Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says • Hacker News Board

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#491

Post by jxramos » Mon, Jan 30, 2023, 6:29 PM UTC

NeverFade wrote: post #89

jxramos wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Usually you mention that sort of compensation opportunity cost and the hiring company can match it with a sign on bonus to make a pain free transition.

We're really assuming a lot about the new employer here. Let's not get too smug about the great employment market we've had for the past decade. It may not last forever, or much longer. Also, it depends on the opportunity cost. It's great to think you're such a great guy that any employer will pay anything to have you, but that's simply not true for most people. If you're losing out on a major grant or bonus, that co…

it is and there's nothing formulaic here nor any guarantees. Folks can also sit and wait it out and tell the recruiters "now's not a good time but I can reach out to you after X months and we can continue from where we left off once I secure XYZ".

People can also decide to pass on deferred compensation when it's not "life changing money" as I heard one individual express once when he left behind some pension or stock or whatever the carrot was that was held out in the nearish future at a previous company I was at. Basically end this deferred compensation for the promise of a better one albeit with a later maturity date.

Lots of calculus and variables involved in these situations obviously but it never hurts to ask and align on these sorts of things where possible. Folks usually don't get mad when others act in their best interest, they'd do the same if they were in the others shoes is how it seems to me.

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#492

Post by sokoloff » Mon, Jan 30, 2023, 6:54 PM UTC

yowzadave wrote: post #480

sokoloff wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard disagree. If I decide I can have a closed-door 1:1 or a lunch 1:1 with some of my direct reports but not with any that are female, I’m inherently discriminating against them. I’d way rather treat all employees fairly and fade a <1% chance of a false accusation than to treat employees unequally and cut that chance in half.

Would it be a viable solution to always have a third party present, whether your direct report is male or female?

It's one of the "possible, but not really viable" solutions I think. I'm probably not going to coordinate schedules in order to have a chaperone present for all of my meetings, not going to cancel meetings when the chaperone is sick/on PTO, not going to take the chaperone on all of my business trips, and probably not going to discuss confidential business topics (upcoming mergers, divestitures, or budget problems brought on by carrying 1/4 of our headcount as chaperones in the company, etc).

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#493

Post by mc32 » Mon, Jan 30, 2023, 7:25 PM UTC

yowzadave wrote: post #480

sokoloff wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard disagree. If I decide I can have a closed-door 1:1 or a lunch 1:1 with some of my direct reports but not with any that are female, I’m inherently discriminating against them. I’d way rather treat all employees fairly and fade a <1% chance of a false accusation than to treat employees unequally and cut that chance in half.

Would it be a viable solution to always have a third party present, whether your direct report is male or female?

Most of these places have seccams every so many feet from each other. Team rooms could have them w/o audio so people can feel at ease to express themselves while also having a silent witness in the event of any physical aspects of the meeting were to come up --obvs there are some limits as most have a def retention of 30 days.

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#494

Post by gallopingcomp » Mon, Jan 30, 2023, 7:28 PM UTC

olalonde wrote: post #387

machina_ex_deus wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real issue is that people stopped caring about whatever the justice system is going to decide. There's a new religion of social justice, and this religion is harsher than even the old religions. The old religions you were at least judged by an omnipotent being who could see the whole picture. This new woke religion have you judged by a dumb mob. Everyone's playing the judge and everyone's responsible to punishing…

> And this is a direct result of lack of religion. The absence of religion isn't lack of oppression, it's oppression by a dumb blind mob. Religion isn't the truly primitive behavior, the truly primitive behavior is this dumb mob social justice that's spreading now. Nah, they're both truly primitive. China doesn't have this "dumb mob social justice" phenomenon and is largely irreligious. Irrationality isn't inevitable…

China has Internet mobs and flame wars too (across many of the same range of issues and sides), but this is usually suppressed by widespread censorship that simply shuts down all discourse.

I would even argue that the mentalities behind the worst performative excesses of social justice culture are even more present in China, by virtue of it being less democratic in practice but more democratic on paper. It’s just harder to accidentally form a mob, or at least that’s the perception.

(And when they do occur you don’t hear about them much. High-profile nationalistic riots and ethnic riots had taken place, offline, at least in the recent past.)

And a lot of religion, spirituality and superstitions, anything from Buddhism to Taoism to folk religion/superstitions to evangelical Christianity. And religious cults too. Yes, even among the educated elite.

It’s just that you don’t often hear about them, because image is everything, and _Jia-chou bu-neng wai yang_.

(Source: grew up there.)

Irrationality is in practice inevitable, because lack of information and motivated reasoning. Complete freedom and moral relativism won’t stop it. Cultural relativism won’t stop it. Authoritarianism won’t stop it. Humans are flawed. It’s better if we all got used to that concept, and both (1) thought more about what we know and how we know it, and (2) try to mitigate the impact of this. How this might work in practice, I do not have a clear idea, but growth driven by engagement metrics needs to die.

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#495

Post by homonculus1 » Mon, Jan 30, 2023, 7:41 PM UTC

boppo1 wrote: post #22

siva7 wrote: post #7

Seems like no one believes him. Let's be honest: How often have you heard news about a woman molesting a man vs. a man molesting a woman?

I was working as a busboy reaching up for a glass when an older server woman grabbed my ass so 'deeply' that her fingers almost reached my testicles, then squeezed like she was wringing out an orange. Even though I was unattracted to her, I was flattered at the time. Nonetheless, I'm pretty sure that's well past the bar for molestation.

