
Ex Google engineer claims she was harassed and “Google did nothing about it” - aestetix
http://www.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2015/03/07/former-google-engineer-claims-she-was-sexually-harassed-google-did-nothing-about-it
======
cpks
I hate the public shaming. If you're in a position like this, two choices:

1) Leave and get a better job

2) Leave and sue

I've been in companies with claimed harassment. It's gone both ways -- about
50/50\. In about half the cases, the victim perceived something that was
clearly not there, ranging from:

* Complete delusion, in the case of one person with severe emotional problems

* A case where we had an someone with autism who would treat everyone in the same inappropriate way -- not understanding eye contact, personal space, etc., and one person who interacted occasionally felt targeted and harassed).

* A case where someone was just an asshole and hard-ass. Equal opportunity. But one person felt targeted.

People aren't perfect. This kind of accusation, even unsubstantiated, can ruin
a career. I wish people wouldn't pull this shit.

~~~
tajen
In case of public shaming, it is important to note that it is a public
defamation. If your point wasn't proven (=recognized by a court), then the
company can ask for damages, so you may have to go for a trial anyway.
Moreover, too many male's careers were broken by illegitimate morale
accusations, which doesn't do any good for peace with women. So I agree wich
cpks, either sue and prove your point or don't say it.

Edit: klodolph is correct, I didn't think laws of US could be that much
opposite from Europe (France in my case).

~~~
klodolph
> If your point wasn't proven (=recognized by a court), then the company can
> ask for damages

This is so far off the mark it's ridiculous. US defamation law is much less
friendly to plaintiffs compared to most European countries, especially the UK
(for example). This may surprise you, but in the US, it is not enough for the
plaintiff to prove that a defamatory statement is false. You have to also
prove that the defendant knew the statement to be false, or you have to prove
negligence by "clear and convincing evidence". This is for private plaintiffs,
the standard for "public figures" is higher.

I can recognize the attitude that "if you can't prove it in court, then shut
up", but there are always going to be a few really important things that you
want to say that can't be proven in court. I'm not saying this is one of those
times (it really isn't) but those times exist.

And I'm not taking sides on this particular case, just to be absolutely clear.

~~~
DanBC
English defamation law recently (2013) changed.

If Ann calls Bob a cheat and a liar she has the defences of:

1: truth

2: fair comment (eg, Bob isn't a cheat or a liar but has behaved in a way that
would make a reasonable person to think he is)

3: protection (eg Ann could have said it in the House of Commons and is thus
immune from prosecution).

To get damages Bob (if he's a public figure) has to show that Ann was
malicious -- that Ann knew the comments to be untrue or she recklessly
disregarded the truth; if Bob is a private individual he only needs to show
Ann was negligent in obtaining the truth. (That's compensatory damages. For
punitive damages malice has to be present.)

------
Rainymood
Off-topic, but not unrelated. She is also the author of this article:

[https://medium.com/@kellyellis/commuting-by-
myself-714e6dc47...](https://medium.com/@kellyellis/commuting-by-
myself-714e6dc47c18)

Directly from the article:

"This is why any man who is a stranger and tries to talk to me when I’m
minding my own business is likely to be met with defensiveness and/or
aggression. [...] If you are a strange man trying to talk to me on my way to
or from work, when I am commuting alone, you are a harasser, pure and simple.
You are threatening. And you need to leave me the fuck alone."

~~~
bshimmin
What she describes in the first few paragraphs of the article is obviously
horrible, but the closing paragraph, which you quote, is also totally insane.

I was in London a few weeks ago, meeting some clients; my aged iPhone had run
out of battery and, not being blessed with a watch, I had no way of telling
the time (yes, this is a stupid situation and I felt like an idiot). I was
loitering outside my client's offices and knew it was roughly the right time
because the coffee shop I'd been in just before had had a clock, but I didn't
particularly want to arrive overly early. A person, who happened to be a
woman, walked past me, and I stopped her, politely, and asked her for the
time, which she duly told me. I thanked her and she went on her way.

Does that count as harassment or threatening behaviour? After all, I'm a white
male, a little over 6ft tall, with a shaved head and often a beard, and she
was a woman, alone, probably walking to or from her office.

~~~
archagon
I'm 95% sure sure that "tries to talk to me" means "approaches me and tries to
have a conversation", not "asks me if I have the time".

See also:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9165486](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9165486)

------
sauere
> Ellis' Twitter profile reads, "bitchy software engineer. doing what i can to
> smash the patriarchy."

Stopped reading here.

~~~
thejaredhooper
This article is another symptom of journalism becoming sensationalism. The
fact that this snippet was included, and that the public shaming was made into
an article at all, is extremely deplorable.

Because of the way this article was presented, I've reserved forming an
opinion of Ellis or her alleged harasser. It's skewed to make both parties
look bad, and based off hearsay. The article did not reveal Ellis'
overreaction to her harassment until after the allegations were repeated
multiple times. It's ridiculous they didn't present everything at once,
instead of attempting to lead our opinions.

