Yuck. I felt slimy after reading this article. What female would participate in this?
[deleted]
Silicon Valley's Secretive, Orgiastic Side
81–90 of 219 posts
Re: Silicon Valley's Secretive, Orgiastic Side
#82Preface: I spend a lot of this response talking about a hypothetical high-status man and a low-status woman. This isn't to be sexist or perpetuate stereotypes; it's just to use a common example that we've all probably seen and witnessed. Preface 2: this response was to someone else in this thread but it got pulled out to the top level for some reason. The intention of the article was, probably, just to shed light on…
The old-fashioned method you are suggesting requires much more effort than Silicon Valley parties that are currently being thrown. Changing who you are as a person is tough, and why do that when there are easier options. In places like SV and Seattle where there is an imbalance between men/women, you could follow these instructions perfectly but you would still be playing with bad odds.
There was recently an article about a prostitution ring busted in Seattle involving Amazon/Microsoft employees, which just shows these type of situations are inevitable in male-dominated industries, and wealth just exasperates the issue.
The old-fashioned method is one of those win-win situations, but if you're willing to let go of being morally correct, it certainly does not hold up against what is currently going on.
Re: Silicon Valley's Secretive, Orgiastic Side
#83This sounds like something out of Eyes Wide Shut, but with social awkwardness, baggy dad jeans, and crocs and socks. I can't imagine this is emotionally healthy for most of the folks involved. The once socially-exiled men trading wealth and drugs and (implicit) promises of career advancement for sex. The women who hope to leverage their looks for access to a better life, but risk ruining their reputations due to soci…
> Orgies are fine. I've never been to one and have no desire to go to one. The real issue here is the power-asymmetry between the men and women involved. Very true. I feel that if these people were really in the business to live out their kinks they would be a hell of a lot more explicit and safe about these things. As far as I can tell none of these people would explicitly refer to any of these parties as an Orgy in…
>none of these people would explicitly refer to any of these parties as an Orgy in the invite, leaving me to believe they are ashamed of the inherent sexism in the actions they are performing.
Or they're ashamed about living in a wider society that isn't fully accepting of the practice.
Be careful with that brush you're painting with. There are plenty of now-accepted lifestyles that previously got the exact same treatment. "They act that way because they know they're wrong!" often turns to "Oh, they acted that way because the rest of us were assholes about it."
Re: Silicon Valley's Secretive, Orgiastic Side
#84My goodness, the pearl clutching sex panic is hilarious coming from Vanity Fair. Rich people have parties and they're fun because when you're rich you can afford good drugs and nice venues. News at 10.
You've missed the point. Orgies are fine. Drugs are fine (or at the very least your choice). There is however a huge contrast between smoking a bit of pot and going to an explicitly organized orgy with an enforced ratio and being fed MDMA and expensive presents by a CEO who wants to fuck you and your best friend.
Why is there a huge contrast, and how is this different from, well, basically all orgies we've heard about for decades now? Drug use is common at such events. The reported MDMA use is entirely consensual, so you are distorting things when you speak of someone being "being fed MDMA".
Re: Silicon Valley's Secretive, Orgiastic Side
#85This is a nothing burger of an article. It's about consensual drug use and sex among adults. It happens to involve rich and powerful people who (gasp) can throw these kinds of parties. In any unequal society, there will be people who are willing to trade sex for financial security or access to power, with others who are seeking sex. It would be deeply naive to think otherwise. The outrage here strikes me as hollow.
I think the outrage comes from the appearance of predatory behavior by men who hold great power in an already male-dominated industry.
I'm sure it's nice to have enough money to get people to bend to your will, but using it to manipulate people who are already marginalized in your industry into sleeping with you is not exactly an ethical thing to do. It may not be illegal, but people should maybe ask themselves if the men who use their money for sexual conquest are the kind of men we want controlling tens of billions of dollars in capital.
I have no problem with open-relationships, group sex, drug use etc. amongst consenting adults - I have dabbled myself - but I do have a problem with power dynamics coming into play and exerting unfair pressure on people to engage in sexual situations that they wouldn't otherwise consent to.
Re: Silicon Valley's Secretive, Orgiastic Side
#86There's a lot in this article that raises red flags for me, but more about the journalism then the subject. There's an element of sensationalism implying that this is a 'side' of Silicon Valley without offering evidence of prevalence.
> ... Founder X told me.
The things here on the record are by those who aren't involved, those who are involved speaking on the record do so anonymously. It really seems less that this is a 'side' of Silicon Valley but more that there is a small number of people engaged in the activity.
Further drawing into question the author's credibility...
>Managing directors at top-tier investment banks may pocket a million a year and be worth tens of millions after a long career.
Principals at mid-tier firms can make a couple million per year. A million dollar quarterly bonus for a fund manager isn't absurd. Henry Paulson took the Treasury Secretary job because it gave him a tax-free sale of his $500M worth of equities after being a Managing Director at Goldman Sachs.
Those at VC funds may have more influence socially because they hold purse strings, but banking is the 'traditional' way to make too much money. I'm really having a hard time not thinking that the entire article is exaggerated.
Re: Silicon Valley's Secretive, Orgiastic Side
#87So...a Silicon Valley version of a Hellfire club [1]? What's the deal with that hot tub party photo from 1996? In particular what is supporting the laptop? It appears to be right on the surface of the water, which would be a ridiculous way to try to use it, as any ripples or waves would get it wet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellfire_Club
Could be a Toughbook, although doubt it.
Introduced in '96: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toughbook
Re: Silicon Valley's Secretive, Orgiastic Side
#88My goodness, the pearl clutching sex panic is hilarious coming from Vanity Fair. Rich people have parties and they're fun because when you're rich you can afford good drugs and nice venues. News at 10.
You've missed the point. Orgies are fine. Drugs are fine (or at the very least your choice). There is however a huge contrast between smoking a bit of pot and going to an explicitly organized orgy with an enforced ratio and being fed MDMA and expensive presents by a CEO who wants to fuck you and your best friend.
women trading sex for gifts. Gasp. Say it aint so. Let's call pulitzer right now.
Re: Silicon Valley's Secretive, Orgiastic Side
#89Re: Silicon Valley's Secretive, Orgiastic Side
#90I think there is a certain amount of denial about male sexuality. It's like trying to change the fundamental personality traits of a child: it won't work and will probably result in someone who is antisocial or otherwise crazy. I don't know why we can't have a discussion about this. Possibly feminism is caught up in a narrative that is overly female-centric, which isn't really unexpected (or entirely unreasonable). B…
This should be obvious, but since it apparently isn't: if you think Google image search provides a useful and cogent analysis of any complex social issue or movement, you are...um, uh, not correct.