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

An Open Letter To All Startup Founders

noconformity.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 101 posts

Re: An Open Letter To All Startup Founders

#71

Post by [deleted] »

tptacek wrote: post #54
mindcrime wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't hit on women at the office. Of course, because it's not like you spend a significant portion of your life at the office (post school) and the office is probably where a majority of your interactions with other people will occur... nothing like passing up meeting the partner of your dreams because he/she happens to be a co-worker and is therefore automatically off-limits. What a load of horse-shit. Flirting, com…

Your problem meeting women = YOUR PROBLEM. Keep it out of the office. When your unwanted advances, innocuous though they seem to you --- the "libertine libertarian" who "prefers to keep his/her workplace relationships intimate" --- result in a complaint from a coworker drafted on a law firm's paperwork, your company will fold like an unsuited 7-2 and pay up, probably to the tune of a year's headcount, and you'll have…

[deleted]

Re: An Open Letter To All Startup Founders

#72

Post by NLips »

tptacek wrote: post #70
NLips wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the other employee isn't your manager or managee, are you really suggesting that "Do you want to go the the pictures tonight?" is in any way related to sexual inequality?

Yes: women feel like a vulnerable minority, and feel bad (or at least uncomfortable) when they turn men down for dates.

Where is the inequality?

Vulnerability? The vulnerability has been caused by something else, which is the inappropriate behaviour. Minority? Irrelevant - (at least) one sex will always be in the minority if there are an odd number of employees. Feeling bad? Unrelated to sex.

Regardless, the behaviour mentioned is neither severe nor pervasive (if standalone) and not intrinsically sexual.

EDIT: From some above comments, you sound like you might be suggesting there is an Atlantic culture device. I'm UK-based, so perhaps this partially explains to you a difference in opinion.

Re: An Open Letter To All Startup Founders

#73

Post by chc »

tptacek wrote: post #70
NLips wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the other employee isn't your manager or managee, are you really suggesting that "Do you want to go the the pictures tonight?" is in any way related to sexual inequality?

Yes: women feel like a vulnerable minority, and feel bad (or at least uncomfortable) when they turn men down for dates.

True story: A couple of weeks after I proposed, my fiance told me that the best thing about being engaged was that she could politely ward off workplace flirtation just by holding up her hand and saying something to the effect of, "Sorry, wearing a ring." Before that it was apparently quite painful.

Re: An Open Letter To All Startup Founders

#74

Post by kathrynhough »

cristianocd wrote: post #53

Lame... so lame. Maybe her boyfriend was in that picture and that's what this post is all about. I bet everyone is smiling in that pic.

Nope, I'm happily married, we live 2,000 miles away from the incident, and I won't disclose the name of the company involved. I have no ties to anyone involved. I have no interest in hurting anyone from any company by bringing this up. I just wanted to start a discussion.

Re: An Open Letter To All Startup Founders

#75

Post by tptacek »

NLips wrote: post #72
tptacek wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes: women feel like a vulnerable minority, and feel bad (or at least uncomfortable) when they turn men down for dates.

Where is the inequality? Vulnerability? The vulnerability has been caused by something else, which is the inappropriate behaviour. Minority? Irrelevant - (at least) one sex will always be in the minority if there are an odd number of employees. Feeling bad? Unrelated to sex. Regardless, the behaviour mentioned is neither severe nor pervasive (if standalone) and not intrinsically sexual. EDIT: From some above comments…

Who are you arguing with? Me, or HR and the company counsel?

The UK has extremely similar workplace gender equality issues to the US according to the World Economic Forum Gender Gap Index; we're basically neck and neck.

Re: An Open Letter To All Startup Founders

#76

Post by mindcrime »

alecdibble wrote: post #61
tptacek wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't hit on women at the office. Don't make comments about the attractiveness of women at the office. If you're not socially aware enough to distinguish between compliments that are and aren't sexually charged (ie, you are like most guys), don't compliment women's appearance at all at the office. Don't take the office to Hooter's. Don't take the office to strip clubs. Don't put sexualized women or men in your presen…

The issue here is making both genders feel comfortable in the workplace. You should NEVER hit on someone at work. By doing that, you could be instantly ruining a large portion of their day. Not just one day but every day. By introducing that dynamic tension is created. Especially so if the other party refuses the advances. Let me illustrate this point with a fake situation: Sally works 9-5 at company A. She loves her…

Note that in your scenario above, Sally never just said "I'm sorry Ted, I don't date co-workers" or "I have a boyfriend" or even "Sorry, but I'm not interested." That's all it takes, and there's no reason a conversation like that needs to be awkward, or cause problems going forward, or result in anyone feeling uncomfortable or crying in their pillow.

