to experience sexism at the level a woman does for the same reason that it's nearly impossible for a white person to experience racism. Going this out of your way to "defend" white men is in direct opposition to the cause of feminism and fighting racism for a simple reason: centrism favors the status quo, and the status quo is still in 2020 that a baby born in Am…

"the status quo is still in 2020 that a baby born in America white and male is among the luckiest babies in history."

Millions of these "luckiest" babies are suffering from crippling illnesses, yet they are treated like they are awash with privilege solely because they are white and male. This is racism and sexism. Disabled white men are not privileged.

Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber

#33

Post by zajd »

devchix wrote: post #24
Traster wrote: post #6

>“I felt a wave of relief wash over me when I remembered that I worked at a large company, one with a sizable human resources department,” I feel like someone needs to run an education campaign on what HR is and who it works for. HR is there to protect the business. They aren't there as some moral arbiter. If you reported sexual harassment to HR you are going to be part of an equation - is it better for the business…

This aphorism that HR is there to protect the company -- I hear it all the time and it's terribly cynical, while also probably true. Why must it be this way; asked another way, why do we accept that it must be this way, that every time we engage HR it must be with the understanding that they are the adversary. Why go to HR at all, why even have HR, why not fold it all in the legal counsel's office? Why can't HR be wh…

> Why can't HR be what they purportedly say they are

Because the owners pay them, not the employees

Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber

#34

Post by alistairSH »

commandlinefan wrote: post #5
lordleft wrote: post #2

That first article she wrote, exposing the culture at Uber, was profoundly upsetting and an important moment in the history of our industry. Kudos to her for standing up to one the most egregiously hostile work environments I've ever read about.

I remember reading that post and being surprised how little of it was actually sexism (the only thing I saw that qualified was the thing about the shirts), and how much of it was just maltreatment of programmers of all types. But I guess if you have to slap the label "sexism" on it to get it to be taken seriously, we take what we can get.

Did we read the same blog entry?

Her first manager propositioned her for sex almost on day one.

HR lied about that managers past issues and told her suck it up or receive a negative review.

She received a negative review anyways (changed after the fact - her in-person review was positive). This blocked role changes and made her ineligible for graduate tuition reimbursement.

Leather jackets for the men, women told to deal with it.

Threatened by manager with termination because she reported somebody to HR.

Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber

#35

Post by notyourday »

Speaking of Uber and Susan Fowler - had the current CEO frog marched out everyone that authorized, worked on, did not block, did not fight against what she experienced especially after the publication of her post?

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/18/books/review/susan-fowler...

If not, why has not the board frog marched the current CEO out?

Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber

#36

Post by roseway4 »

There have already been posts (now deleted) speaking to how terrible the culture was generally and how the experiences of men have been lost in the "#metoo noise". Both can be true. She's telling the story from a women's perspective and encountered situations that were unique to women at Uber. It also sounds like she suffered greatly in the aftermath of going public[1]. Continuing to speak out must have taken great courage. This all doesn't discount the pain and suffering many men may have experienced at Uber, but again, she's telling her story.

[1] https://time.com/5784464/susan-fowler-book-uber-sexual-haras...

Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber

#37

Post by raxxorrax »

dangus wrote: post #31
raxxorrax wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> is people have been oppressing the person in question for centuries, so he’s not really in a position to be able to honestly say that he isn’t being racist or generally isn’t. Since we dropped collective punishments a longer time ago, this statement is false. On the contrary, it a big problem on the topic of racism. I would escalate that argument any time. edit: it is additionally false, because "the person in ques…

Escalation never helps. I think we have to acknowledge that discrimination and oppression will be followed by retaliation. Even if white people and men are treating black people and women, respectively, with perfect equity (spoiler alert, they’re still not), those groups have already been wronged and have been conditioned to understand that those people consider them to be sub-human. It is logical for women and black…

No, you get there by minimizing discrimination. The black man in your case is the offender by insinuating racism.

Your idea is to sanction innocents.

edit: for some form karmic or historical justice that I would think is pretty flawed.

Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber

#38

Post by whoisjuan »

Traster wrote: post #6

>“I felt a wave of relief wash over me when I remembered that I worked at a large company, one with a sizable human resources department,” I feel like someone needs to run an education campaign on what HR is and who it works for. HR is there to protect the business. They aren't there as some moral arbiter. If you reported sexual harassment to HR you are going to be part of an equation - is it better for the business…

"Toby is in HR, which technically means he works for corporate, so he's really not a part of our family. Also, he's divorced, so he's really not a part of his family."

- Michael Scott

Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber

#39

Post by e40 »

scott_s wrote: post #23
commandlinefan wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember reading that post and being surprised how little of it was actually sexism (the only thing I saw that qualified was the thing about the shirts), and how much of it was just maltreatment of programmers of all types. But I guess if you have to slap the label "sexism" on it to get it to be taken seriously, we take what we can get.

The sexism I see in her post: Upon joining, her manager sexually propositioned her; a subsequent manager sabotaged her performance reviews and attempts at transferring to keep a woman on his team; they gave leather jackets to SREs as a gift, but would only get jackets made for men (I think this is what you refer to as "the shirts"); she recalls many emails that she does not describe; HR claims she is the problem in a…

Honestly, it sounds like a sociopath was in charge of HR.

Re: Why Susan Fowler blew the whistle on sexism at Uber

#40

Post by wbronitsky »

wavepruner wrote: post #32
komali2 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and white men in particular It's difficult for a man to experience sexism at the level a woman does for the same reason that it's nearly impossible for a white person to experience racism. Going this out of your way to "defend" white men is in direct opposition to the cause of feminism and fighting racism for a simple reason: centrism favors the status quo, and the status quo is still in 2020 that a baby born in Am…

"the status quo is still in 2020 that a baby born in America white and male is among the luckiest babies in history." Millions of these "luckiest" babies are suffering from crippling illnesses, yet they are treated like they are awash with privilege solely because they are white and male. This is racism and sexism. Disabled white men are not privileged.

This argument does not address the point. No one said that lucky means perfect; everything is relative.

It can be (and is) true that you can be the luckiest baby in history and have "crippling illness". You can both be privileged and disadvantaged on different axes at the same time.

I think you misunderstand racism and sexism. These refer to power structures that oppress people, not inborn disadvantages.

Post reply on HN