It's Different for Girls

http://heidiroizen.tumblr.com/post/84530650750/its-different-for-girls

by tkorotkikh • 12 years ago

427 379 12 years ago

heidiroizen.tumblr.com

dang3• 12 years ago

This is a good, substantive article that draws on long experience.

Commenters: before posting, please ensure that your comments are both substantive and civil. You should always do that on HN, but for obvious reasons, this topic requires a reminder.

carrotleads3• 12 years ago

Well I should have realised that before putting in my comments. Got massive downvotes, the reason seem obvious now. Maybe I should have atleast have been substantive. Ah well, lessons learned.

huu2• 12 years ago

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

Swizec5• 12 years ago

It's also very relaxing. I do it all the time when, say, watching television.

cobrausn• 12 years ago

You probably misread the previous statement - it says placing her hand in his pants...

EDIT: Dear downvoters: This statement is a favor to the guy above me, who probably thought the statement was referring to Al Bundy like behavior of watching TV with hand in pants.

EDIT 2: Removing some needless name-calling. Was just annoyed.

tptacek14• 12 years ago

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.

AngusMcQuarrie• 12 years ago

Speaking as a privileged cis straight white male under 40 here, can we at least as a community agree to roast assholes who sexually harass our female compatriots alive? If I ever caught someone I know pulling shit like that, I would make it my personal mission to wreck their reputation and end their career. I realize that's not going to level the playing field completely, but I cannot believe stories like this still come out in 2014.

rafekett• 12 years ago

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.

munin• 12 years ago

Attitudes like this are why stories like this still happen in 2014.

scott_karana• 12 years ago

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.)

nmcfarl• 12 years ago

Maybe. But from my perspective when people are actively destroying communities, companies, or other groups I’m a member of, I tend to take action. And I’d be very disinclined to just skip on action because it could be seen as defending a woman.

However it should be said that so many of these things are dependent on the people involved. I’ve never been accused of/(praised for) acting chivalrous in nearly 40 years on the planet. I suspect I can get away with things that people who open car doors can’t.

However I bet those people have plenty of tools at their disposal to make it clear that they aren’t defending anyone - but rather attacking poor behavior. I say they should act and use those tools, rather than not acting.

sunir3• 12 years ago

Vigilanteism is not the right answer. It turns this problem that happens in the real world to real people into a weapon to be used for dishonest ends by people who know a mere accusation is as good as a conviction.

We all want to live in a world where people are treated professionally.

So, please just step into that world. Expect others to do so as well. Hold those that behave abhorrently to account by all means, but take the high road.

news_to_me• 12 years ago

Lack of diversity in the tech industry truly saddens me. I love technology, and I want to encourage everyone else to discover how magical it is. It's a tragedy that the industry can be so hostile to some, for apparently no reason.

But as a white male, I feel powerless to do anything. I can't speak for women, or for other races, or really for anyone else. I want to help fix this, but where do I begin?

britta• 12 years ago

You can educate yourself and others! There are lots of resources for learning how to do more, including speaking up to other men and putting some money toward supporting people who are making a difference.

Here's an article with a bunch of options ("What Can Men Do? Men working with other men against patriarchy in technology"): https://medium.com/tech-culture-briefs/a1e93d985af0 - and here's an allies training workshop that you can encourage your company (or your friends' companies) to do: http://adainitiative.org/what-we-do/workshops-and-training/

thenmar3• 12 years ago

I'm curious about how controversial this post seems. It has been bouncing back and forth from light gray to black. Is it that people disagree with educating others? That they have a knee-jerk reaction to the word "patriarchy" and dismiss anyone who uses it? That they idea of "allies training" is somehow repulsive and unfair?

gfodor6• 12 years ago

Sorry, but I find Shanley's approach to framing this issue completely the opposite of the OP here. The OP sees the good in good men and lifts them up. The closing point about the joke she shared with her colleagues underlines it: there are people who are unable to laugh off a "dick in your hand" joke regardless of context and who it comes from. Not because of a lack of sense of humor, but because any such joke will be framed as oppressive and sexist due to the gender of the person it comes from.

Shanley sees all men as de facto oppressors (of varying degrees) due to their gender and the existence of the patriarchy. (Don't believe me? Look at her point: "Men need to work with each other on sexism. It is not okay to lean on the class of people you oppress to solve your system or your discomfort with it.".) This is not a productive avenue for making progress IMHO.

jdp235• 12 years ago

britt's post is a substantive answer to 'news_to_me's question, with links off to useful resources.

What does it say about the HN community that it was downvoted?

[And by the way, this is an example of the 'speaking up' that britta mentioned. Guys, when you see this kind of hostile-to-women behavior on HN, call it out.]

cjbprime• 12 years ago

It seems unlikely that, in a hostile industry, you never see anything hostile happening yourself, right? So you can (as we all should) try to call men out on everything they do that's exclusionary.

xbryanx• 12 years ago

You (and me) are in the most powerful group to do something about this issue.

First off, check that you are never participating in the behavior you don't want to see. I'm amazed how often I have to check myself.

Second, use your position of power as a white male to call out other men, privately or otherwise, when you see them behaving like any of the reprobates in this article. You'll be amazed at how much weight your voice can have in these situations.

Third, proactively advocate for women.

calibraxis2• 12 years ago

You can amplify their voices and efforts. For example, depending on your power, you can take Shanley's articles like this (https://medium.com/about-work/514a6edcce2c) and implement them. Or you can disclose your salary. Or install a simple code of conduct.

Society stamped the male designation on my forehead, and feel like there's no end of wonderful things I do that have an immediate impact. Which improve people's dignity and quality of life. Do I attack patriarchy? Good. Do I attack the boss's ability to extract unconscionable hours, dignity and money from his wage-slaves? Good.

But you know that movie Avatar, which portrays the white male hero "leading" an army of poor blue savages? Avoid such corrosive social nonsense, and you'll spend a lot less energy. Simply assist and amplify the efforts of others, share literature which isn't afraid to be radical, and you'll go far.

vezzy-fnord3• 12 years ago

I'm getting an odd vibe from your comment. Almost as if you try to be some heroic anarchist who has swallowed the red pill, except a rather juvenile one.

Indeed, I'm curious how your being a male lets you do "no end of wonderful things that have an immediate impact". Either you're in a high socioeconomic position, or you're overstating your abilities significantly. "Attacking the patriarchy" doesn't mean much, and the latter sounds like it comes straight out of a parodic parable.

Finally, that colorful interpretation of Avatar was interesting, though not particularly innovative.

logfromblammo• 12 years ago

You're not entirely powerless. There is exactly one person on the planet that you can force to not be an asshole.

Never apologize for anything that is not your fault, and don't cry about the things you have no power to change.

There is no particular reason to wave someone else's war banner. You won't get any trophies or medals for it. So speak for yourself. And if anyone ever tells you to "check your privilege," translate that as "count your blessings," and let them go about their own business.

And I won't say anything more about it, since these sorts of topics tend to attract "downvote for disagreement" moderation.

colmvp• 12 years ago

"Lack of diversity in the tech industry truly saddens me."

Eh. I work in tech in the Bay Area, alongside people from Europe, Asia, South America, and North America. I would say the amount of diversity is far more than what I see working at other industries. Is there a gender imbalance? Sure, but I don't see it as a bad thing considering that not every industry has equal representation of both races and gender. For example, I rarely see public initiatives to get more Asian men to be hollywood stars, models, politicians, teachers, etc. and that doesn't bother me.

jquery• 12 years ago

Have you worked in other industries? Most of them don't hold a candle to tech when it comes to diversity. It's slightly lacking in a few visible areas, but beyond that it is truly one of the most diverse industries in the world. My coworkers are from all over the world, with a huge variety of backgrounds. Get to know them. If you truly work in a mono-culture, that's not the fault of tech, that's an issue with your hiring manager(s).

whiddershins3• 12 years ago

There's an aphorism that true power is never given, it is taken. If that's the case, it actually is entirely up to the oppressed to take power, and the most the people in power can do to support it is not stand in their way.

ben0x5394• 12 years ago

I don't think that's the best conclusion to draw. I'm taking that to mean that the oppressed can't just wait for the oppressors to wake up one day and realize they've been wrong all along. But I don't think it means we get to stand around and do nothing.

wpietri28• 12 years ago

One thing you can do: talk to people like yourself. It is crazy, but there are people who will believe you when you tell them this stuff is a problem in a way they won't believe others. Ditto for proposing solutions. E.g., next time your company is looking to fill positions, try saying, "Say, our pool of applicants last time wasn't very diverse. I'd like to reach out to groups X, Y, and Z, and also a ask wider variety of people vet our job description just to make sure we aren't giving off the wrong signals." It is much easier for a white dude to say that.

You can also do a lot to signal boost. Passing along stories, links, and books is one thing. (I'll often send people to Everyday Sexism or Project Unbreakable, for example, or to particular things on the geek feminism wiki.) And if you notice non-white-male people getting shortchanged at work, do something about it. For example, I've heard a lot of women in tech tell stories of saying things in meetings and getting totally ignored. So be the person who says, "Hey, Jane's point is really interesting, and we went right by it. Jane, could you say that again, and maybe expand a little?"

