Update on Julie Horvath's Departure • Hacker News Board

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#421

Post by vidarh » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:00 PM UTC

tw268 wrote: post #96

comrh wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, rage against feminism... the radical notion that women are people.

Feminism is a cultural Marxist ideology which tries to explain the world through the lens of class conflict - an overclass (male) which is oppressive and therefore evil and an underclass (female) which is oppressed and therefore good. This is why it is not considered oppression when men die young or go to prison more often than women and it is not a problem when men are underrepresented in higher ed - men can't be op…

> which is oppressive and therefore evil and an underclass (female) which is oppressed and therefore good

If you think Marxism considers classes to be evil and good, you have already demonstrated that you don't know Marxism. Marx was very clear that he saw the members of the different classes as effective slaves of circumstance, who acted out their roles in history out of necessity.

The capitalist, to Marx, not only is not evil, but is seen as a historical necessity that drives progress: Only through the development of advanced capitalist economies does production reach sufficient levels to be able to eradicate common wants, thus making socialism possible.

I'll not disagree with you that there are some feminist groups that follow the same twisted idea of what marxism is that you describe above, but they're by no means the only feminists out there, nor does their views have much of anything to do with marxism.

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#422

Post by vidarh » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:03 PM UTC

astrange wrote: post #356

brazzy wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have not the faintest trace of an idea what feminism or Marxism are. This is the most idiotic thing I have read all week. OK, it's Monday morning, but I give it a good chance to stand...

"Cultural Marxism" is an academic offshoot possibly inspired by Marxism. Though I'm not quite sure why it's called "cultural". As for feminism, what's your definition, and do you think other people are practicing that definition in particular? Look at tumblr posts discussing patriarchy theory sometime; somewhere amidst the paranoid depressed teenagers is a pretty well-defined belief system, and it's not yours anymore…

While technically true, today "Cultural Marxism" is mostly a label that the extreme far right use to try to brush centrist and moderate leftists with associations of Stalinism.

Beware whenever the term is brought up - it's usually used as an ad hominem.

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#423

Post by LanceH » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:09 PM UTC

infinity0 wrote: post #386

piokoch wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if Horvath is right or not, but this is nice case study how PR works. I would say this statement is a very clever move from GitHub side. I guess they have skilled PR people working on the issue. At first look, the cited article seems to admit to everything. As a result, it will be sort of last news on the topic - if they admitted Horvath is right and they even put on leave a founder and the programmer an…

It's possible that things will be brushed under the carpet as you say. But I'm not convinced that this is a "clever PR move" as you suggest. What else can GitHub do at this point? Fire the people involved without even investigating ?

They could have done it wrong; denied everything, counter-accused her and kept the flames burning.

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#424

Post by dragonwriter » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:09 PM UTC

vidarh wrote: post #421

tw268 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feminism is a cultural Marxist ideology which tries to explain the world through the lens of class conflict - an overclass (male) which is oppressive and therefore evil and an underclass (female) which is oppressed and therefore good. This is why it is not considered oppression when men die young or go to prison more often than women and it is not a problem when men are underrepresented in higher ed - men can't be op…

> which is oppressive and therefore evil and an underclass (female) which is oppressed and therefore good If you think Marxism considers classes to be evil and good, you have already demonstrated that you don't know Marxism. Marx was very clear that he saw the members of the different classes as effective slaves of circumstance, who acted out their roles in history out of necessity. The capitalist, to Marx, not only…

> If you think Marxism considers classes to be evil and good, you have already demonstrated that you don't know Marxism. Marx was very clear that he saw the members of the different classes as effective slaves of circumstance, who acted out their roles in history out of necessity.

Marx clearly did describe things that way but the movements that called themselves Marxist (particularly Leninism and those Marxist groups influenced by Leninism, which given the influence of the USSR were pretty common among "Marxists") did tend to take the capitalist = evil approach (which fits more in with Leninism than Marxism, since Leninism major point of divergence was adapting Marxism to justify "socialist" revolution in pre-capitalist societies, thus rendering capitalism unnecessary.)

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#425

Post by lmm » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:12 PM UTC

gdilla wrote: post #136

That non-employee spouses are allowed on company property to the extent that the CEO has to acknowledge it (and put an end to it) smacks of an unprofessional environment. Ugh.

I don't think the fact that the CEO has acknowledged it implies anything. If the wife in question's only contact with the company was to visit to and say hi to her husband once a week, I think the CEO's statement would have been exactly the same.

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#426

Post by pervycreeper » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:12 PM UTC

pron wrote: post #366

aceperry wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"People: when did our brains melt and spill out of our ears?" When the topic is as controversial as sexism in tech and the workplace. Or whatever the flashpoint happens to be at the moment. Like sequoia, I've noticed that controversial topics brings out the most incredible responses from both sides, and often with very little definitive evidence. To me, this is a sign of how deeply felt this topic is, and how much it…

It is sad that some people dispute the existence of sexism in tech, but that does not make it controversial in the sense that it is contentious, because it isn't. The facts are simple: 1) technology is a big source of power in our society, and 2) women are underrepresented in tech. Whenever a well defined group of people is absent from (or underrepresented in) a source of power, discrimination is taking place, period…

>Whenever a well defined group of people is absent from (or underrepresented in) a source of power, discrimination is taking place, period.

