How to Apologize • Hacker News Board

Re: How to Apologize

#121

Post by orblivion » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 4:53 PM UTC

cgoddard wrote: post #120

orblivion wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Though I'm generally turned off by the use of the word "privilege", I actually don't disagree with you on either point. 1) I'm not saying this is a harmless joke. I'm saying that I'm afraid that actual harmless jokes will fall prey to the backlash against ones like this. I anticipate that there will be another story at some point where an actual funny, but edgy, joke will be told and I will have to find myself on the…

Behavior and humor in professional, work environments need to be held to a different standard than what might fly just between a group of friends or in a bar. In such an environment even usually harmless jokes contribute to a subtle if not overt sexist atmosphere which discourages female participation. Sure, there are always going to be some aggressive, driven women who will enter the field anyways and excel, but the…

The tech sector seems to hate formality, I think this may also be part of the problem. But in this particular case, it's a hackathon, pretty informal to begin with. If this were a job description I'd agree that any sort of joke that relates to gender would be totally inappropriate.

Re: How to Apologize

#122

Post by derefr » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 4:55 PM UTC

samth wrote: post #109

kyberias wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, that opinion is wrong. You should stop having it, and if you express it at work you will and should be fired. I think this opinion is wrong. If one expresses his opinion about slavery, he should not be fired. Now that you had this wrong opinion about opinions, should you be fired? From work? From Hacker News? Anywhere?

Really? If someone at your job expressed the "opinion" that you, personally, should be chained and sold as property, and that they should be allowed to beat, rape, and murder you as they saw fit, that would be acceptable behavior at your job? Because that's what the OP was suggesting, except that they used the umbrella term "slavery" to refer to it.

I imagine that for most people in first-world countries who aren't avid studies of historical ignominy, "slavery" conjures connotations of indentured servitude, rather than complete autocratic determination over others. In fact, even if "slavery" was still something that existed in otherwise-modern countries (let's imagine the US never bothered to fight a civil war over it), you'd probably not be allowed to "beat, rape, and murder" your slaves--any more than you can currently beat, rape, and murder your pets.

Re: How to Apologize

#123

Post by cgoddard » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 5:08 PM UTC

orblivion wrote: post #108

Duff wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a guy who in more of an IT role with alot of women (probably a little less than half the people here) -- so I guess I come from a weird perspective. My sister is an engineer/designer, so I've heard her perspective on this as well. The issue with this kind of behavior is that it intimidates and/or repels professional women. It doesn't set an appropriate tone. If you were a woman with a degree in CS who was potenti…

> It's not a matter of bringing in the "PC police". It's about respect. The distinction between these points is important to me, I'm glad you bring it up. I know I've been somewhat contradictory on this, but I'll say I agree that the given joke, as it stands, is not respectful. If it were a guy's gathering, I think it would be ok, but it's an open invitation. Since I've been saying that the problem is about bad taste…

What's most offensive about the incident wasn't the wording in the ad, but the fact that they were going to hire exclusively women as sex objects (eye candy) for a professional event. The ad simply provided advance notice and an opportunity to call them out on it before the event actually happened.

Re: How to Apologize

#124

Post by cgoddard » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 5:12 PM UTC

perokreco wrote: post #20

orblivion wrote: post #10

I'm a bit torn on this whole issue, I wonder if somebody could give me some perspective. There are two conflicting things I don't like here. In the first place, I don't like when people are so sensitive that there's no room for a harmless joke. In most cases I really would say "oh come on lighten up." On the other hand, among us computer programmers, there's so much social ineptness (and perhaps outright disrespect f…

See, both their joke and the statement: "maybe we could take this joke at face value (ha ha, we're all sex deprived computer nerds who would do anything to interact with women for a second)" assumes women are not programmers and thus makes them feel less welcome. That is the main reason why it is bad.

Exactly. It marginalizes women in the profession. It also supports sexual objectification as being okay in a workplace / professional environment.

Re: How to Apologize

#125

Post by AkThhhpppt » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 5:12 PM UTC

hellweaver666 wrote: post #77

kyberias wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, that opinion is wrong. You should stop having it, and if you express it at work you will and should be fired. I think this opinion is wrong. If one expresses his opinion about slavery, he should not be fired. Now that you had this wrong opinion about opinions, should you be fired? From work? From Hacker News? Anywhere?

Everyone is entitled to have an opinion and they shouldn't be ostracised for expressing them. There is no such thing as a wrong opinion, only opinions that you disagree with.

Oh yes there bloody is: an opinion held in spite of overwhelming evidence.

Re: How to Apologize

#126

Post by muraii » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 5:12 PM UTC

hythloday wrote: post #65

hullibu wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe in freedom of opinion and speech, but I also believe in freedom of sense. Believing that slavery is good is not only a generally offensive position, but it is an opinion that implies poor morals. Therefore not only in general company is expressing such an opinion a poor choice if one wishes to be socially accepted, but having the opinion itself is an abomination. Being easily offended is not a good thing. A…

Here are some other things that have been considered abominations at one point or another by a dominant culture: homosexual sex; Jews marrying Germans; property right and suffrage for women; atheism (or virtually every religion, in fact). I am pretty sure that people who held the view that those things were abominable were not Dr. Evil caricatures, but honest people who sincerely believed that these things were utter…

Thank you. I have tried several times to articulate how weakly we can reasonably attribute rightness to any of our beliefs, and you've done a wonderful job of it. Mary Wollstonecraft succinctly expressed this as "No man chooses evil because it is evil; he only mistakes it for happiness, the good he seeks." (Full disclosure: only came across this as a section quote in _The Walking Dead: Rise of the Governor_.)

