301–310 of 882 posts
I give a lot of credit to women like Susan Fowler who were brave enough to speak out, with starting what feels a bit like a tidal wave. I hope we see similar light shone on institutionalized racism.
How is it that the old money industries of Wall Street and Hollywood, no vanguards of gender egalitarianism themselves, seem to have less flagrant sexual harassment issues? Do they keep them under wraps or are they just more mature by now?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you're right. It's "unlawful" but handled civilly. While looking up the relevant law, I looked through the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sex and various other things, and discovered that there is an explicit exception written in to the law for members of the Communist Party. So you can totally discriminate against any commies who might try to work for you.…
Jeez, the Cold War was a strange time. The exception seems especially weird since political party affiliation wasn't a protected class in the law to begin with. I guess that meant you legally could say, "We only hire non-Communists, regardless of sex/race/religion/...; and white Communist Jain men of Estonian origin." I wonder if it was just a "safeguard" against members of CPUSA claiming their membership was a relig…
http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=...
It sounds like it was an amendment introduced by a confused lawmaker who wanted to make sure the law wouldn't stop companies from firing Communists. The amendment was then accepted on the basis that it didn't make any difference (since as you note party affiliation isn't protected in the first place), so it wouldn't do any harm to include it.
Harassment goes both ways. I have worked in Silicon Valley for 8 years. I have heard women managers and even a CEO say and do inappropriate things. Not only did the woman CEO say horrible things about her employees, she was also a bad CEO.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a bit of a different scenario, though. The statement I objected to is sexist in at least one of these two ways: 1) it presumes that women appreciate these advances from men in positions of power simply because they're attractive (i.e. that harrassment is "forgiven by default" if it's done by an attractive guy) or, 2) women are vacuous and easily charmed by attractive men to the point where they don't recognize…
It probably isn't sexist to say that people appreciate advances from someone who is extremely attractive, as long as both are available and looking. The problem is that it's inappropriate to express interest if you're in a position of power over someone, whether you're a man or a woman. I think you were saying that, but point #1 lacks that context.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My point holds as long as false accusations are possible. Women, like men, are not all angels. Sexism, or even patriarchy, has no gender.
False accusations are basically not possible though. The people getting in trouble right now are not the borderline cases of someone saying an awkward comment here or there. The people getting in trouble are the serial harassers who are so egregiously bad that a multitude of incidents are documented. Your big standard subtle sexist or tech douche bro has nothing to worry about.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My point holds as long as false accusations are possible. Women, like men, are not all angels. Sexism, or even patriarchy, has no gender.
False accusations are basically not possible though. The people getting in trouble right now are not the borderline cases of someone saying an awkward comment here or there. The people getting in trouble are the serial harassers who are so egregiously bad that a multitude of incidents are documented. Your big standard subtle sexist or tech douche bro has nothing to worry about.
What are your thoughts on women with borderline personality disorder abusing an environment in which the burden of proof is placed entirely on the defendant?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What would be enough to you?
It would be a good start if he came to this realization on his own, instead of right after being contacted by the New York Times going "Hey, we're going to publish a story about your sexual harassment, do you want to dispute this account".
The point is that it's probably a mistake to treat him the same way you'd treat certain kinds of felons. Part of that is to give him an opportunity to contribute in a positive way to the world, like everyone else. If he's genuine, then isn't there some way to do that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know many people like that, and no, they don't derive an enjoyable power trip out of being rejected at all. Theybdon't know they can get away with it. They don't know that they are doing it . These people are rarely evil and predatory. They usually genuinely believe that the behavior they are exhibiting is desireable. They think that this is how the game is played, and these things are a form of peacocking. They th…
I know many people like that, and no, they don't derive an enjoyable power trip out of being rejected at all. Theybdon't know they can get away with it. They don't know that they are doing it. These people are rarely evil and predatory. They usually genuinely believe that the behavior they are exhibiting is desirable. Basically, power corrupts. Being a boss, an investor, or an employer comes with power. Just having t…
We absolutely should encourage this, but let's not ignore that we need to build a culture that doesn't ostracize and attack people when they do this.
So far, we have HR departments that have an incentive to ignore, minimize or deflect these problems. We have a culture of employment that says that this is all part of dealing with a job in a tough industry. And we have internet trolls ready to harass people when they come out against this behavior.
The first part, of asserting yourself and claiming your agency, is extraordinarily important. But there's so much more to it. If someone is sexually harassed, and they hit a brick wall at every turn, the best case scenario is that they ditch the startup or tech industry and go to more established companies that actually have a solid culture and process in place. And that is an absolute loss for everyone, especially because the kind of person who can see everything weighed against them and still takes a stand is what the startup scene is supposed to be all about. We shouldn't punish or ignore those people.