[dead]

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#496

Post by RangerScience » Mon, Jan 30, 2023, 7:48 PM UTC

malwrar wrote: post #320

RangerScience wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I agree with your take despite the downvotes. Ultimately this person went on to be successful and was formidable and honest. They deserved the chance they were given, just as most of the other candidates so far have made it my way (imo) did. People have taken chances on me too. Real life is full of complex feelings. I don’t really think this experience demonstrated anything to me other than that this sort of pressure…

Totes, and thanks :)

BTW, I think about this conversation a lot, any time I think about ends versus means, you might also appreciate it: https://strongfemaleprotagonist.com/issue-6/page-112-2/

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#497

Post by caminante » Mon, Jan 30, 2023, 7:51 PM UTC

operatingthetan wrote: post #231

kodah wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frankly, I read this article this morning when it broke on the NYP. The NYP stays in my feed but when I read their stuff I almost always cross it with other sources. There are none though because all that exists of this story right now is the docket. Miller, Google, and Olahan aren't talking. How victims are portrayed in the media matters a great deal. Media can skewer a case by either poking holes in it or by flatly…

Trying to reason with someone who flat out rejects nuance might be futile.

Who rejected nuance?

The parent expressly left their comment un-nuanced.

Are you redefining the term?

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#498

Post by bradlys » Mon, Jan 30, 2023, 7:57 PM UTC

unglaublich wrote: post #421

crossroadsguy wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ugly truth is — false sexual harassment complaint is one those things in life you keep hoping and praying it never happens to you. But if it does you’re screwed one way or the other. The stigma that it “automatically” brings just doesn’t go away. It just doesn’t. You forever become “that” person. And I really don’t know how it can be fixed. That’s just how it is.

There's an impressive movie about such a situation: "The Hunt" (2012).

This movie alone is the number one reason I will never work or be alone with children that aren’t my own.

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#499

Post by seadan83 » Mon, Jan 30, 2023, 8:01 PM UTC

schroeding wrote: post #125

seadan83 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's one of those, "see, woman can do X too, so why are we so focused on only men doing X" Similar too, "white people are shot by cops". Similar to "white people are discriminated against in colleges". The point is true it is shitty no matter. Though, now the conversation is shifted if a person were to focus on root causes of either problem. Overall, false equivalence.

... so don't talk about it, keep it quiet, because it "shifts the conversation"? :/ Sorry, I see your point, I know that this is used to derail conversations, you're right, but "false equivalence" kinda implies that one thing is worse than the other. It is, systematically, but it isn't, personally. If you were raped, it doesn't help you that the power dynamic is and was different in our society between genders and yo…

It is hard to know whether that would be a willful mis-reading or not. Creates the straw retort, "see, you don't care about victim X at all, you are a hypocrite and not actually wanting to solve this problem! X matter too!" For some, having that kind of dialogue is their goal rather than actually discuss the problem of sexual harrasment.

The false equivalence is not the impact of the problem, but the prevalence of the problem.

AFAIK, most yearly sexual harrassment training at workplaces is mandated in most states. That training makes it clear any gender can instigate harrassment. I'm surprised that this seems like anything new.

If a person wants to deal with sexual harassment, you kinda need to make an impact on the 90% causes of the problem. Instead, this kind of "man bites dog" story does results in debates of nitpicking. Nobody said this isn't horrible for anyone to experience, men or woman. But, creating a false equivalence that this is an equal problem for everyone ignores what are going to be otherwise uncomfortable truths.

It's one of those problems where one side doesn't need to win, just make sure that the other side does not (eg, troll, buy time, change the subject, what-aboutism, attack the messenger, etc..)

The data we have is that sexual assault and harrasment from woman is rare. That does not mean it does not happen, but it is rare. Some commentators stated that men being harassed is under reported, well it is overall under-reported.

In sum, sexual harrasment is a big problem no matter who experiences it. Though, the focus here creates a real risk of a "man bites dog" type of story.

Re: Google exec fired after female boss groped him at drunken bash, suit says

#500

Post by RangerScience » Mon, Jan 30, 2023, 8:03 PM UTC

ShredKazoo wrote: post #230

kodah wrote: post #18

Probably worth noting this story was first published by the New York Post. Take that for what you will. That said, this is a pretty wild turn of events. From the initial and continued sexual harassment/assault to the racism, and subsequent retaliation. More curious is the very direct "your team is too male" and the encouragement to fire someone. I've heard this hinted at before, but never said out loud for obvious re…

>More curious is the very direct "your team is too male" and the encouragement to fire someone. My friend who still lives in the Valley says this kind of sentiment is incredibly common there nowadays, e.g. advertising an open position and having discussions internally that a man won't be hired for the role. It's pretty surprising to me, because statistics show that most major careers have a gender imbalance in one di…

:shrug: The first computer scientist (IMHO) was a woman - Ada Lovelace [1]. It's also my understanding that, when computers were first introduced, they were mostly seen as aide to secretarial work, which is why a lot of the early computer pioneers were women - it was actually women-dominated at that time [2].

So there's (IMO) historical evidence that it's not inherently a "male" field; which I see as evidence that the imbalance is unexpected and undesirable.

(That said, I can't speak to why it's an "urgent" priority)

[1] Babbage invented the mechanical calculator. Ada realized you could do calculations on something other than numbers. IMO that makes Babbage the first computer engineer, and Ada the first computer scientist.

[2] one article of many on this: https://digitalfuturesociety.com/programming-when-did-womens...