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

Racism at a gaming company

qu33riousity.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 468 posts

Re: Racism at a gaming company

#331

Post by colindoc84 »

taligent wrote: post #316
tptacek wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, because Steve is surely not one of a tiny minority of white people in the office, nor is there a clear cultural connotation/prejudice of white people being thuggish. For whatever it's worth to you to know this: being considered thuggish, or violent, or hotheaded, or unreasonable is a hot-button issue for working black professionals. I've had neighbors complain to me that they can't disagree or argue with anything…

Your definition of thuggish seems a bit off. Thug = a common criminal, who treats others violently and roughly. It's akin to calling someone 'white trash'.

There's nothing about the phrase 'white trash' which implies someone is a criminal, though.

Re: Racism at a gaming company

#332

Post by sadface »

Lukeas14 wrote: post #272
to_jon wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I agree, but some of his content will be a barrier for some people. I'm sure if the tone of the post was milder, most of the comments here would be supportive." -- too typical a response "Peppered throughout the post are cultural signs and signifiers that mark the author as an advocate for a fairly specific set of political and social beliefs." -- completely irrelevant to assessing the facts of the case As a white m…

Regardless of how pissed off he may have been, you don't fight racism with more racism. All that does is exacerbate the situation and hurt your credibility. Calling someone a dumbwhite * might feel good but does nothing for your cause. I've always believed the correct response to racism is to educate. Educate his coworkers on the origin and significance of his necklace and why they shouldn't equate the way he dresses…

It's not his responsibility to "fight racism", it's the responsibility of his employers to provide a non-racist workplace. Your "correct response" is of course ideal, but imagine how draining it would be for someone to attempt to change an corporate culture 200+ people. It's unfair to expect that from an someone whose only wants to not have to endure severe racism at their 9-5.

Re: Racism at a gaming company

#333

Post by saraid216 »

gizmo686 wrote: post #322
saraid216 wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Please understand that the anger such treatment (validly) brings about is incredibly hard to suppress. And also, why should it be suppressed? Integration doesn't work if both parties pretend to be nice but are prepared to find a more underhanded way to stab each other in the back once the negotiations have ended.

Integration works fine if both parties pretend to play nice. The not nice people die off, and the young generation never thinks of being not nice.

This deserves an analysis far more nuanced than I'm able to deliver. How has the integration of Italians versus Irish gone in New York? I can't answer that, because I've never studied it. I suspect it went better than the integration of whites and blacks in the South. Why? I can't answer that for the same reason.

I suspect we're both right for different reasons under different circumstances, and it would be fascinating to actually go through the histories and anthropologies to understand what those reasons and circumstances might be.

Re: Racism at a gaming company

#334

Post by dmorgan »

MartinCron wrote: post #297
dmorgan wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the word "oppression" perfectly applies to multiple unwelcome instances of strong verbal abuse coming from someone in a privileged class directed at someone in a non-privileged class. If there's a better word, I haven't found it yet. Are white people supposed to be privileged in a company and black people non-privileged? Was he denied changes to get a promotion, or had he to make do with less wage? What was…

Are you seriously asking these questions? Do you realize that you're coming across as defending deplorable behavior? Do you care? Would you say these sorts of things to the author's face? There's a large sea of historical context that we're all swimming in. You can pretend it doesn't exist and make your cute little conjectures about Irish and Redneck jokes.

>Are you seriously asking these questions? Do you realize that you're coming across as defending deplorable behavior? Do you care? Would you say these sorts of things to the author's face?

I sure would. He comes off as a judgemental, reverse-racist (I lost count of the "anti-white-in-general" references), and unable to take a joke guy with an axe to grind.

I care far more for actual cases of racism, like an over-representation of the black population being in prison, or the government (and the country) pissing all over native american rights, that for some guy crying over some jokes said in his office without any links to actual facts of racism (like, I was paid less because I was black, I was not promoted because I was black, etc).

>There's a large sea of historical context that we're all swimming in. You can pretend it doesn't exist and make your cute little conjectures about Irish and Redneck jokes.

YOU might be swimming in. This is the internet, it's global. My country didn't trade in black slaves, so I could care less for that hypocritical "after the fact" guilt.

Re: Racism at a gaming company

#335

Post by Apocryphon »

methoddk wrote: post #326
Apocryphon wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except he never used that sort of language towards his coworkers at a professional setting.

