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

71–80 of 216 posts

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

#71

Post by mercer »

chrisseaton wrote: post #68
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…

I think you may be misunderstanding. The idea is that a large HR department knows how to do things legally correctly. People hope that a large corporate HR department is going to be at least following the law, which is a step up compared to a tiny company with no HR expertise that may do things unprofessionally. I don't think anyone's under a misapprehension that having an HR department means they're going to side wi…

I'd say the very assumption that those who 'own' the output of your labor, especially in larger companies, is hopelessly but understandably naive.

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

#72

Post by conradfr »

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…

Propositioning to her is not really sexism, but it's inappropriate and unprofessional.

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

#73

Post by eweise »

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…

They are there to protect the business. One way they do that is by ensuring that the business follows the law. So, they are aligned the the interests of the employees up to a point.

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

#74

Post by wpietri »

cultus wrote: post #62
fhood wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not here to pile on, I just want to understand why this point of view is so common. I have always felt incredibly blessed by my circumstances (straight white male). Would you really rather be some other gender and/or race? Do you truly believe it would make life easier?

Some people are essentially unable to experience empathy, only sympathy. This also seems to co-occur with lack of self-awareness. Thus, they cannot "put themselves in the shoes" of another person experiencing different challenges than themselves. For example, think of every Republican who is anti-gay until their kid comes out (Cheney), misogynistic except when it comes to their daughter, or opposes abortion until the…

And I should point out that in the short term it's often personally advantageous to suppress one's empathy and self awareness. Narcissists are fucking exhausting, but they often get what they want. And what quite a lot of people want is a sense of power.

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

#75

Post by rat9988 »

eweise wrote: post #73
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…

They are there to protect the business. One way they do that is by ensuring that the business follows the law. So, they are aligned the the interests of the employees up to a point.

Unless they think you cannot prove it.

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

#76

Post by raxxorrax »

dangus wrote: post #44
raxxorrax wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I actually do think he’s in the wrong as well, in this particular case, I agree. I guess what I’m trying to say is that this person has already been affected by racism. The only hope there is to allow the passage of generations to ease that pain. In other words, by engaging and escalating the argument, even though the white guy was likely correct, he is reinforcing these tensions rather than reducing them. If people…

That is something different. I wouldn't blame him harshly for reacting this way, but I would also firmly state that his statement is ridiculous.

Use your judgement in the situation, but if you just accept it, he might continue to treat others unfairly. So a firm rebuff is certainly valid.

Deescalation doesn't mean to fall on your knees. You won't ever end up on the same level and might just become a bully victim otherwise. That is no road to more justice in my opinion.

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

#77

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

notyourday wrote: post #64
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such destructive cleaning of house creates the wrong incentives. Most of the people involved would have lacked either the full story or the power to do anything about it. If it's a fireable offense to be near a big scandal, the rational response isn't to start fighting against the problems you see - it's to build a massive silo to minimize the number of problems you can see.

There were people who authorized either employees or contractors to harass her, dig the dirt out on her, etc, etc, etc. There were people who read/compiled/presented that information to the higher ups in management/executive levels. Did those people write memos/emails to their bosses saying that based on their view they should not be doing it but since they may not be fully aware of the full context they need their b…

Absolutely. Maybe you don't have the full context of the story - the CEO at the time that Fowler got harassed, Travis Kalanick, ended up being that someone who's accountable.

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

#78

Post by p_l »

eweise wrote: post #73
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…

They are there to protect the business. One way they do that is by ensuring that the business follows the law. So, they are aligned the the interests of the employees up to a point.

Only so long as they don't decide that not following the law vigorously isn't better for any reason. Said reason might not be well thought through.

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

#79

Post by non-entity »

ryguytilidie wrote: post #16
Tomte wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Another thing that gets me is that you didn't do anything wrong. You aren't slandering women, you're just saying that there's sexism towards white men. I am not white and I say this is not worth flagging. Sure he did something wrong. This discussion thread is not about sexism towards men. It's about Susan Fowler's experience. And the "white knight" screed alone is enough to flag it. Find another submission to whine…

Or just don't whine about feminists when people are talking about serious women's issues?

It was my understanding that "whining about feminists" falls into content was discouraged on this site in general

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

#80

Post by mercer »

fhood wrote: post #61
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 can change. Sure HR will almost always protect the organization, but I hope we are coming to the point where it is unequivocally more damaging to these companies to sweep these issues under the rug rather than dealing with them properly.

How do you see that happening? As long as HR is department paid by the organization, how is there any way, structurally, for said department to change? How would said change translate to 'less damaging' in a way that is measurable enough that stakeholders will care?

As much as unions can be problematic, at least there's at least a possibility they'll pick the worker's side.

Post reply on HN