And you can do things right here. Among a number of groups, Hacker News is basically seen as a wretched hive of scum and villainy. Call out bullshit. Point out the distorting effects of privilege. When people are derailing, don't let it slide.

jawns• 12 years ago

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 didn't realize" -- and they won't do it again.

Which doesn't necessarily mean that people should always be let off the hook if they say/do something in ignorance; there are some things that one ought not be ignorant about.

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.

Swizec5• 12 years ago

And then you have people like me who consider trolling to be the single best way of bonding with people. I don't think I could work with a person I can't say offensive things to and who doesn't say offensive things back.

Maybe I'm just too European, I don't know.

skannamalai• 12 years ago

Are you a person of color? Are you a woman? Are you gay? Are you trans? Are you disabled?

Not trolling, genuinely curious.

Edit: I can't reply to the children (might be my karma game) and so I'll reply here. The linked article is about specifically about power and privilege, and how being a woman in the tech business puts you at a severe disadvantage in your job, in your community of choice. The reason why I ask is justification "I'm European so..." seems dangerously close to "lighten up" or "get a sense of humor". It's fine to put yourself out there on a joke, humor is hard, but rewarding. But when someone takes offense, I find it problematic when all of a sudden it's their problem for not getting your style or sense of humor.

When a privileged person is forced to check their privilege and they respond with "oh, my bad, I didn't realize, etc." I accept maybe they don't have the experience or perspective that comes with being disenfranchised in that particular regard. When they respond with "lighten up" I find there is no attempt to internalize why someone could feel sadness, or discomfort, or frustration about the offensive topic at hand.

wakaflaka• 12 years ago

Actually, I think you are just socially inept.

aaronem6• 12 years ago

Not flexible enough, perhaps. It's all in the context.

abracar8• 12 years ago

Come on, I'm European too and that's not an excuse for hurting people's feelings or worse.

cms07• 12 years ago

I can't believe that you're receiving this poor of a response for acting like a normal person. It's as though everyone on HN is a hypersensitive person.

timsally• 12 years ago

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). That said, good intentions don't lessen impact on victims. Intention sometimes plays a role is determining what punishment is appropriate for the person who did the offensive/criminal act, but that's little consolation to those who are routinely targets of said acts. You're dead, whether the person that killed you meant to kill you or not. Something important to keep in mind in the context of harassment and conduct in the workplace.

evilduck• 12 years ago

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

sliverstorm4• 12 years ago

Intent is huge. If my friend says something incredibly aggressive, but I know they are being facetious or sarcastic or humorous, I will find it amusing. If I know they are being serious, I will not find it amusing.

Actions are generally equal regardless intent, but IMO words depend immensely on intent.

__david__• 12 years ago

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

vacri7• 12 years ago

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

If someone pushes me hard because I might have been hit by a falling item, that has less impact on me than if someone pushes me hard because they want to start a fight or get the better of me in some way.

Most human actions don't result in the finality of death.

taiki• 12 years ago

I really REALLY hope that no one is ignorant to the fact that tricking people to touching their penis is wrong.

I'm REALLY really REALLY hoping.

mhurron• 12 years ago

Knowing something is wrong doesn't mean anything when you think you have the power to overcome any consequences.

brudgers• 12 years ago

Actions which are done without thinking through the consequences are careless, reckless, or negligent. Each of us is free to let such people off the hook when we are the victim as a result of such actions. But just as we are not obligated to do so, neither are other victims. And suggesting that forbearance is what someone else ought to do is bullshit.

A man who treats women poorly isn't ignorant, he's habitual, and the habit was developed and persists because he's been let off the hook or as is the case with the VC's in the story because of a disparity of power.

It's bullying and part and parcel of bullying is a lack of contrition.

namenotrequired• 12 years ago

There's a difference between saying something of which you're not aware it can be offensive, and saying something without thinking about whether it can be offensive.

guelo• 12 years ago

That is not the big takeaway.

The big takeaway is that straight white men's privilege gives them an advantage over everybody else since they face fewer obstacles such as having their hands forced onto a penis while closing a business deal.

drumdance2• 12 years ago

Not that I'm justifying it, but I wonder if the deal would even have gotten to the closing table if Heidi had been male?

teacup506• 12 years ago

straight white men's privilege

The article didn't actually include the man's race.

jamesaguilar• 12 years ago

Totally agree. It's always sad to see the response to this type of news on Hacker News. It inevitably immediately becomes something that is no longer about the problems women face, but a defense of the men. Like, how can you read the article and come back and say, "The big takeaway is, don't get mad at me if I'm just being a guy, because I mean well." What weird heuristic did you use to take the article as being primarily about you and the risk that you might be misperceived? That is not what it is about.

_tlf76• 12 years ago

exactly

mafribe4• 12 years ago

Men live substantially shorter than women, men commit vastly more suicides, men are punished substantially harder than women in courts of law. Men are drafted to armies. Men get their children stolen in divorce cases. Men work vastly harder on average. Consequently men get paid much worse on average for the same amount of work than women. Men pay the majority of taxes, women get the majority of social services. Men are the majority of homeless. Almost all who live in forced celibacy (a form of forced sexuality) are male. Male homosexuality is vastly harder punished than female homosexuality.

It is objectively much harder being male than being female.

ElComradio4• 12 years ago

Where is it writ that a person's right to not endure offensive speech trumps another person's right to express themselves? Of course I would opine that a person being needlessly offensive is a jerk but where would I get off insisting she has to change her behavior to suit my tastes?

zachwooddoughty• 12 years ago

I think it's important to look at this as part of a more widespread issue than a few individuals expressing themselves inappropriately. When women are so ridiculously under-represented in the tech industry and are facing both explicit and structural discrimination, it's important to speak out against this behavior.

Put another way: women's "jerkiness" does not make it harder for men in the tech industry, but men's "jerkiness" does make it harder for women in the tech industry.

arrrg3• 12 years ago

Because that would be a polite thing to do?

This is mostly not about rights. It’s also about proper and polite behaviour.

wpietri28• 12 years ago

That's one good takeaway. But there's one that is more important to me: no matter how good my intent is, it's easy for me to accidentally make people suspect I'm just like some total asshole they've dealt with before.

So I'm going to try harder to avoid triggering those associations. And when I do, I'm going to try to be bolder in apologizing for it and learning from it. My good intentions may explain a fuckup, but they sure don't justify it, and they don't excuse me from taking full responsibility.

sunir3• 12 years ago

Are you sure this is the right take away? It seems extreme to expect you to take full responsibility for some other total asshole. And also kind of immoral to live in a world like this.

I think the expectation of a moral adult is to seek mutual understanding to continually improve yourself to be a positive and constructive element in others' lives.

If you unintentionally offended someone, it's an opportunity to learn more about their world.

Conversely, it's also an opportunity for them to learn about your world. Maybe not everyone they meet is that total asshole, and there are in fact good people in this world. Just be that good person.

pabb• 12 years ago

As someone who actually enjoys making offensive comments in the _right context_, I can't disagree more with you.

When somebody says something offensive, context is everything. If you're in a meeting with a group of adult men that are culturally similar to you and there's nothing pressing on the table, sure, a dick joke might be fine.

But in the case of the article, I think the author even let off lightly situations like the "dick in the hand" anecdote. It's one thing to make an off-color joke to ease the mood when the context is appropriate, but if you're sitting in a room with a woman, and you make a comment like that, you know for a fact you're crossing a boundary, no matter how small it may be.

For some reason, it reminds me of a former (male) roommate of mine who would always make comments containing indirect sexual references in the presence of our (only) female roommate. He would never say something sexually related pertaining to her, but things like "I watch too many TV shows? Nonsense. Are you calling me a whore??" Shit that would be subtle enough that he could easily shrug off an accusation that he was being offensive, yet he very much knew he was trying to spin the conversation toward sex as a means of flirting.

I don't think there are many excuses to be made in these contexts. If you've ever known your mother, or had a sister or a girlfriend who was attractive (and the recipient of suggestive comments), you know exactly what's acceptable and what's not. Picture it's your girlfriend getting harassed.

I'm hardly the whiteknight, social-justice type whatsoever, but for fuck sake, keep business as business and play bullshit kiddie flirt games at the bar.

meric5• 12 years ago

"I don't think there are many excuses to be made in these contexts. If you've ever known your mother, or had a sister or a girlfriend who was attractive (and the recipient of suggestive comments), you know exactly what's acceptable and what's not. Picture it's your girlfriend getting harassed."

Your argument is incomplete. I doubt most people have an attractive women in their lives, having either the role of mother, sister, or girlfriend, since such a minority of women are attractive, even if they might be the only women you notice every day.

mwetzler• 12 years ago

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

joelrunyon2• 12 years ago

That is why I encourage my fellow female trailblazers to look for the intent behind the words. Offensive language is often unintentional, and sometimes you can turn an awkward situation into a bonding experience.