This is a good illustration of the point in the grandparent comment. This is simply not true, and I can't even think of any fallacy/ belief/ blindspot that could be adopted by a somewhat rational listener to make it sound convincing. (just to address the recalcitrant credulous among you: consider whether there is discrimination against Down Syndrome sufferers amongst tenured faculty on math departments)

In topics where people have deep vested personal interest or emotional investment, the quality of arguments that they would view as convincing goes down (often way down). The tragedy here is that the discourse about complicated topics which are important is overrun by people who have either (or, most often both) vested interests in a particular outcome, or little knowledge about the topic.

Saying "period period" at the end, I think, indicates that on some level, the parent commenter knows that s/he is presenting a weak argument. The poster's emotion overpowers this, however.

QED

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#427

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:26 PM UTC

balloot wrote: post #222

Zigurd wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can be both true that the situation called for having a co-founder put on leave, and his wife banned from the premises because a first look shows Horvath's claims are likely to be true and that Github's management deserves respect for prompt action, candor, and open communication. They could have been completely opaque and done nothing but investigate the matter, without any disclosure. It's a brave choice to be o…

As many others have said in this comment thread, Github's actions do NOT mean any claims are "likely to be true". It just means Github is taking proper steps to investigate the situation. The investigation may lead to them determining that Horvath, and not other employees, was in the wrong. At the very least, she seems a bit...attention hungry. Knowing nothing about the situation or people involved I am taking her ac…

[deleted]

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#428

Post by stantona » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:26 PM UTC

sequoia wrote: post #248

When I arrived at this thread, comment two was 'using the information available in the short techcrunch article, I'm now going to PROVE, point by point, how Horvath's claims are false.' Comment three was 'aha they issued a vague apology, this is basically a FULL ADMISSION that everything Horvath said was true!' People: when did our brains melt and spill out of our ears? There is not enough public information present…

The entire story in all its objective context will never be known, and those privy to the story, Horvath and those involved at Github carry more context than we will know. For Horvath, you have to give her credit to go public the way she did. That requires a lot of courage that could have negative ramifications on her career, which could indicate that she was strongly upset about the incidents she described. I don't know her or her motivations, but if she would be playing a pretty risky game if she were to lie. What I will say is that I'm tired of the continual denial or downplay of sexism in this industry. I've seen it first hand, some of drink ups I've attended were a disgrace, and the frat house culture that some tech organizations have cultivated not only make women uncomfortable, but men too including myself. This man-child culture is embarrassing and needs to stop and it's a very real problem.

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#429

Post by leccine » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:28 PM UTC

pron wrote: post #366

aceperry wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"People: when did our brains melt and spill out of our ears?" When the topic is as controversial as sexism in tech and the workplace. Or whatever the flashpoint happens to be at the moment. Like sequoia, I've noticed that controversial topics brings out the most incredible responses from both sides, and often with very little definitive evidence. To me, this is a sign of how deeply felt this topic is, and how much it…

It is sad that some people dispute the existence of sexism in tech, but that does not make it controversial in the sense that it is contentious, because it isn't. The facts are simple: 1) technology is a big source of power in our society, and 2) women are underrepresented in tech. Whenever a well defined group of people is absent from (or underrepresented in) a source of power, discrimination is taking place, period…

Just one quick note on "women are underrepresented in tech". You are absolutely right. What is the solution? You think that Julie's case is going to help that change? Or we should focus on the root of the problem, aka. education. How come in schools (elementary or secondary) nobody tells to young girls that they can become an engineer? Why is the society parents, teachers, media included trying to push those girls to more traditional professions? This is the right topic to bang on if you want to solve gender inequality in tech and not the frustrated and hatred feminist crap what people usually associate the problem with.

Re: Update on Julie Horvath's Departure

#430

Post by facepalm » Mon, Mar 17, 2014, 3:36 PM UTC

PakG1 wrote: post #260

The actions that Github has taken lends credibility to what Horvath has said. Of course, we'll not know the whole truth until sometime in the future, if ever. Even if this episode were only hypothetical, this episode reminds me that many people have poor decision-making abilities, even if they are super intelligent. A co-founder of a company like Github would and should have a very good brain and very good decision-m…

It seems more likely that it was a bad hire rather than a bad marriage (more thought probably went into the marriage decision than the hire decision). Clearly wife and employee didn't get along well, and wife made some unfortunate judgement calls in how to deal with the situation. It still seems possible she just wanted to protect her husband from a toxic employee, and just chose the wrong way of doing so.

Imagine getting a restraining order from an employee of your husbands company. I suppose they should have made a cut way sooner...