The whole article was crap.

~~~
leereeves
I hesitate to call this site journalism. Top _news_ on their front page right
now:

What to Take on Your Bikepacking Trip

Man Beaten While Boozing in Washington Square

The Bay Area Is Full of Skinny People

Unruly Patron Gets Booted From Bar, Returns and Shoots Out Window

~~~
thejaredhooper
Reprehensible.

------
Red_Tarsius
> _About 83 percent of its software engineers are men, according to a recent
> New York Times report._

On a side note, I'm tired of _high percentage_ arguments, I've seen it in
countless articles. There's NOTHING inherently wrong in the ratio itself.

~~~
imaginenore
Exactly. Look, boilermakers are 99.8% male. You never ever hear feminists
complaining about that.

[https://espnfivethirtyeight.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/chal...](https://espnfivethirtyeight.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/chalabi-
datalab-flightattendants-2.png)

~~~
DanBC
Yes you do.

This point has come up on HN so many times that anyone continuing to repeat it
is at best willfully ignorant, but probably deceitful.

A simple websearch [boilermaker women] shows you're wrong with plenty of sites
calling for more female boilermalers.

~~~
collyw
You hear a lot less about calls for more males into nursing or primary
teaching (lower paid generally than male dominated professions, like
engineering).

~~~
DanBC
False.

 _You_ hear a lot less anout it because you don't read any nursing or teaching
magazines or blogs or message boards.

This is now a great dogwhistle -- anyone saying things similar is clearly
dishonest.

~~~
collyw
I hear a lot less of it, not only on HN but on general newspapers and sources
that are not focused on tech. Does that make the point more valid to you?

------
tzs
Earlier discussion, with many comments:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9163309](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9163309)

The submitted link is different there, but the link on this submission is
cited in the comments there.

------
ksec
I dont live in US, so it is rather strange from an outsider prospective seeing
US as being "open" with sex. (Must have been largely influenced by US TV
series )

"You look amazing in that bathing suit, like a rock star" Why does that, count
as sexual harassment? May be he said it with his tone, eyes and looks?

~~~
bluthru
It makes her uncomfortable and it has nothing to do with her job. In the
workplace, you don't blurt out everything that comes to mind even if you feel
a certain way or even if you mean it with good intentions. She wasn't hired by
Google to look good, she was hired to be a good developer. Vic G telling her
that she looks good in a bathing suit makes her question why she's there and
what her bosses motivations are. Everyone has a right to feel comfortable in
the workplace.

------
threeseed
Pretty terrible situation for all involved.

Whenever there is a he-said/she-said situation without objective proof there
really isn't a lot of options. All that is really left in terms of options for
the victim is to leave whilst the perpetrator continues their life. This
leaves public shaming as the victim's only way to fight back.

The only way to solve this is basically to limit social activities in which
incidents like this can happen e.g. drinking or going to the beach.

~~~
droopyEyelids
You're right, but some dangerous situations can be tolerated if the benefits
outweigh the negatives.

But anyway, what happened to keeping a work diary, building evidence, and then
creating a court case? It's not a perfect system, but filing a lawsuite has
way less chance of creating blowback than starting a social media battle. Plus
it can be useful to keep a work journal for many other reasons.

------
datashovel
I'm just as much pro-women's rights as anybody, but a few things I was
thinking while reading this:

1) "grab your ass" comment happened in Maui, which I'm assuming is not on work
premises or during a work-related event. In cases like this a simple "please
keep your comments to yourself. I don't feel comfortable with you saying
this." would be appropriate and I think respected. It nips the issue in the
bud. Pouring a drink on someone is not necessarily the best way to communicate
that. And next time don't accept the invitation if you don't feel comfortable
around them. In my experience it's not common that this sort of comment will
be made without some level of prior assurance (flirting?) that the comment
wasn't entirely inappropriate.

2) claims "let me be in a position where I couldn't be promoted" but without
details. This sounds like paranoia to me. I have never heard of a company
explicitly denying promotions to people in certain positions. Google is in the
internet business, but most importantly they're in the business of making
money. If you prove that you're valuable to them making money, then you're
valuable to the company. Bottom-line.

As a side-note, Google has just as much of a responsibility to the other
employee to get the story straight. Allegedly nothing was done to reprimand
the perpetrator. This is likely because 3rd party observers (also Google
employees?) probably provided 3rd party testimony that it was no big deal
which would likely help as a deciding factor. Of course they likely told the
guy not to let it happen again. If there's no 3rd party testimony and it's not
on premises or at a work-function what do you expect your employer to do about
it?

Another point I would make is that the paranoia could be because people
stopped interacting with her as often or inviting her to social gatherings.
What you don't think about necessarily is that people will stop talking to you
if they think you'll accuse them of something or if you're overly sensitive.
It's human nature. I don't want to offend someone if they're overly sensitive,
and it's less fun being around people like that, so if I'm just socializing
I'm going to be considerate and NOT invite them to social gatherings because I
don't want you to be offended. After all I can't control what others will say
or do when we're out having a drink.

3) "you look amazing in that bathing suit" seems like an attempt to flatter
someone. I didn't know they wear bathing suits to work at Google :) It's what
guys do to girls. They compliment them. And girls generally accept the
flattery and say thank you. If you don't like that it's fine, just let people
know and they more than likely will be happy to oblige.

4) "drinks after work". This is again a situation outside of work. You're not
required to be there. If you find that it's not a social circle you want to be
a part of you don't have to be. I do get that social settings is where you can
establish deeper levels of trust with people within an organization, and so
that can be perceived as a roadblock to advancement. In this case I can't see
how Google the organization can legally control this, except to work on
balancing the ratios. But that is also not necessarily a gender-related issue.
Girls don't get along with girls in social settings also at comparable ratios
if not more often. But if the organization you're a part of is controlled by
people with personalities you don't mesh well with, and you can't be moved
laterally within the organization then it's time to move on. If someone finds
it hard to get along with most people within an organization it is always
worth the time it takes to self-reflect to determine if it's your issue and
not theirs. Especially in a company as large as Google.

5) Unrelated, but similar situation. A past co-worker complained in a meeting
they felt awkward when we used the word "penetration". We were an internet
marketing company, so "market penetration" is a common term within the
industry. But to satisfy her wishes we did our best to stop using the term. No
questions asked.
[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_penetration](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_penetration)]
I can assure you no one in the meeting was thinking of that other kind of
"penetration" but her.