It's a perfectly normal, routine thing and mature, well-adjusted adults should not have a problem with something like that. Truth be told, it strikes me as disrespectful to women to assume that most of them are like your Sally, and are emotionally fragile as to be unable to handle a situation like this. Now if Ted kept making repeated advances after being told "no," then you're in a whole different ball-game.

Re: An Open Letter To All Startup Founders

#77

Post by mindcrime »

tptacek wrote: post #68
temphn wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think this state of affairs is a desirable one? If you accuse someone of being a communist or a socialist, you are laughed out of the room; if you accuse someone of being a sexist or racist, the onus is on them to disprove it (and this is frankly impossible). The insane contortions of the American legal system are good reason to base a company outside of the US.

I'd love to watch more companies get slaughtered by effectively delivered gender discrimination complaints. Post them all to HN and spark 482-comment threads about the injustice of it all! I will laugh, and laugh, and laugh. I've seen the system be abused by people with totally bogus complaints. Somehow, I just can't work up any outrage about it. Something about how "men like women and women like men and that's just…

Something about how "men like women and women like men and that's just the way it is" just does something to my internal moral compass.

So you don't think that men like women and women like men?

Re: An Open Letter To All Startup Founders

#78

Post by hythloday »

mindcrime wrote: post #30
hythloday wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a problem because it is an explicit sign to women thinking of applying to that company that they would not be welcome in the organization. Fewer organizations that welcome women mean a less attractive industry for women, which is the polar opposite of avoiding gender inequality. Pretty much any time you're discussing inequality, if you reach for "it would be OK if the situations were reversed", you are choosing…

It is a problem because it is an explicit sign to women thinking of applying to that company that they would not be welcome in the organization. Is it really, though? If so, why? Men who enjoy going to Hooters are not necessarily crude, aggressive louts who treat women poorly. And a company that has lunch at Hooters is hardly a place where women are automatically unwelcome, or treated as inferior. In fact, I see very…

Even the post I replied to admitted that it would be a problem if there was a woman in the company who objected. If you assume that women are more likely to object to going there than men, and that men in the company enjoy going there, it's obvious that a woman would be less welcome to join the company than a man. I think you're seeking to interpret "unwelcome" as implying deliberate slights or cold shoulders, which isn't what I was getting at - I mean that the company culture would have to change more to accommodate a woman than a man, and that this would be obvious to the woman.

Re: An Open Letter To All Startup Founders

#79

Post by Mz »

mindcrime wrote: post #76
alecdibble wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue here is making both genders feel comfortable in the workplace. You should NEVER hit on someone at work. By doing that, you could be instantly ruining a large portion of their day. Not just one day but every day. By introducing that dynamic tension is created. Especially so if the other party refuses the advances. Let me illustrate this point with a fake situation: Sally works 9-5 at company A. She loves her…

Note that in your scenario above, Sally never just said "I'm sorry Ted, I don't date co-workers" or "I have a boyfriend" or even "Sorry, but I'm not interested." That's all it takes, and there's no reason a conversation like that needs to be awkward, or cause problems going forward, or result in anyone feeling uncomfortable or crying in their pillow. It's a perfectly normal, routine thing and mature, well-adjusted ad…

Oy. I haven't found that anyone of either gender acts particularly "mature" when you have them emotionally by the short hairs. I am female and in my forties. I am currently unemployed but previously worked for Bigco for five years. In spite of having only an entry level job in a pink collar ghetto, trying to figure out how to sidestep trouble with men at work took way the hell too much of my time and energy.

I found it especially annoying because I am celibate for medical reasons, so rejecting some man's attentions was in no way personal criticism. But I also did not feel I should have to tell someone I barely knew about my medical situation. Futhermore, I had reason to believe that divulging such personal info wouldn't have helped anyway.

Re: An Open Letter To All Startup Founders

#80

Post by rada »

temphn wrote: post #56
rdl wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think she's arguing that even if 100% of the current employee participants are happy going to a hooters restaurant, posting a photo of it will deter future female hires. In reality, it won't deter only female hires. I have nothing against going to places like this (or strip clubs: subsidized steak, at least in Oregon) socially, but a fair number of people wouldn't want to go socially, and I absolutely wouldn't want…

What if 100% of current employees posted a photo of themselves at a gay pride parade, next to scantily clad gay men? It's on their private time. But something tells me that Kathryn Hough wouldn't dream of attacking them.

Google Marc Jacobs lawsuit. Kathryn Hough's warning - which you call an attack despite the article's overtly friendly overtones - fits to a "t".
Post reply on HN