So racism is okay as long as it's not in a professional setting?

His racism is not the subject of dispute here. The racism that the story focuses on is the one that created a hostile workplace and is the subject of legal action.

Re: Racism at a gaming company

#336

Post by [deleted] »

MartinCron wrote: post #297
dmorgan wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the word "oppression" perfectly applies to multiple unwelcome instances of strong verbal abuse coming from someone in a privileged class directed at someone in a non-privileged class. If there's a better word, I haven't found it yet. Are white people supposed to be privileged in a company and black people non-privileged? Was he denied changes to get a promotion, or had he to make do with less wage? What was…

Are you seriously asking these questions? Do you realize that you're coming across as defending deplorable behavior? Do you care? Would you say these sorts of things to the author's face? There's a large sea of historical context that we're all swimming in. You can pretend it doesn't exist and make your cute little conjectures about Irish and Redneck jokes.

[deleted]

Re: Racism at a gaming company

#337

Post by graue »

tptacek wrote: post #291
swang wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> * A black coworker is singled out by another (non-black) coworker with "watch out for that guy, he’s trouble, he talks a lot of shit" I think you read that wrong. The black coworker (Mike) said that in reference to Steve not the other way around. Given that, do you think the black coworker should be fired for saying that about Steve? Is it okay for the Mike to say that about Steve but not the other way around, rega…

No, because Steve is surely not one of a tiny minority of white people in the office, nor is there a clear cultural connotation/prejudice of white people being thuggish. For whatever it's worth to you to know this: being considered thuggish, or violent, or hotheaded, or unreasonable is a hot-button issue for working black professionals. I've had neighbors complain to me that they can't disagree or argue with anything…

Thanks for posting this. So much of HN seems blissfully unaware of what privilege is (white privilege in this case), and I hope your explanation will help some people start to understand.

Re: Racism at a gaming company

#338

Post by MartinCron »

thebigshane wrote: post #315
MartinCron wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that there is such a ...passionate... discussion about it, from "this is terrible" to "this guy is just being too sensitive" or "OMG, the OP is racist as well!" shows that there isn't a consensus opinion about this kind of behavior in the workplace for our industry. This, along with sexism, is difficult to talk about well, but I don't know if that means we need to stop talking.

Do we need a "consensus opinion"? Does it need to happen here? My point is that discussing controversial social issues is generally unproductive. Worth thinking about, but unless PG devotes his next essay to this topic, I don't think anyone is going to be changing their minds here. For what it's worth I agree with most of your comments on this thread, and the backlash you are getting has really lowered my average opi…

I totally see where you're coming from, and I don't think that we need a consensus opinion on everything. I'm just really disturbed that "don't be a sexist asshole" and "don't be a racist asshole" are still actual controversial positions in a community I care so much about.

I don't know if talking about it will make anything any better, but I have a hard time with the idea of not talking about it as a way to improve things.

Re: Racism at a gaming company

#339

Post by dkarl »

tptacek wrote: post #259
JPKab wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brilliant analysis. I am one of the readers who had deep concern for the truthfulness of these observations. If they are true, then he got screwed, royally, and should sue. Except for the pendant comment. That's just a case of taking yourself too seriously. Yet another nail in the coffin of his credibility.

The things you think sap his credibility add to his credibility for me; if he was making things up, it would have been easy for him to leave his own politics and sensitivities out of the post to make it more painful for his ex-employer. To me, it reads like he's just venting to his peers. We're the ones making a big deal out of it.

In this situation perhaps it's most constructive to proceed with the conversation under the assumption that he honestly related his experiences, while acknowledging that we don't have a solid reason for believing him. We could run around in circles all day trying to reason things out -- for example, I could point out that exaggeration and embellishment are normal when people vent to their peers -- but we'd never get any closer to the truth. Unless we know him or the people he's talking about, we can't evaluate his credibility without making some unjustified assumption (such as the assumption that he's worse at lying than you are at spotting a lie,) but we can justify treating the story as honest on the grounds that it leads to a more interesting conversation than treating it as a lie.

Re: Racism at a gaming company

#340

Post by MartinCron »

RivieraKid wrote: post #311
benihana wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Get a grip. Murderous rage isn't typically an acceptable response to things that upset you.

Murderous rage = being very angry. Not wanting to literally kill someone.

Metaphors are hard sometimes. I'm learning to be more cautious with them.
Post reply on HN