This is probably the most common-sense, insightful piece of advice that our news cycle does its best to make people forget.

thenmar3• 12 years ago

Perhaps, but taking it at face value is dangerously close to thinking it's okay to tell somebody to "man up" or "laugh it off" when they're offended by sexist/racist/offensive comments. Remember, in her example, she says, "I already knew Brad as a great guy and a huge supporter of women". It's not license to tell someone they shouldn't feel offended.

jordo372• 12 years ago

I agree that this is balanced advice, but I worry that it is actually another way of masking the problem. In the example she gave with Brad Feld, his response to her critique wasn't really LESS sexist, just more absurd. That may just be an issue with the the example though.

In a broader sense, intent is nearly impossible to determine, and it's dangerous to put the responsibility for understanding intent on the party that is being offended. I edited a comics section in college, and I am not sure how I feel to this day around the nature of offense and intent, but taken to an extreme this feels similar to someone telling girls to dress conservatively to avoid rape - its not HER job or MY job to make sure that something dumb is not done by another party.

joelrunyon2• 12 years ago

to look for the intent behind the words

It's just giving the benefit of the doubt - not attributing malice to what might be just ignorance.

I think it was a refreshingly balanced perspective.

Dewie4• 12 years ago

Her critique? The way I read it, I interpreted as a joke on her part, which he in turn bounced off of.

What is sexist about "sitting here with our dick in our hands", anyway? Does it say that men are better because they have... dicks to hold on to? That she doesn't have a dick so she can't join in some literal circle jerk later? It's an expression. Sure, it's "othering" in a sense, but all it really is as an expression of a sentiment of passiveness and inactivity. I think most people have felt passive and complacent at some point.

ProAm2• 12 years ago

Not that it ties directly to this article but Ive always found the quote "Judge people by their intentions, not by their actions" to help me quite a bit in the professional world. People can often be frustrating, counter-productive, or as in the case of this article sexist, but sometimes they don't mean to be. When you have to deal with others try and look at what they were intending to do not necessarily the results of what they did.

EDIT I bring this up because of how she ended her blog post and felt it was relevant.

abracar8• 12 years ago

Right - I also find it helpful to judge them for their actions in general, and not just for one stupid thing they may say.

Mz10• 12 years ago

"Believe your eyes over your ears," so to speak. It's a good rule of thumb.

mherkender• 12 years ago

I sorta disagree, actions are what really matter. I think it's good to cut people slack and avoid grudges/judgement in general, but how are we supposed to deal with society-level problems if each example of the problem can be written off as a well-intentioned mistake?

ProAm2• 12 years ago

I can see where you are coming from but if you boil people down to being good or evil (over generalizing), who do you want on your side? There are people who purposely intend to do bad things and do, and there are people who mean to do good things and do bad. No one is perfect and people make mistakes, and results don't always come out as intended. But the people who intentionally act on bad intent are never people you want to work with. To come back to your original statement actions are not what matters in the end (in relation to what hacker news represents) but results are. In the end we all want positive results, but we are all people, and good people will always get you closer to your goal than bad people.

solidsnack9000• 12 years ago

The notion of a concurrence of the "mens rea" (the guilty mind) and the "actus rea" (the guilty act) would seem to apply here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concurrence

A person who did not mean ill warrants different treatment from one who did; but can we ignore their bad behaviour?

bsirkia• 12 years ago

Very refreshing read for a few reasons:

- The use of specific examples, rather than broad generalizations. - Explaining that the intent and attitude of the potential offender makes a huge difference (ie. Feld vs. hand in pants dude). - Acknowledging that even she has made some un-PC comments unintentionally. - Not offering any silver bullet solution, because there isn't one.

As a white guy, hearing stories like this are really helpful at getting a sense of what real world challenges women face in the entrepreneurship/tech world.

wutbrodo2• 12 years ago

Explaining that the intent and attitude of the potential offender makes a huge difference (ie. Feld vs. hand in pants dude).

_what???_ You think INTENT was the difference between those two situations? You really don't see any inherent difference between using an expression that involves genitals but doesn't have anything to do with them and...sexually assaulting by forcing them to touch your genitals? The difference between those two examples had nothing to do with intent or attitude, but the actual action itself was explicitly malevolent in the latter case while accidentally offensive at worst in the former.

aasarava3• 12 years ago

She makes a really good point about pausing to evaluate the intent behind the words -- and even using the opportunity to educate -- rather than always assuming the worst.

But did anyone else feel that Brad Feld was very, very lucky that it was Heidi Roizen in the room and not someone less forgiving when he said, "well if you need a dick to hold you can borrow mine anytime"?

What Brad did in that one comment was underscore the power differential in the room between a number of males and a lone female who had just said she feels "very uncomfortable" (even if she couched it as a joke so as not to rock the boat.) Worse yet, Brad was essentially saying, you're here to service the males. Again, it was a comment made as a joke -- but what a crappy joke, to point out that there's an implicit hierarchy in the room.

The only way I can see how that comment would not have made a woman in the room very uncomfortable (or even any respectful male), is if he said it sardonically to make fun of guys who do say things like that without realizing why it's not acceptable.

EDIT: There are a lot of responses analyzing this particular situation and pointing out that Heidi said she wasn't uncomfortable. My point is not about Brad & Heidi, it is that you can't take this one very particular relationship and setting and extrapolate anything from it. The risk of misreading the situation and making someone feel harassed is so high and happens so often, that sexual innuendo in a professional setting is a bad idea. You can find another way to break the tension or team-build.

marssaxman• 12 years ago

She did not seem to interpret the joke the way in the way that you are doing here. As with most humor, we can assume that a lot of the meaning had to do with tone and body language, and she describes the "borrow mine" comment as something which defused the tension created by an earlier remark.

Udo• 12 years ago

That's exactly what I found so strange about this article. In his first remark the dick is clearly a figure of speech. In this case it's maybe an unfortunate phrase but it doesn't really exclude people without male genitalia (because it's not really about those).

His second remark, however, is clearly innuendo. And that was described as having diffused the situation. As a reader, the first remark did not affect me, but this second one absolutely does feel weird and inappropriate.

All of which probably illustrates that I lack social awareness, but for some reason I find this example very confusing.

waterlesscloud• 12 years ago

There's some subtle things going on in that anecdote that are easy to miss.

The meeting they were in was a very stressful one, in a very stressful era. The person who looked nervously at her to see her response was new to the group. Guessing based on his concern, he hadn't yet been "initiated" into a more casual relationship with the others in the room. He was still on a somewhat formal ground.

The person who made the comment was cutting through the unspoken fog underlying the meeting, and no doubt was intentionally using blunt language to assist in that.

She responded with mildly crude humor of her own to indicate not only that she wasn't taking offense, she appreciated the attempt to break through the unspoken fog. She was also bringing the new guy into the circle a bit.

The speaker continued with crude humor to sort of close the scene out. What a screenwriter would call a "button". It also emphasized his original point- "Let's get past this posturing we've been doing. We know what the game really is here, we're normal people and we've been fighting for our own interests."

That would be the end of that line of humor, since it had now served its purpose.

The same approach would usually (but not always) be inappropriate in a meeting of new acquaintances, but this was a different case.

This was an inner circle in a time of stress, bringing a new member a little closer in.

aasarava3• 12 years ago

You're absolutely right that there is a lot of nuance in that particular situation, and you did a good job of breaking it down. But that's my point: Brad was taking a very big risk in thinking that Heidi was on the exact same page. And we know that other people, even trusted friends at times, can read situations very differently than we do. If Heidi was even slightly uncomfortable around Brad or, say, had been groped earlier that day -- things unbeknownst to Brad -- her reaction could have been quite different.

I've been in situations where the relationships between coworkers have been misread. In one case, two women reported a male coworker to HR after he sent out an email that many people, including other women in the group, seemed to think was innocuous.

So I'd hate for someone to read Roizen's post and think that that is the typical response to sexual jokes in the workplace. Even if everyone laughs in the moment, someone may walk away feeling ashamed. More to the point, if you're looking for a way to break the tension, you can probably find a way to do it without making a joke that could potentially make some uncomfortable.

whiddershins3• 12 years ago

I see what you are saying but I simply disagree. Depending on the age, specific region, and various other social contexts of the participants, not to mention the context of their existing relationship, that joke can be just fine and the story implied it was, in that case.

I don't agree that the comment underscored the power differential, rather than wryly acknowledging the reality that the expression didn't work well in a mixed gender group.

It is also worth bearing in mind, that when people aren't offended by a sexual suggestion, they tend to be complimented. Because the majority of people, regardless of gender, like to feel attractive. This is one reason why the area is so hard to navigate, the line between compliment and offense can be so hard to locate, but compliments are one of the primary ways we smooth over social awkwardness and bond.

I personally feel people should make a distinction between what makes them feel bad, and what constitutes someone else being wrong.

If I feel I am being treated disrespectfully, it is enough, and I will act accordingly. I don't need the disrespectful person to be "wrong." I just need to not experience that behavior any longer. Maybe I'm wrong. Who cares. I'm not going to embrace a situation which feels bad, regardless of objective "wrong." Whether I handle it by asking for clarification, leaving the room, firing something back, this is situational. But in any event, my feelings are my feelings, not someone else's responsibility.

saurik• 12 years ago

I think the argument is that there are many ways to compliment someone that aren't sexual, and that sexual statements (whether compliments or otherwise) should not be used in work situations: that even in a situation where a sexual statement is taken as a compliment rather than an offense, it is still inappropriate for work.

DatBear• 12 years ago

Why read into it this far, and just completely ignore what she said of the incident, "I took it for the joke it was intended to be..."

I don't think it was meant to be taken the way you portrayed it at all.

zaroth• 12 years ago

  “This is bullshit.  Each one of us is just sitting here with
  his dick in his hand asking for more money without truly
  justifying it.”

  Jason looked nervously at me, wondering how I was going to react. 

  “This is making me very uncomfortable,” I said. “Because I don’t
  even have a dick to hold.”

  Without skipping a beat, Brad replied “well if you need a dick to
  hold you can borrow mine anytime.”

What I think Brad did in that comment is express his frustration at the vanishingly small pot of money they were trying to divvy up, and the way everyone was going about it. From the extremely narrow context, I definitely do not get the impression Brad was saying anything even remotely like "you're here to service the males."

I also think you have it wrong that "any respectful male" would feel uncomfortable from that comment. From that one comment I can relate to exactly what Brad is describing, and I assure you it has nothing to do with actual dicks.

Who in this industry cannot identify with the feeling that everyone in some meeting is 'sitting here with his dick in his hand, asking _______'? I could never feel uncomfortable with someone making that comment, because I would understand exactly what they were saying.

Mz10• 12 years ago

My thoughts about someone on HN getting called out for "sexist language" that I put on my blog instead of mixing it up here, thus probably almost no one has seen it:

http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2014/03/grow-set.htm...

Have an upvote.

carrotleads3• 12 years ago

I think Brad's comment was rude and the only comeback to lighten the mood would be to ask him to slice and hand his dick over.

but hard to think this way for those not natural at wit.

Dewie4• 12 years ago

But did anyone else feel that Brad Feld was very, very lucky that it was Heidi Roizen in the room and not someone less forgiving when he said, "well if you need a dick to hold you can borrow mine anytime"?

She indicates that they knew each other. So I suspect that it had nothing to do with luck that he addressed her; it might have been precisely because it was someone like her, that he said that.

Mz10• 12 years ago

It pains and somewhat embarrasses me that I am not recommending calling out bad behavior and shaming the individual or individuals responsible. In a perfect world people would have to account for their behavior. But as an entrepreneur who spent years in a daily battle for existence, I did not feel like I could afford the hit I’d take in exposing these incidents.

I agree with her and I blog about such things. I could not have returned to Hacker News had I begun attacking men publicly for some of the shit that has gone down. I am glad to be back and I think I did the right thing, not "morally" but pragmatically.

In many situations, my answer is, you have to simply walk away.

I am still working on trying to blog about other options, not just walking away and not having a shitshow. I struggle with it. My last few posts on the topic have not gotten any attention. I wish I knew how to get some additional feedback so I could figure out how to communicate more effectively. Some of that is just happenstance -- I have had a rough month and just haven't been at my best for writing -- but some of that is that many of the things I want to discuss frequently either get attacked or dismissed. It is thus difficult to get good constructive feedback. It is such a hot button issue for so many people. Perhaps in the future I can figure out how to invite more meaty discussion and feedback. I am certainly not just looking for fanlike adulation and the opposite -- the ugly attacks, where my thoughts are not taken seriously at all -- is generally useless for determining how to communicate more effectively.

I am glad to see this here. She was a CEO and has bigger public accomplishments under her belt (than I do). It gives some of the principles I am trying to promote more credibility. My lack of public stature makes it all too easy for a lot of people to ignore and dismiss me.

stcredzero5• 12 years ago

I am still working on trying to blog about other options, not just walking away and not having a shitshow. I struggle with it. My last few posts on the topic have not gotten any attention.

I would maintain that her blogging about her experience is "not just walking away" and is "not having a sideshow." The feminist movement produced tremendous cultural benefits through "consciousness raising" and I think consciousness raising worthy of the name is a good thing as any truth revealing self-examination is. Unfortunately, some of what happened under that rubric has devolved into labeling and name calling. (Granted, this could be an effect of the most strident voices being the least valuable.) The population as a whole has to be actively brought into such consciousness raising for it to benefit society as a whole. Also, I don't think that it can happen under something called "feminism" in a manner that's non-sexist any more than "mankind" can represent all of Homo sapiens in a non-sexist manner. I think there are some valid points raised by "Men's Rights" activists, but I see so much angry and anti-intellectual nonsense from under that banner. I wish there were an egalitarian movement.

throwwwaya22• 12 years ago

I would love to write "It’s Different for Boys", not as a rebuttal, but to explain how two-sided this problem is from a man's perspective.

That sexual harassment and the weirdly dysfunctional sexual culture of business is perpetuated on men as well as women.

I arrived on the scene in the Bay Area start-up culture ~5 years ago from a very different industry / cultural perspective.

I was in LOVE with the idea of the Bay Area tech-start-up culture - it's incredibly magnetic.

Within a month I'd closed a major deal with a new client - they'd just raised tens-of-millions in venture money from prominent VCs, the CEO was very visible in the SF bay start-up culture, etc.

I was living the dream - everything in their office was just as I imagined, the people were all hip and fresh and liberal-earthy-but-wise-and-techie just as I'd hoped.

Then the work day ended and I was invited out to drinks to celebrate our deal with the "boys" from the office.

Drinks led to more drinks, led to a strip club, led to the CEO literally going home with a hooker (and he was dating another prominent valley founder at the time no less).

And nobody batted an eye.

Like the author I don't quite know how to wind this up other than to say this is a two way street.

And the more time I spend with rich and powerful SV men, the more I see a "women as toys" culture perpetuated.

Yes, we're all human susceptible to our very human flaws and needs, but it's insane how completely acceptable sexualized behavior is behind the scenes.

abracar8• 12 years ago

I don't see how that would be a rebuttal, but from what you say it could be interesting to read.

throwwwaya22• 12 years ago

Good point, edited my first sentence.

nollidge• 12 years ago

How is this a rebuttal? If anything, this furthers the author's case.

EDIT: nevermind, the language was fixed.

pbhjpbhj• 12 years ago

And the more time I spend with rich and powerful SV men, the more I see a "women as toys" culture perpetuated. //

Isn't this "just" the distasteful behaviour of rich and powerful people. Don't rich and powerful people who engage in all types of sexual behaviours, of both sexes, objectify people.

When a rich and powerful woman goes to a strip club, or uses a prostitute or engages in drunken fornication do we demand that her industry sector be reformed?

What I mean to say is, is this issue really about men being obnoxious or is it about rich people being obnoxious and those rich people happen to be men?

[It's a question, not a supposition. I find all such behaviour to be abhorrent FWIW]

wpietri28• 12 years ago

If you do write this up, definitely avoid the false equivalence that one could read into your comments here. I agree that being around the CEO picking up a hooker could be uncomfortable, but Roizen's story involves much more career risk and personal impact.

rfrey• 12 years ago

Judging others by their intentions seems like good advice in general, not just for offensive speech.

Goodness knows I've been judging myself by intention more than deed for over 40 years. It's probably a courtesy I could extend to others more often.

wutbrodo2• 12 years ago

It's sad that we've looped around to needing to specify this in interactions, when it used to be simply something that decent human beings did. It seems like the need to remind people to do so is only necessary in the (relatively) recent context of "the goodness or badness of your actions should be judged by how other people reacted to them".

jacquesm2• 12 years ago

Incredibly classy of her to not name & shame the bad guys but to accent the good ones. Kudos. Also, the behavior of some of those guys is absolutely shocking, I'm sorry to say I never suspected it to be this bad at that level. Call me naive.

arrrg3• 12 years ago

Would you have a problem with someone naming those responsible?

It is obviously wrong to demand of victims to take specific actions (or not). Telling a victim (especially one you do not know personally) what to do is definitely never ok. At most you might recommend a certain action, but depending on how that is framed such a recommendation might already be problematic.

That said, I’m not sure I see the problem with naming those who are responsible. Had she done that I really don’t see what would be wrong about that.

Mz10• 12 years ago

That said, I’m not sure I see the problem with naming those who are responsible.

One of the problems with naming names is that there are two sides to every story, so it tends to lead to "he said, she said" and tends to get very ugly -- the man has reason to defend himself and often feels he didn't do anything wrong and may not have been intentionally bad. Another is that the woman who does so harms her own reputation. Who the hell will want to work with her if they know that should they crack an off color joke or make some other faux pas, she will go all SJW on them and seek to publicly hang them high?

Women are never going to get anywhere if they continue to jump on their high horse every time they have a run in with some guy. It is the men who have power. We (women -- as I am one) have to find a way to work with them if we want to get anywhere. And learning to sidestep trouble and frame things as innocently as they are reasonably able to be framed is a path forward. Jumping to ugly conclusions and starting a shitshow every time something happens is not.

The author was a CEO who apparently did multi-million dollar deals. I suspect she knows whereof she speaks. The shitshows we have seen posted to HN mostly seem to be women who are less successful than that.

I say this as someone who was molested and raped as a kid, who talks openly about that fact and what it did to me yet I have protected the identities of the perpetrators, for quite a lot of reasons. So this is something I have firsthand experience with.

The other problem is that naming names tends to not let it be a growth experience for men who screwed up because they just did not know any better. We all inherit an awful lot of shit culturally (I grew up in the deep south -- here is me talking about stupid racist assumptions I did not know I had and how I became aware of them: http://ask.metafilter.com/261222/How-can-I-practice-gratitud...) You have to start with the assumption that men are just as much a victim of circumstance as women if we are ever going to find a path forward.

Once you out a man, he is publicly branded. Once that is done, he is much more likely to feel compelled to justify his actions to himself. That means he is likely to keep being an asshole and not become more sensitive to the issue. That does not let us, as a culture, move forward. Nailing men to the cross for relatively harmless assholery keeps all of us, as a group, pinned in place. I would like to move forward. The status quo sucks. I do not wish to do anything which prevents progress.

I am not saying that names should never be named. But the kinds of things described in the article, while definitely deal-breakers socially and in terms of business, are relatively harmless. She is not talking about being beaten and raped. She is not talking about the sort of thing that would justify calling the police and having him charged, criminally.

needacig• 12 years ago

There is a related HN post a few pages away for the curious: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7686491

protomyth• 12 years ago

"Again, not criminal behavior. I suffered a few unwelcome gropes at late-night Comdex parties and the like, but never felt like I was in danger and I was always able to walk away unharmed."

An unwelcome grope is criminal behavior.

TodPunk• 12 years ago

I like this article specifically because it is the only APPROPRIATE level of "women have it different" I've ever seen (I don't read a lot on the topic, to be fair). It doesn't detract from men (or even compare to them), it doesn't say how it must be if you are a woman, it's just saying "there's things here, they happen, it should be something we're aware of and probably keep in mind." That level headed attitude is the right thing to engender and bring to the discussion.

bobbles• 12 years ago

Jesus, the profile pic she is using here is 2000x3008 and just rendered as a 1-inch wide circle.

enraged_camel2• 12 years ago

I have an ex-coworker who is a really attractive girl, and she used to tell me lots of stories like this about places she had worked at previously. Vice presidents calling her to their room and offering her promotions if only she would give them weekly blowjobs, prospective customers turning away from million-dollar deals at the last minute after she refused to sleep with them, etc.

The really sad thing about is that the vast majority of guys I talk to about this topic are simply not aware that women, especially attractive women, go through stuff like this all the time. So when they hear women complaining about discrimination, harassment, glass ceilings, and so on, they think those women are simply "being bitchy." Which simply perpetuates and intensifies the status quo.

ars4• 12 years ago

Makes you wonder about how many women do accept such offers and get ahead that way. Which is "unfair" in a way to the men who don't have such an option.

I'm really curious about the numbers here - what percent of women have ever agreed to such offers for the purpose of getting ahead (at any point in their lifetime).

I'm hoping the number is in the single digits, because if it's higher this type of harassment will never stop.

enraged_camel2• 12 years ago

>Makes you wonder about how many women do accept such offers and get ahead that way. Which is "unfair" in a way to the men who don't have such an option.

Oh yeah, that's another thing that happens: when a good-looking woman is successful, others (men and not-so-good-looking women) will assume she must have done sexual favors for someone in power - as opposed to because she's smart and capable.

(You may have asked the question innocently, but... there be dragons.)

alukima3• 12 years ago

Seriously? What do you think is more likely to happen if the woman submits?-

1. She gets a promotion she doesn't totally doesn't deserve because she submitted to sexual harassment by her her boss at work. She's happy about this.

2. She submits to sexual harassment because she is afraid she'll lose her job if she doesn't. She feels dirty and exploited.

And this is unfair to men how? Because they don't have to put up with sexual harassment at work as much?

offbrand• 12 years ago

The way you are phrasing this is super offensive and border line disgusting. Do you really think its a privilege that women have this "option"? What if someone offered you a promotion if your wife gave him blowjobs? Would you consider that a sweet opportunity? You want to picture that?

ACow_Adonis• 12 years ago

I imagine, whatever that number is, that its far less than the number of white, socially-connected men who got their jobs/opportunities because they weren't black/female/gay/poor/ostrich...

Which doesn't justify when a woman gets a job by blowing someone, but as a man i'm not exactly concerned about the relative amounts of privilege I receive relative to the blowjob "opportunities"/discrimination women do...

I am of course doing my small part to fix this by offering to blow every Manager i meet if they'll promote me :( You gotta do what you gotta do for equality...

shanacarp• 12 years ago

Imagine submitting and then not getting the offer. You're screwed either way.

cinquemb4• 12 years ago

The really sad thing about is that the vast majority of guys I talk to about this topic are simply not aware that women, especially attractive women, go through stuff like this all the time. So when they hear women complaining about discrimination, harassment, glass ceilings, and so on, they think those women are simply "being bitchy." Which simply perpetuates and intensifies the status quo.

Assuming not all (attractive) women will publicly or privately complain about such behaviors by men, will the others submit to such behaviors by the men in those positions? Will some women complain (public/privately) and still submit to such behaviors, and what circumstances is that more likely to happen? And is that act submission more socially accepted than say, if the sexes were reversed?

Tangent: I wonder if such things could be analytically studied? Some one could mine sites like HN, twitter, etc for a signal. Check the various states of the author of such. But then it would be hard to match that with the outcomes of submitting to such behavior or not without some kind of surveillance.

Meta: My tangent makes me really wonder what the world could be like where the current information asymmetry when it comes to present and technically possible surveillance systems, did not exist, where nearly everyone could leverage such scale of information in the same way that nearly everyone can leverage the atmosphere to breathe…

Edit: So I'm not sure why I'm being downvoted since I'm not trying to lead any bias towards any group that could be placed on either side of the interactions, It could be Martian's propositioning some being from Alpha Centauri system. Is pondering a way to study such things (and how one could even approach to) so controversial such that no one will respond yet shame at the same time? It's like we're not even allowed to try to explore what is going on. We all must trout out more anecdota, spout out more faux outrage about what has been going on (we're all apart of the status quo, and even with the internet outrage we haven't progressed very far in understanding it seems, who could have guessed…), and damn everything else. Anyone going to propose another reason to refute that's not what's going on here? Maybe someone can point me to a place where I could attempt to frame such ideas/questions/ways to approach studying such things and doesn't cost $xx,000 per year, since apparently, HN isn't for such. Amusing HN…

joe_the_user2• 12 years ago

It could be Martian's propositioning some being from Alpha Centauri system.

I didn't downvote you, though I was tempted.

I think what's happening people are taking offense at exactly your detached tone, where what they're looking for is a human response.

Involved Person: Oh my god, did you see that guy who was just shot.

Disengaged person: Yeah, the way the blood spurted out of his head was fascinating, I've cut up with an equation for the arc it took.

You see how an involved person can take offense at someone's disengagement?

wpietri28• 12 years ago

Yeah. Street harassment is another thing like that. E.g., I naively assumed that my girlfriend's experience going out and running alone was exactly like my experience when I was with her. Until she started telling me about the frequent whistles, comments, and sexual propositions she would receive.

It just didn't happen when I'm around, because people who are jerks and abusers are, unsurprisingly, very crafty in doing it only in contexts when they are unlikely to get called on it. So male perception of this bullshit is almost totally unrelated to how much it happens.

As an aside, it made me really happy to come across a poster last week for the #stoptellingwomentosmile campaign: https://twitter.com/williampietri

stormbrew• 12 years ago

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.

beaner• 12 years ago

Don't understand why we don't start naming and shaming. It's a lot easier to not see as a real problem when it's always stories of nameless men in unspecified locations and situations. And the kinds people who are prone to this behavior are being given a free pass, only to do it again later.

pekk5• 12 years ago

Let's figure out what kind of behavior you mean by "this behavior." Does it mean saying dongle to my buddy?

eli3• 12 years ago

The point is it's a systemic problem. Internet mob justice is generally terrible to begin with (for a lot of reasons) and it doesn't solve the problem.

Also, at the risk of stating the obvious: there are potentially very serious ramifications for the person doing the naming and shaming too. Most people don't like being called sexist assholes even if they are, in fact, sexist assholes.

nostrademons• 12 years ago

Shaming usually makes people either dig their heels in more and justify their behavior, or it drives the behavior underground where they won't get caught for it. Neither is a desirable result.

I think that what Heidi did is basically perfect - she's educating people that this does go on, it does have an effect on the women who are subjected to it, and they shouldn't have to put up with it. But she's doing it in a neutral, non-defensive tone, without calling out specific people. That's usually much more effective at changing behavior.

forgottenpass2• 12 years ago

Why shaming? Isn't this shit outright illegal? There is time to worry about shaming after the lawsuits.

obstacle1• 12 years ago

Because what if the namer/shamer gets it wrong? Have you ever heard of the Salem Witch Trials? Or even Donglegate, for that matter?

It's the whole reason presumed innocence is a cornerstone of every modern justice system.

pekk5• 12 years ago

What sorts of guys do you hang out with?

I'm not sure how you know that the vast majority of men think that women complaining about being solicited for blowjobs are "being bitchy." That seems like a really jaundiced generalization of men.

poolpool• 12 years ago

Or maybe this is far, far more common than many people would like to think.

carrotleads3• 12 years ago

but you do realise that these women would be complaining about something else as a placeholder for the BJ... and that can be seen as bitchy. rarely does a women complain of BJ's without undertaking harrasment complaints.

grlhgr4202• 12 years ago

https://i.imgur.com/ZI6ye2F.jpg

rando2894• 12 years ago

“Every time I see the word ‘Girl’ used in scenarios that are supposed to empower women, it really grates on me,” http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2013/01/30/girls-lad...

It bothers me too. The article is otherwise great.

google, define: girl "1. a female child. 2. a young or relatively young woman."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girl: "A girl is any female human from birth through childhood and adolescence to attainment of adulthood when she becomes a woman."

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/girl: "a : a female child from birth to adulthood

...

d : sometimes offensive : a single or married woman of any age"

In this case, it seems like she is trying to sound cute or informal while unwittingly reinforcing the perception of women as child-like.

nancye• 12 years ago

The use of 'girl' to refer to women often bothers me as well, but in this case, it's a reference to a song title: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It's_Different_for_Girls

vacri7• 12 years ago

I've had a 15-year experiment going in relation to this. Some adult females hate being called 'girls', because of the reasons you state. Some adult females hate being called 'women' in a general context, because they feel it brings a whole lot of feminist baggage they don't want to deal with. It didn't matter what word I chose, I'd find someone who was put off by it, and had had clear complaints verbalised about both words (ie: I'm not wrongly picking up on nonverbal cues).

So I started using 'lass' instead (I am not in an area where this is in common use). I haven't yet found anyone who bridles at this, when before I certainly did with 'girl' and 'woman'. No-one seems to particularly care for or against 'lass', with the exception of some elderly women, who seemed to like the suggestion of youth in the word. The experiment part was that I'd stop using 'lass' when someone complained about it, like they did with 'girl' or 'woman', and to see how long that would take.

I'm not particularly suggesting this as a course of action for the general public, it's just a story to relate.

jaredmck• 12 years ago

I think the usage of girls here is likely intentional and is a very important and much better word choice than "women" IMO - it shows the power differential common in many of these situations.

monochr3• 12 years ago

"and she used to tell me lots of stories like this about places she had worked at previously. Vice presidents calling her to their room and offering her promotions if only she would give them weekly blowjobs, prospective customers turning away from million-dollar deals at the last minute after she refused to sleep with them,"

When you can use your mobile as a universal recording device and you carry it everywhere I find stories like this incredibly hard to believe.

Is it that hard to download a recording app, like the aclu police recording app, and have the most water tight sexual harassment suit ever? I mean you don't need to know that's happening before hand, when things start to get weird just say you got a text message and start recording.

At the end of the day remember that stories are just that, and people, both men and women, lie. Without evidence believing anyone because they are a woman is just as sexist as the people who supposedly made those passes on her.

sp3322• 12 years ago

That's not legal as evidence in many states. Both people must be aware that they are being recorded or the recording is illegal.

dmoy• 12 years ago

If this is in California, would a tape recorded by one party without consent of both parties be admissible in court? I was under the impression that California was two party consent.

jurassic• 12 years ago

Is it that hard to download a recording app, like the aclu police recording app, and have the most water tight sexual harassment suit ever?

So you're suggesting the solution to sexual harassment is for women to go deeper into an already uncomfortable situation and gather evidence for the 'nuclear option' that can potentially ruin the careers of both parties? That's complete nonsense. Nobody wants to hire somebody they think might sue them. Since women who file big sexual harassment suits face serious repercussions in the job market later, it's usually an option of last resort.

Castlereagh• 12 years ago

There's a counter-point to this that is likely to be unpopular, but it's deeply rooted in human biology and isn't going to go away any time soon. Attractive young women may have difficulty getting people to take them seriously, and have to deal with things like frequent unwanted sexual advances, but they have no trouble getting laid. Attractive young women have easy, practically unlimited access to sex (if they so desire). Unsurprisingly, this comes at a cost.

Meanwhile, while it's easier for men to be taken seriously, and they much less often have to deal with sexual harassment, they often have trouble getting laid—especially with the aforementioned attractive young women. It may be true that "the vast majority of guys...are simply not aware that women...go through this stuff all the time". But it's also true that the vast majority of women are simply not aware of how hard it is for young men, especially nerdy young men, to get appealing women to have sex with them. They would be utterly flabbergasted if they learned just how many computer geeks, science grad students, etc., have never even kissed a girl, much less had sex with one.

We see that there are plusses and minuses to each respective situation, but arguably men have it worse off, because women can complain freely of the terrible things they have to put up with, and they're generally met with sympathy by the mainstream (and backed by the full force of Federal law). Meanwhile, men who complain that attractive young women won't sleep with them are shamed and belittled, and told that no one owes them sex. Which is true—but is hardly helpful to the proverbial 40-year-old virgin.

afro88• 12 years ago

You really need to re-evaluate your perspective on sex. You say you understand it's true that no one owes men sex, but you clearly don't understand that.

Both men and women are owed the respect of not being offered frequent unwanted sexual requests. Of getting people to take them seriously, based purely on the merits of their work.

Both men and women aren't owed sex. And it's not a "downside" to not have something you're not entitled to not be given to you. It would be a downside to have to pay for clean drinkable water. Or not be allowed to get public transport to work.

If someone approaches you in public and asks you to have a coffee with them, you don't owe it to them to have it, and your refusal is completely ok. They have no right to get upset if you refuse. Just because everyone else has refused them before doesn't make them suddenly entitled to have coffee with you now.

If no one wants to have coffee with you, you need to make it appealing for them to have coffee with you. This isn't just looks, and you need to stop feeling sorry for yourself and blaming things you can't change.

judk4• 12 years ago

We all want what we can't have. A woman may be able to get sex, but not a husband who will stuck around for years.

This often settles down around age 30 when a woman no longer youthful settles down with a nerdy man.

JackC• 12 years ago

Unsurprisingly, this comes at a cost.

Seriously, no. Don't do this. Don't do "being attractive to men unsurprising comes at the cost of sexual assault." Don't do "not having sex when you want to is as bad as being forced to have sex when you don't want to." Don't do "attractive young women are the only women worth having sex with." Don't go for the mathematical impossibility that women get to have more sex than men. Don't go for "reporting sexual assault is a sympathetic experience with no negative consequences," when women are still basically put on trial for it.

In all sincerity, if you don't get why you are shamed and belittled when you complain about unfairness with respect to women, here's the key to make sense of it: you live in a caste system, and you are the higher caste. Women were literally second-class citizens under the law until very recently (assuming they no longer are in your country), and a society doesn't shake that off overnight. Men have real problems, but you can't talk sensibly about them until you get how stacked the deck is to start with. (And, honestly, a thread about a woman who was trying to cut a quarter-million dollar deal when the man on the other side put her hand in his pants? That's a thread that doesn't need to be about men's problems.)

wpietri28• 12 years ago

Dude, peeing when my bladder is full is deeply rooted in my biology. But rather than just whizzing willy nilly in the corner of rooms, I know to go to an actual bathroom to do it. Why? Because I'm more than 4 years old.

Biology is no excuse for behavior. It can explain a tendency, but it does not justify yielding to that tendency.

abracar8• 12 years ago

I also liked how Heidi Roizen tried not to extrapolate on her own experience now that she is a VC. When you get older, more assertive and less of a 'target', it's too easy to forget what younger women might encounter. [edit: grammar]

mafribe4• 12 years ago

Are you in all seriousness saying that attractive women have it hard? You are suffering form a massive case of what modern social though terms "privilege blindness". (And, as an aside, probably have the hots for that girl als well.) Nobody on this plane is more privileged than attractive girls. They don't even have to work if they don't want to.

In your delusion, you also conveniently ignore that (within certain limits) being attractive is very much a lifestyle choice that brings with it all manner of intense advantages. Your ex-coworker made the choice of being attractive precisely because of all these advantages.

The reason women complain about being 'discriminated' is because it works so well for them: there's always, in the lingo of modern social thought, a "white knight" who's willing to believe them because he's so desparate.

_zen• 12 years ago

The reason women complain about being 'discriminated' is because it works so well for them

Probably the most bullshit thing I will have read this month.

NhanH• 12 years ago

Without commenting on the first two paragraphs, your last paragraph makes it sounds more malicious than reality probably is. It's entirely possible that attractive women got BOTH privilege and harassment.

meric5• 12 years ago

You have a point - a woman can always choose to be relatively unattractive by cutting her hair short, not wearing makeup, wear unattractive clothes, etc... They choose to present themselves as attractive because there are more social advantages of doing so.

dzink• 12 years ago

Imagine being an attractive skinny guy in a prison? Or a token burned-out hacker at a business school where everyone needs a "coder" to be the next Steve Jobs? How will you make friends? How much privilege will you be granted to compensate for the perpetual annoyance/fear of being taken advantage of?

mercurial2• 12 years ago

Well, today, Paul, I'd like some of this "terrible reading comprehension" you have so prominently on the menu (I mean, reading both an article and a testimony about actual discrimination, and then saying it's a "lifestyle choice", it's either that or something so much beyond bad faith, it's positively Luciferan). Additionally, I'd like a healthy serving of victim blaming, because I too subscribe to the idea that any abuse suffered by attractive females is completely their fault, why should they be attractive in the first place?

