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

It's Different for Girls

heidiroizen.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 400 posts

Re: It's Different for Girls

#231

Post by tptacek »

frozenport wrote: post #184

>>My partners are concerned that when you have this baby you are going to lose interest in the company and not be a good CEO As a practical matter this is a legitimate question. For example, "why are you taking this job when you plan to be busy for the next 6 months?" (or even longer).

No, it isn't a legitimate question. In fact, in an employment setting, it's an unlawful question. It presumes that the interviewer can extrapolate from the probably irrelevant detail of someone's pregnancy status to their ability to perform after the birth; refuting that bogus extrapolation requires the candidate to explain and defend their child care arrangements and home life.

As a practical matter, if someone in my company asked a candidate a question like that, premised on the candidate's ability to perform a job based on pregnancy status, I would fire the interviewer --- both because they were playing games with the most important function of the firm, and because they'd have exposed us to legal risk.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#232

Post by __david__ »

timsally wrote: post #43
jawns wrote: post #6

I think the big takeaway here, not just for women but for anyone in the workplace who feels uncomfortable with or offended by something someone else has said, is to consider the intent. Sometimes somebody says something offensive, and they don't even know they're being offensive. And in those cases, you can take them aside, explain to them why it's offended you, and hopefully they'll say, "Oh, dreadfully sorry, I did…

> But I think there's something fundamentally different about someone saying or doing something in ignorance -- especially if they appear contrite once they realize how it's made others feel -- and someone doing it purposefully, like the creep in the restaurant in Heidi's story. Sure, agreed, and this is explicitly recognized by the US legal system (i.e. involuntary manslaughter vs. voluntary manslaughter/murder). Th…

> That said, good intentions don't lessen impact on victims.

I fundamentally disagree with you on this, but I've noticed that people seem very divided on this issue.

Personally, if I'm offended by something and I learn that it was a fundamental misunderstanding and no harm was intended, then the anger/hurt/whatever emotion just goes away naturally, without me having to even consciously think about it or calm myself down.

My ex-wife was the opposite—once the anger happened it didn't go away no matter how much of a misunderstanding it was that triggered it.

I've come to think of it in terms of "Humpty Dumpty" from Alice In Wonderland[1]: "'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."

IE, if you are taking more from my words than I put in them (including offense), then that is on you and is not my problem, especially after I've explained myself.

I've since learned to just remove the other type of people from my life as much as possible—they just aren't worth the trouble.

[1] Technically "Through the Looking Glass": http://www.gutenberg.org/files/12/12-h/12-h.htm#link2HCH0006

Re: It's Different for Girls

#233

Post by tptacek »

ars wrote: post #124

Was the question about the baby really so bad? It seemed to me like the person asking about it tried as hard as he could to ask it in a positive way (i.e. not accusatory, but offering opportunity to explain).

Yes. In an employment setting, it's an unlawful question. The reason it's unlawful to ask a job candidate the question is the same reason that it's unethical to ask a prospective investment target: the premise of the question is bogus, and rebutting it requires the candidate to explain and defend private child care and home life arrangements.

Offering a candidate an "opportunity to explain" a question that shouldn't have been asked in the first place isn't a positive thing.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#234

Post by gfodor »

selmnoo wrote: post #142
evilduck wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think another important thing to consider is that not everyone who takes offense to another's use of language is always a victim, but they'll gladly play the role of victim if we allow it. Sometimes people are actively looking to be offended. Take this one for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oc1zGRUPztc

> Sometimes people are actively looking to be offended. Take this one for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oc1zGRUPztc That reminds me of a conversation I had nearly a decade ago with a black (African immigrant) friend. I don't remember the details, but basically he said that he was annoyed that the words "dark" and "black" had negative connotations. I knew him well enough to know that he wasn't trolling, and…

Seems obvious to me that black has negative connotations for all the things it's directly associated with due to the physical fact it's the absence of light. Darkness, death, etc. Humans are hard-wired to fear these things because without light we can't see and if we can't see we can't avoid danger, etc.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#235

Post by mwetzler »

jawns wrote: post #6

I think the big takeaway here, not just for women but for anyone in the workplace who feels uncomfortable with or offended by something someone else has said, is to consider the intent. Sometimes somebody says something offensive, and they don't even know they're being offensive. And in those cases, you can take them aside, explain to them why it's offended you, and hopefully they'll say, "Oh, dreadfully sorry, I did…

I don't think the big takeaway is about how women should act/think.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#236

Post by tptacek »

huu wrote: post #3

I'd say a man placing her hand in his unzipped pants counts as criminal behavior.