~~~
DanBC
> 3) "you look amazing in that bathing suit" seems like an attempt to flatter
> someone. I didn't know they wear bathing suits to work at Google :) It's
> what guys do to girls. They compliment them. And girls generally accept the
> flattery and say thank you. If you don't like that it's fine, just let
> people know and they more than likely will be happy to

Do not "flatter" people on their appearance unless they are a family member or
close friend.

~~~
datashovel
I agree to a point. I think the general rules of thumb would be more along the
lines of, "don't flatter someone in a suggestive or inappropriate way". Some
people work very hard on their appearance. I would go so far as to say it
(their looks) is, to a large extent, who they are. That's not to say they are
necessarily shallow people either. They find pleasure and take pride in
keeping up with their looks and overall aesthetic. So if you're out and meet
someone who might be a friend of a friend / co-worker, or a co-worker from
another department who you may not have met before, if they look like they've
gone above and beyond to look good, they more often than not will appreciate
the compliments. If you don't look like you've put all that effort into your
looks (which is not to say you purposefully try to look ugly) more often than
not you will not receive those compliments.

~~~
DanBC
You are wrong. It is not appropriate to comment on another person's appearance
if that person works for you, or works with you. (Unless their appearance
falls below whatever minimum standard your company has).

Women do not appreciate those comments. By making those comments you are being
creepy and unacceptable.

~~~
datashovel
At work yes. I was under the impression we were talking about social settings
outside of work with co-workers. Since none of the scenarios from the OP
appeared to have happened at work. Or at least that's the case with all the
scenarios I cited in my original comment.

I don't see why compliments of one's appearance outside of work must be off
limits. As long as they're not inappropriate or suggestive. It's a common
courtesy in some social circles. And I'm also not against women complimenting
men on their appearance, or women complimenting women or men complimenting
men. I'm an equal opportunity complimenter :)

Now if they report directly to you yes I agree it's inappropriate and
boundaries need to be in place. But I didn't get the impression that was the
case.

And for the record I'm not talking about "cat calls". That's inappropriate in
all cases.

------
hudibras
It's gonna be fun watching all the HN libertarian-types clutching their pearls
at an American exercising her First Amendment right to free speech.

------
Touqeer
google.com

------
codecamper
There are women who have a deep dislike of men. Can be caused by not that
great fathers, or maybe a string of horrible boyfriends. Maybe watching too
many of the wrong sort of movie or reading the wrong sort of books. Who knows!

So... it's not the woman's fault. Everybody starts out wanting to be good.

But women that do not like men really do exist! (Speaking from some experience
here)

------
kofejnik
Even if the events took place as she claimed, where's the harassment? Two guys
found her attractive and told her so, what's the drama? Pretty sure if this
went any further (i.e. they had power over her and tried to coerce her into
something), she wouldn't hesitate to tell. So far, it looks like tumblrina
with a mission.

~~~
Dewie
It's considered harassment because they (or at least one of them) were her
superiors. The problem is the power dynamic.

~~~
leereeves
That's what I thought too, now I'm not so sure:

"If you are a strange man trying to talk to me on my way to or from work, when
I am commuting alone, you are a harasser, pure and simple."

~~~
Dewie
Her attitude and what happened are two separate things.

Given that she isn't lying, it doesn't matter what her opinion on interacting
with strange men are (radical as they are). It doesn't change what happened to
her.

~~~
leereeves
What harassment is depends on who you ask.

If you mean the legal definition, consider that even different courts often
disagree.

------
xacaxulu
Reminds me of the GitHub case. "harassment" is the new "I didn't like how
things shook out".

------
Mikeb85
Let's see, Twitter shaming and a Twitter history of feminist trolling...

From the article, more disclosure of the possible events:

> She then added "full disclosure. I'm not proud, I poured a drink on him. It
> became about that."

Seems to me when you combine beaches and alcohol while on a staff getaway,
things may get slightly out of hand. Not exactly sexual harassment in the
office kind of stuff...