(edit: obviously sarcastic)

mhewett• 12 years ago

This is not intended to diminish the perfectly valid stories in her blog, but about 30 years ago I went to a Silicon Valley talk where Heidi Roizen was the featured speaker. Minutes before the talk started she swept into the room surrounded by a half-dozen very handsome young guys in designer suits, all smiling beautifully. It was exactly the same as if some older guy had showed up surrounded by models in Versace dresses. I thought it was very inappropriate and lost some respect for her. Of course, I may have interpreted it incorrectly...perhaps there is another explanation for the entourage of young men accompanying her.

ars4• 12 years ago

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).

rando2894• 12 years ago

The bit about her losing interest was clearly without tact. Like asking "are you going to love your baby more than your company?"

However, I think tactfully having and voicing concern of how the pregnancy would affect her job performance in a ceo to investor meeting was valid. I wasn't sure myself, so I did a few google searches and which came up with headlines like "Why 43% of Women With Children Leave Their Jobs, and How to Get Them Back", and the legal right for 3 months of maternity leave in the US. It's perfectly reasonable to wonder what kind of preparation the company has to handle these issues.

tptacek14• 12 years ago

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.

ShardPhoenix7• 12 years ago

It's obviously a reasonable question and the fact that it's illegal to ask is outrageous.

reshambabble• 12 years ago

I am so glad articles like these are coming out. It's brave to reveal these intimate and embarrassing situations. I wonder how things would have gone if she or another man in the room had reacted. I think there is a need for women (and men!!) to stand up for women rather than just "walk away." Could you just imagine what that meeting would have been like if a male employee just said, "seriously?" and walked away instead of Heidi walking away?

transfire• 12 years ago

Attractive woman are going to have such problems as a matter of course. Men are attracted to woman primarily based on their looks and confident men are going to act on their desires. If you are an attractive woman and want to do business under such potential circumstance, then your best bet is to try to make yourself look unattractive. You can't have it both ways. You can't lure a client with your looks and then always expect totally platonic behavior from them. And if instead, you just want to pin all the blame on men for being pigs and expect them to change, well good luck with that. Mother Nature quite clearly has other designs.

fmdud2• 12 years ago

Sorry, this is a pretty fucking horrible comment.

You can't lure a client with your looks And if instead, you just want to pin all the blame on men for being pigs and expect them to change, well good luck with that.

It's perfectly reasonable to expect men to not commit sexual assault in the workplace. What world are you living in where anything like this is remotely acceptable?

pekk5• 12 years ago

You are right that it's a completely horrible comment. But even so, where did he say that we should expect men to "commit sexual assault" in the workplace? Flirting with someone or asking them to coffee is not sexual assault, though it is inappropriate for the workplace.

slurry2• 12 years ago

Attractive woman are going to have such problems as a matter of course. Men are attracted to woman primarily based on their looks

People are attracted to all kinds of things. Go out to a big box store in an unfashionable suburb some weekend and look at the couples walking around. It's not as if The Real America is living in a PUA utopia where only attractive people find a mate. All kinds of facial and body types are walking around with each other.

If people can pair with unconventional types, they find them attractive enough. Some people will harass what they find attractive. Therefore some people will harass non-conventionally attractive people.

Which is a long way of saying, by no means will conventionally attractive women be the only ones to find themselves receiving such harassment.

This pretty much defeats the purpose of the rest of your comment.

and confident men are going to act on their desires.

What do we mean by "act on their desires?"[0] There is enough ambiguity to drive a rather alarming truck through.

[0] http://www.hackcanada.com/canadian/zines/spacemoose/take_bac...

ElComradio4• 12 years ago

I won't accept "it's harder for women in business" because it is impossible to actually demonstrate and it devolves into a pissing contest about who has a greater frequency of unpleasant experiences with coworkers, partners and clients.

It is also impossible to balance that against reasons it is easier for the genders. How often did Heidi have an easier time being trusted or otherwise "invited in" because of being an attractive woman? No one can really claim to know who has it easier at the end of the day.

What is true is that it is different.

jonathankoren• 12 years ago

I really wish she would name names. This sort of conduct shouldn't be tolerated.

Aloisius• 12 years ago

Agreed. Frankly, the hands on the crotch moved well past shouldn't-be-tolerated and to should-have-been-prosecuted.

I know it is a hassle dealing with the police and the legal system, but good god until a few of these assholes get publicly shamed and thrown in jail for a while, I'm not sure we're ever going to be rid of them.

mkempe4• 12 years ago

Walking away silently is not the appropriate response. Tolerating a colleague's obscene language isn't either.

In both cases, the outcome is that the perpetrator is going to repeat the same offensive behaviour. People who are offensive should be shunned and told why they are shunned. If they are borderline criminal, others should be told about them. If they are criminal, government should be involved.

Being afraid of what others will think, or of them potentially closing their doors (why?), is a sanction of evil and encourages further victimization.

mkempe4• 12 years ago

To those who downvoted my comment without argument: what I said is outrageous? unacceptable? men who physically assault women or treat them as purely sexual objects should be tolerated? am I missing something?

wpietri28• 12 years ago

It's certainly not very thoughtful or empathetic.

It's easy for you to say what other people should do. But if somebody has been harassed or sexually assaulted, reporting it or suing has to be up to them. There are enormous personal consequences to doing so. Blaming people who decide not to do that is putting an additional unfair burden on somebody who has already been victimized.

orionblastar• 12 years ago

It is the same for men in some situations.

When I worked my male bosses asked me to give them a blowjob in exchange for a promotion or drop my pants and be sodomized instead. I refused and was never promoted. They told me they did this with everyone. I complained to HR, but they refused to do anything about it.

I don't really consider myself an attractive man, I think they were doing it to be mean and have some dirt on me. In order to be promoted they need dirt on you to keep you in their control. It is more of a bully and domination thing.

Manager of HR, said she would fix it if I slept with her, by the way.

You will find that a lot in big businesses, smaller businesses not so much. Which is why I try to startup my own small business and never do those things and go by ability to do the job, experience, talent, and skills as well for promoting people.

kansface2• 12 years ago

Why didn't you go the police instead of HR?

_tlf76• 12 years ago

I was so happy this was published. As a female founder, the grossest things happen. It sucks, there are some VC firms where I no longer feel safe attending their events. I don't get why men I ask for business help to this day still feel comfortable asking me out knowing that a) I'm a very vocal feminist and b) I state very clearly that I need business assistance.

frozenport• 12 years ago

>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).

tptacek14• 12 years ago

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.

danielweber• 12 years ago

I once thought that everyone knew not to ask things like this, but people don't.

Story: at a friend's place of employment, they were having an interview for a secretary, as the previous two secretaries had both left after their maternity leaves. During a group interview, one guy asks a candidate "hey, you're not planning on getting pregnant, are you?"

Did I mention this was at a law firm, and that the guy asking this was a lawyer? Yeah.

The poo instantly hit the fan from about a billion different directions. Everyone in the room, not just the guy who asked the question, got a very very long talk with HR. It entered company lore as "really stupid and expensive mistake this one guy did."

Whenever I'm on the questioning side, I always go over this with my coworkers.

dingaling• 12 years ago

As a man I have been asked whether my performance at work has been affected by raising children.

When I made a mistake I was asked 'Are your children affecting your sleep? Perhaps you should take some time off as you seem to be losing focus.'

Other feedback that came in was 'He seems disinterested in the tasks assigned' with the implication that my children were more interesting than my work ( which of course they are ).

Would you also fire anyone who asked those questions of a man?

mdorazio2• 12 years ago

How is this an unlawful question? As far as I know, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act only applies to employees and those seeking employment. In the setting of an individual seeking funding for their business, the law doesn't apply.

Furthermore, from an objective point of view how can you argue that pregnancy doesn't affect an individual's expected ability to perform as an entrepreneur after the birth? In my opinion this is a valid question to ask both expecting parents. One of my male coworkers recently had a child and his work performance in the month since then has been noticeably worse than it was prior to the birth. Babies take a lot of work, a lot of time, and a lot of lost sleep no matter help much help you have. We're not talking about hiring someone - we're talking about investing in the business they are running. Any major pending commitments, pregnancy included, seem fair to ask about.

PeterisP3• 12 years ago

It's an illegal question because we as the society have chosen to value family interests above the employer interests and made specific laws to prohibit it.

It is a legitimate question because from a purely practical employer's point of view it IS important. As opposed to irrelevant questions such as ethnicity/religion/sexual orientation which don't affect performance, having a baby does require taking some time off, and does have an impact on performance, sleep, ability to work 100hour weeks, etc - a number of medical conditions fall into this category as well; you can't require a candidate to disclose that they have cancer and have planned chemotherapy, but if you could, then it would make sense to do so.

Knowing the answer is an advantage to the employer and disadvantage to some employees; therefore, if it wasn't legally prohibited, 100% of HR handbooks would actually mandate to always ask such questions - as far as I know, before those laws were implemented, it was the recommended practice to do so. And since the particular scenario of the original post isn't an employment scenario and it's not prohibited - it's likely in the investor's best interests to ask that question; the only downside is a possible PR impact.

_tlf76• 12 years ago

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 put up with all these sexist comments to have value to this community?

Mz10• 12 years ago

I just tweeted you with a link to my blog because it was the only contact info in your profile. HN used to be a lot rougher. I probably have the second highest karma of any openly female member. I used to get badly raked over the coals. I think a) yeah, there is room for improvement on HN b) I have been in even worse sexist business/professional situations, so it took me a while to connect the dots and realize it was a sexism thing. So I think you probably do need a thick skin and more savvy about how to deal with such things if you are going to make it in business. This is really not that horrible, in the grand scheme of things.

Sorry you are having some trouble with it. (I would have emailed you these remarks, but, again, no ready means to do so.)

_tlf76• 12 years ago

thank you! I got your tweet-like I said, I'm new to this but I do want to dive into this community. Really appreciate your help!

reitzensteinm• 12 years ago

You shouldn't participate here just to keep your options for YC open, especially if you don't like the company! At the end of the day, that same amount of effort is going to be better spent directly on your business.

For what it's worth, these threads are always train wrecks, and many here avoid participating and even reading because of it. Usually, they just get flagged straight off the front page, though that hasn't happened here.

HN hits a lot of high notes, so if you learn to tune out the noise, you'll probably enjoy your stay here much more.

dang3• 12 years ago

I'm very sorry. Many of these comments have made me sick to my stomach, too. And also ashamed. (I'm one of the moderators of HN.)

You don't have to be active on HN to apply for YC. There's a technical requirement to have an account, just because YC's software systems were built that way, but there's definitely no requirement beyond that. I hope you'll participate, but if this has been your introduction to the "community" I can understand why you might not want to.

abracar8• 12 years ago

Thanks for saying that. Still, it may not be how applicants see it. For instance my take from PG's "How to apply" (http://ycombinator.com/howtoapply.html) was that posting here could definitely be a plus — and that's one of the reasons why your role is so important. I know sama mentioned improving the quality of HN comments as part of the roadmap for YC to get to fund more women and I couldn't agree more.

_tlf76• 12 years ago

thanks for this info. Still new to this site and I'd like to be more active in the community but it's good to know it's not a strict requirement.

tptacek14• 12 years ago

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.

ahh• 12 years ago

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.

Java type system debates don't usually come with a side of blaming all men (especially low status men like most engineers) for the actions of a few (usually extremely high status) men. I would expect a lot more angry comments on Java typechecking if that topic impacted directly on every man's chance of social and professional livelihood.

_tlf76• 12 years ago

thanks for this- incredibly encouraging!

mturmon• 12 years ago

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)

owenversteeg• 12 years ago

As a HNer of two years, I'd say to take all comments (not just those that are racist or sexist) with a grain of salt is the best thing to do. The Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory [0] applies here as much as anyone else, and many HN comments (not excluding those upvoted to the top) are downright mean, idiotic, or incorrect.

Looking at my comment history, I have several points from random, off-the-cuff observations and negative two points from well-thought-out comments that are related to programming. That's HN for you. Of course, there are also fascinating, interesting, and relevant comments posted all the time, or I'd never visit HN.

Also, tptacek's comment is very correct. Stories like these seem to light HN on fire. Just look at the front page right now - this story has 100 points more than its closest competitor, and almost as many comments.

[0] http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19

rando2894• 12 years ago

I like the article, but I must point out this one thing I don't want it to perpetuate.

“Every time I see the word ‘Girl’ used in scenarios that are supposed to empower women, it really grates on me,” http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2013/01/30/girls-lad...

It bothers me too.

"A girl is any female human from birth through childhood and adolescence to attainment of adulthood when she becomes a woman." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girl

orky56• 12 years ago

We are in the 21st century, everyone knows right from wrong, and we're still in this situation of sex & sexism in the workplace? Despite the rise of anonymous, democratic, and free voice, whistleblowers still have more to worry about than ever. Majority of rape incidents go unreported, sexual harassment to males is increasing, and we are creating tools to draw people together. If the culture is to change, common decency, morals, and ethics need to be emphasized consistently throughout age, career, and power progression. As we saw with Dropbox and Mozilla, public outrage has an effect and upper management has to address these concerns. Founders need to create the culture of transparency over even matters like this. People need to call each other out when words come out like "Which girl in the office would you like to...?" At the end of the day, you have to choose whether your opposite sex coworkers are your family or friends.

JDDunn9• 12 years ago

Perhaps if we legalized prostitution it would decrease incidents like this. We know that as pornography consumption increases, violent sex crimes decrease. It's plausible that giving people a legal outlet would make them less likely to sexually harass others. Then it shifts the costs to the men rather than on the women of society.

vii• 12 years ago

Articles like this just reinforce stereotypes (women as victims) without recognising the reality that men can also be victims (of male or female abusers). This makes it even harder for men who are victimized to come forward.

There are plenty of studies which show that men are very unlikely to report sexual assault -- for example, recently http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/04/male_...

Sexual harassment is an important issue; but it affects both genders. Starting out with examples of unwelcome sexual touching in the workplace and saying "it's different for girls" drags the debate back twenty years.

I'm a man and I've faced unwelcome touching in the workplace and I'm sure I'm not exceptional.

wpietri28• 12 years ago

"What about the men!" is a deeply disappointing response here.

Yes, men can also be victims. And it's also important to fix that. But you can make that point without instantly demanding equal air time or suggesting that a woman telling stories about her life is placing an enormous burden on you.

elchief• 12 years ago

I'm old now, but when I was a younger man, I was something to look at. I got sexual come-ons and innuendos by female and gay male coworkers all the time. It's not a "girl thing", it's an "I'm attractive thing". It goes away.

Guys also like to make dick jokes. Because dick jokes are funny. See Louis CK net worth. And guys build rapport by being funny. I showed a guy at work my Chromecast. "It's smaller than I thought". "That's what she said", I replied. Laughs by all genders.

Accept dick jokes. Punish actual harrassment. Don't think it only happens to women.

robobro• 12 years ago

How exactly is this "news"? What does it have to do with "hacking"?

abracar8• 12 years ago

from HN's FAQ: "On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity."

wpietri28• 12 years ago

Yes, there's no possible way a VC talking about making deals and raising investment could possibly be related to a site about startups.

/me rolls his eyes.

javert3• 12 years ago

If you compare an "ideal" man with an "ideal" woman, being a woman is, arguably, a disadvantage. But the vast majority of real men and women are not "ideal."

For instance, what if you are a black man? What if you are short? What if you don't have the right "swagger"? What if you visit the VC when he happens to be having a bad day? What if you have a different accent?

This is why feminism is ridiculously unfair to all men except the "ideal" men, and also not applicable to the vast majority of women, who are not "ideal" women.

wpietri28• 12 years ago

I have heard a lot of ridiculous arguments about feminism, but this one at least has the virtue of being novel.

It's still not very interesting, though. If you were to read as much as a book on feminism, you'd know that there are reasonable answers to these questions.

javert3• 12 years ago

Can you give me an example of a reasonable answer to this?

And if my argument is novel, I'm not sure how a book on feminism could have already answered it.

Ransom_• 12 years ago

When thinking about my female friends, it is hard to believe that this is the type of crap that they will most likely, scratch that, will experience. I can keep my actions in check, call people out on theirs, but it just doesn't seem like it's enough.

facepalm• 12 years ago

It sounds as if it sucks to be attractive.

I am not convinced that it doesn't still suck more to be unattractive (as in male).

There are no interesting stories to be told. You don't rant about the awful party - you weren't invited to the party to begin with.

Those experiences she describes sure sound awful, but they are the extreme end. In between there are probably lots of encounters that she get because non-creepy people were attracted to her. Maybe people even rationalize they like her startups because they like her.

Men also get rejected from VC companies all the time. Also if I would witness men doing awful stuff to women, I wouldn't want to work with them either.

RDeckard2• 12 years ago

Strong white-knighting in this commentary.

jdhzzz• 12 years ago

I find the phrase "Tits up" simultaneously offensive and hilarious. Thinking of saying it in front of my mother tilts me more towards offensive, but I still smile...

Holbein• 12 years ago

"Men categorize women in one of four ways: Mothers. Virgins. Sluts. and Bitches. Of course none of the above is suitable for the modern business woman. But, you can create your own image by selecting pieces of each archetype suitable for you. For example, the sexual attractiveness of the slut. The wisdom of the mother. The integrity of the virgin. The independence of the bitch. This leaves men confused and unable to pigeonhole you. They are forced instead, to take you seriously."

From "Syrup" (2013), Amber Heard, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vO8jBcL0oAQ

Not saying this is the solution. You should get respected no matter what.

But... if everybody you meet is a shallow asshole, why not start manipulating them?

yaelwrites• 12 years ago

I just have to say how nice it is to read a discussion about this topic that's productive and supportive. I guess the new H/N algorithm that I whined about is actually working. :)

It's Different for Girls

Related Stories