It is criminal behavior. In Illinois, the relevant criminal statute is Criminal Sexual Abuse, which is a class-1 felony. Coercing the victim into touching the accused is specifically included.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#237

Post by pencilcode »

sliverstorm wrote: post #172
stormbrew wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's even worse than being 'crafty', they're actually trying to show you respect under the idea that because you're with her you have a claim on her and they're deferring to that. Which is incredibly creepy and offensive.

Well, or they just feel that they will be much less successful hitting on a girl who is accompanied by a guy, platonic or otherwise.

And/or they simply want to avoid a direct confrontation, which might happen when a man is present, but not when the woman is alone. This just happened to me today, biking and of course i heard some rude comments. Really wanted to tell them to fuck off but then I would engage, they might respond, etc, and my biking zen would be even more disturbed.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#238

Post by tptacek »

_tlf7 wrote: post #189

I'm a woman who is new to hacker news. I've been told I have to be on this thing if I ever want to apply for YC. I don't know if I'll ever do that but I don't want to ruin that opportunity. I've been reading through all these comments and a lot of them make me sick to my stomach. Articles that surround women in the work force interest me because my startup is in this space, but at what cost of my sanity do I have to…

Something about this topic makes the Internet creepers come out of the woodwork. It seems to be much easier for them to get a charge out of gender-based stories than, say, Java type system debates.

What I can tell you as someone who has spent altogether too much time on HN is that for the most part, the people writing the worst comments on these threads are drive-by anonymous trolls, and not serious members of the community. Further, people who have a serious HN presence who contribute to the muck on these threads are, as you can see from the grey cast their comments take, driving themselves into pariah status. You'll notice that even when a creepy comment is written by someone with a lot of karma... they're gonna tend not to have their real names on their profile.

There's probably not a whole lot HN can do in the near term to keep hostile, offensive noise off threads like these. Anyone can make an account, and some people keep a whole battery of sockpuppet accounts handy so they can stir shit up on the threads. All I can tell you is that if you feel like you need to stand up for yourself on a thread like this, there are lots of long-time serious people on HN who will have your back. If you don't want to do that, nobody can blame you.

Welcome to HN, by the way. Stick around.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#239

Post by sunir »

scott_karana wrote: post #38
rafekett wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i'm incredibly reluctant to post in threads like this, but I think this attitude is actually hurting diversity in the industry: excessive "chivalry" by males gives more of an illusion of preferential treatment when women stand up to discrimination, which is just more fuel for the gender war fire. women need our support, not our defense. it's fine to be outraged, but your response should not be to go on the offensive.

If women can't speak up, lest they be further marginalized, and men can't speak up, lest they add more fuel, what can be done?... (Not that I disagree at all! Serious question.)

Speaking up is required and necessary. You have to bring terrible situations to light.

Wrecking people's reputations and careers with mob justice is unacceptable. You must not burn situations with fire.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#240

Post by mturmon »

_tlf7 wrote: post #189

I'm a woman who is new to hacker news. I've been told I have to be on this thing if I ever want to apply for YC. I don't know if I'll ever do that but I don't want to ruin that opportunity. I've been reading through all these comments and a lot of them make me sick to my stomach. Articles that surround women in the work force interest me because my startup is in this space, but at what cost of my sanity do I have to…

The original article is, clearly, very high-quality and based on a lot of experience.

Too much of the community here is unable to have either an intelligent, or empathetic, response to articles like this. Many comments are not even trying to learn something from the OP, which should be the baseline approach. Even a small proportion of these comments can completely derail the thread.

They employ a variety of diversionary tactics (probably unconscious!). Like hyper-rational "what if"/"did they consider"/"yes, but" reactions, objections to language in the original post, objections to hypothetical language or attitudes in other places on the internet.

I assume that it's a maturity issue, although I've known immature people who have healthier reactions to issues regarding equal treatment in the workplace than the ones here.

(Incidentally, before taking these opinions too seriously, it might be funny to peruse https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5326511)

Post reply on HN