On the general topic, I can't add much except that Sqoot's response adds to the apologetic miasma that suffocates honest expression. It is not the same thing, but of a piece, that several times daily a person will say "Sorry" for such transgressions as brewing their K-cup before I can brew mine, or for crossing paths as we walk around the office. It lacks conviction, and it should: these are not offenses, are not rude actions. They so quickly issue "Sorry" that it's as hollow of meaning as the familiar "You know" and "like." It is mere social lubrication without intent.

On the other hand, there is at least one subtlety I haven't read here yet, and that's this: if I enter another culture, either by travelling to another country or merely travelling down the street, I may risk doing something which is legitimately offensive in that culture but which I don't personally find offensive. I can easily, then, find myself in a situation where I am earnest in my apology even if I have no intention of changing my opinion. I can simultaneously claim my values and care enough about others to understand they may find them objectionable and respect them by either keeping my mouth shut or apologizing if I feel I've offended them.

Is there a line to be drawn between that scenario, which doesn't seem controversial, and Sqoot's predicament? Is there room for allowing the male-and-macho developer set to think sexism is cool and still earnestly apologize because they realize others are offended?

Re: How to Apologize

#127

Post by protomyth » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 5:13 PM UTC

rtperson wrote: post #111

protomyth wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a difference between a hackathon and a restaurant. There are actually restaurants that hire very good looking men also because they are going for a certain clientele. Sexuality sells a lot of things, but that's hormones and money. The problem here is that a goodly chunk of people expect the clientele of a hackathon to be developers. Developers are men and women who are professional. As much as sexuality sell…

> it is not a accepted selling point of professionals. Rather, it will get you in serious trouble in many professional environments. Not to defend Sqoot at all, but... um... booth babes? Every large trade show has them. They are there specifically to excite the hormones of the male professionals in attendance. Their use is as sexist as it is effective. Had Sqoot quietly hired a bunch of models to serve beer to the at…

Booth babes are a problem and the protests have gone up about them (to the point of misidentifying a women as a booth babe will get you in trouble).

If they had quietly done it and female developers had showed up, the damage would have been worse, much worse. Words are one thing, pictures of scantily clad models serving beer at a hackathon would have been a little too juicy for the bloggers. Twitter pictures turn into mainstream media articles rather quickly these days.

Their crime is thinking it was acceptable. As my Dad told me (constantly as a youth it seemed), "I'm amazed you thought of that, and appalled you actually did it." Fantasy is best kept out of the professional workplace / event planning.

Re: How to Apologize

#128

Post by cabalamat » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 5:16 PM UTC

batista wrote: post #104

samth wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For instance, I might have an opinion that we should bring back slavery. A totally offensive opinion, yes, but dammit, I'm entitled to have it. I think this is confusing two very different things. You are "entitled" to have this opinion in that (a) you shouldn't be locked in prison for stating this opinion and (b) I am not allowed to beat you up for having this opinion. However, that opinion is wrong . You should s…

I think this is confusing two very different things. You are "entitled" to have this opinion in that (a) you shouldn't be locked in prison for stating this opinion and (b) I am not allowed to beat you up for having this opinion. However, that opinion is wrong. You should stop having it, and if you express it at work you will and should be fired. So one is only allowed to have the "right" opinions? And who gets to jud…

> He is entitled to think whatever, include slavery or the annihilation of mankind, and people should not only not put him in prison for it, but not even fire him for it.

If someone wants to kill me and everyone I care about, then surely it is reasonable for me to be somewhat irate at that person, up to and including choosing not to do business with them.

Re: How to Apologize

#129

Post by cgoddard » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 5:18 PM UTC

mtoddh wrote: post #17

jeswin wrote: post #9

"Women: Need another beer? Let one of our friendly (female) event staff get that for you." I suppose it varies with culture, but I can't imagine any of the women I know getting upset about that line. So a genuine question, are we getting to a point where you need to think so much before actually saying anything? Personally, even if I were the butt of a mildly racist joke I would probably enjoy the joke than be offend…

So a genuine question, are we getting to a point where you need to think so much before actually saying anything Yes - and many people are going to see this as a good thing (and some won't). I think the best route is to never include any references to gender, (or race, or any hot button issue) in any of your promotional material, slides, talks or whatever. Even if it's intended as light-hearted humor.

Yes, making assumptions about people based on their race, sex, heritage, etc. is not okay, especially not in a professional setting.

Re: How to Apologize

#130

Post by natep » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 5:25 PM UTC

batista wrote: post #118

samth wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So one is only allowed to have the "right" opinions? I think it's pretty obvious that everyone should try to have correct ideas. For example, if you think that Mac OS X is the world's most widely-used desktop OS, then you are wrong, and you should revise your thinking on the subject. Similarly, if you think that IP guarantees reliable delivery, you should think something else , because you're not right. Thinking that…

> I think it's pretty obvious that everyone should try to have correct ideas. For example, if you think that Mac OS X is the world's most widely-used desktop OS, then you are wrong, and you should revise your thinking on the subject. Similarly, if you think that IP guarantees reliable delivery, you should think something else, because you're not right. That about factual correctness. Another ballgame altogether. Whet…

It's not about whether hackathons should have female waitresses. It's about whether "women" should be listed as perks right under massages. And for what was supposed to be a professional event (in the eyes of its sponsors and potential audience at least), the answer is a clear "No."

And regarding the slippery slope you tried to construct, I don't think there is one, unless you are a moral relativist. Anyone that thinks anyone else is wrong should be able to tell them so (or fire them if it's an at-will situation[1] or part of the contract). If it turns out the majority (or those that are the most vocal) are wrong, then I can only hope that the right opinion will win because of its rightness and/or the persuasiveness of its proponents. Will this situation inevitably lead towards a more moral, ethical society? No. Does it have the potential to categorically exclude/supress correct opinions? No.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment