
It's Different for Girls - tkorotkikh
http://heidiroizen.tumblr.com/post/84530650750/its-different-for-girls
======
enraged_camel
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.

~~~
beaner
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.

~~~
nostrademons
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.

~~~
joe_the_user
Naming and shaming is hard for anyone who has to have a continue relationship
of even a distant sort with a guy and it is hard to prove a lot of
accusations. So I wouldn't pressure anyone to be the namer-and-shamer.

But if you could get over those hurdles, it should happen, regardless of those
shamed "digging in". Seriously, this kind of behavior seems much more
authentically shameful than a lot of illegal activities carrying multi-year
sentences. Sorry but knowing that inappropriate behavior has hard consequences
works as a deterrent, maybe not for the first guy confronted but for the tenth
guy, who at that point knows they just better not do that.

------
jawns
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.

~~~
guelo
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.

~~~
teacup50
> _straight white men 's privilege_

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

~~~
eli
The point is the same though: it's about power and privilege.

~~~
teacup50
_I am an individual!_

When you equate power and privilege with my appearance and gender, not only do
you dehumanize me and treat me like a caricature, but you seem to assume that
I hold some sort of power that makes me immune to your hate -- or you just
don't care.

Well, I'm not immune, and I'm sick of it, and if anything, I'd like you and
people like you to take your message of prejudice somewhere else.

I never graduated high-school, much less from Stanford with a MBA, and as far
as I'm aware, I've never even had a meeting with a VC. I guess we all just
"look the same" to you.

~~~
skywhopper
I agree that we should be judged as individuals, but if you are white and
male, then you should also be aware that you are perceived differently and
generally more positively in many situations than minorities and women. If you
apply for a job or a loan, you have an advantage. Even without a Stanford MBA,
you would have an easier time getting VC funding than more qualified women and
minorities.

~~~
teacup50
Let me apply the necessary nuance to your argument to strip away the racism
and sexism:

"I agree that we should be judged as individuals, but if you are white and
male, then you should also be aware that you are _perceived_ differently and
_generally_ more positively _in many situations_ than minorities and women. If
you apply for a job or a loan, you _[MAY]_ have an advantage. Even without a
Stanford MBA, you _[MIGHT]_ have an easier time getting VC funding than _[MANY
SIMILARLY QUALIFIED]_ women and minorities."

In your statement, you ascribed stereotyped attributes to me, and to _every_
situation I might find myself. In doing so, you ask me to accept the core
premise that I _always_ have an advantage over others, in _every_ situation,
_because_ of my appearance and gender.

Yet, Heidi Roizen, in many ways (but clearly not all ways, as evidenced by her
experiences) started from a position of much greater privilege than me. I hope
you can see how these things are nuanced, and that sexist/racist stereotypes
are convenient but inaccurate, and in aggregate, those stereotypes become very
wearing on those of us who, as is often stated by those with your point of
view, "do not inhabit positions of power" relative to you.

The "white man" stereotype used to roll off me, because I only saw it on the
fringes of impolite society. Now, I see it said regularly and publicly, in
popular if not polite company, often in contexts where I _don 't_ have "power"
and I _do_ find it both demeaning and threatening.

------
aasarava
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.

~~~
zaroth

      “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.

~~~
Mz
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...](http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2014/03/grow-set.html)

Have an upvote.

------
dang
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.

~~~
carrotleads
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.

------
bsirkia
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.

~~~
wutbrodo
> 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.

------
news_to_me
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
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](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/](http://adainitiative.org/what-we-do/workshops-and-training/)

~~~
gfodor
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.

~~~
jdp23
I've shown Shanley's post to quite a few women in technology (including some
diversity experts) and they all think her concrete suggestions are excellent.
[As do I.] So I strongly suggest any guys who really want to help read it and
act on the suggestions even if they would prefer a different framing.

And specifically, which of her points do you disagree with? Are you saying
that men don't need to work with each other on their sexism? Or, are you
saying that instead of men taking a responsibility to address sexism or
overcome their discomfort with this issue they should instead lean on women?

~~~
gfodor
I push back hard on the tumblr-ization of language, much as I do with the
Luntz-ification of language perpetrated by right wing outlets like Fox News.

Terms like "patriarchy", "privilege", and even "problematic" serve to re-frame
the debate in a way that causes many negative consequences. It is pretty much
the same tactic used in politics to control the language in order to disarm
your opponent before debate even begins.

First, it causes debates on issues to immediately have one side assume the
premise. If we are having a discussion about privilege, then I am already
conceding that in this instance I had privilege in the first place. Second, it
turns small issues between individuals into illustrative examples of a wider
power and class struggle, regardless of how appropriate such extrapolations
might be. Third, it carves a lens through which all day-to-day human
interactions may suddenly become viewed, where innocent actions that normally
would have gone unnoticed become immediately magnified into sexist acts
because they fit into a pre-conceived mold defined by this language and
ideology (lets call it what it is) regardless of context. This is what the OP
is talking about. Fourth, these terms provide no way to measure progress,
similar to the "War on Terror", the "War on the Patriarchy and White Male
Privilege" will never be won since it is by definition immeasurable against an
enemy that is a concept. Finally, in this particular case it serves to cause
women to see men, all men, as inherently flawed and part of a systemic regime
of oppression, and men to see themselves that way too. This is all
counterproductive, dare I say, _problematic_.

~~~
tptacek
Since you haven't acknowledged a single substantive point from the Shanley
post cited upthread, you should reconsider writing 250+ words about "framing"
and Frank Luntz. And by "should", I mean that you should follow the Principle
of Charity.

If you'd like, you can wait to start doing that until the principle becomes an
HN guideline. You might have a couple of weeks left to ignore it ('dang has
more or less said it's coming). But since it's just a good plan regardless of
what the site rules say, I think you should start now.

The tendency for people to litigate framing, tone, and decorum _instead of_
substantive points has a name in online feminist circles: "tone policing". I
find the application of that term incredibly annoying. Which is why it's
especially discomfiting to see someone directly play into the pattern of
behavior the term was coined for.

~~~
gfodor
It seems you are doing the same thing you are accusing me of by not addressing
my points. The specific calls to action she makes for the most part seem
reasonable. But they are hung not just on a poor tone but a general worldview
that in my view alienates both genders from one another and in general would
cause more friction and emotional hurt in day to day life if it were adopted
by all. Hence the reason I called out what I saw to be a poor comparison, the
OP and Shanley are coming at this from what I think are completely different
angles. (And yes I agree with you, the 'tone police' card is overplayed and
stupid.)

~~~
tptacek
You understand that Britta wasn't saying "tell all your male friends to follow
everything that Shanley says", right? She was saying, "this Shanley post has
good suggestions in it". It turns out you agree.

If you'd like the "tone police" card to get played less often, stop _burying
the lede_ that you agree with all the substantive points of this-or-that
feminist blog post under a mountain of concern trolling about tone.

You can buy yourself the rhetorical space to criticize someone's tone by
demonstrating that you took their substantive points seriously. But read your
comments; you can see clearly that you did nothing of the sort here.

~~~
gfodor
Fair enough.

~~~
tptacek
Hey, I'm being super snippy. Thank you for responding gracefully.

------
throwwwaya2
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.

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

~~~
throwwwaya2
Good point, edited my first sentence.

------
emcarey
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?

~~~
tptacek
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
> 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.

~~~
wpietri
Engineers are low status? Please. That might have true in 1984, when Revenge
of the Nerds came out. But it sure isn't now.

Also, as a man, I have benefited from literally millennia of people
advantaging my gender. If I occasionally get blamed for that, I think I can
handle it. Maybe you can too?

------
jacquesm
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.

~~~
arrrg
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.

~~~
Mz
_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...](http://ask.metafilter.com/261222/How-can-I-practice-
gratitude-while-recognizing-and-fighting-injustice#3794660)) 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.

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

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

~~~
cobrausn
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.

~~~
Swizec
Yup, my bad. Totally read that as him placing his hand in his pants. As in,
only one person involved.

~~~
aaronem
Probably not in a restaurant, though.

Dragging the subthread back on topic, while I don't doubt Ms. Roizen or anyone
else who describes having encountered such abhorrent behavior, it amazes me
every time I hear about it, and not so much because it's sexual assault as
because I have such a hard time believing any man, indeed anyone of any sex or
gender, could be so incredibly _déclassé_.

I don't know -- maybe it's because I'm gay, or because I gravitate toward the
company of people who deport themselves with something which at least vaguely
resembles good taste, or I don't know what all, but honestly? Who actually
_does_ something like that? Who can even _contemplate_ doing something like
that without shriveling in well-deserved shame?

~~~
pekk
Given HN's comments above, apparently we are to believe it is all men who do
these things, and think women are "bitches" for objecting to them.

------
elchief
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.

------
protomyth
"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.

------
joelrunyon
> 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.

~~~
jordo37
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.

~~~
joelrunyon
> 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.

------
rfrey
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.

~~~
wutbrodo
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".

------
ProAm
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.

~~~
mherkender
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?

~~~
ProAm
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.

------
emcarey
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.

------
TodPunk
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.

------
reshambabble
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?

------
ars
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).

~~~
tptacek
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.

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

~~~
kaitai
There was a bunch of discussion of good intentions above. You're one of those
people who may or may not have good intentions, but as a woman who might
someday have a kid, you make me angry. People like you make me REALLY angry.
It's reasonable to doubt my interest in my own f(&ing company, it's reasonable
to think I'll suddenly get stupid for hormonal reasons and won't be able to
deal with business, it's reasonable... what? Do you not think I'm an
intelligent being who has thought about the ramifications of having a kid and
running a business? Do you think that it's just some sort of thing that I
don't even notice until _pop_ I have a squalling child and then I'm all like
wow my brain has turned into maternal mush and I never even expected that!
Unlike men who just do stupid business s#(& for rational reasons, like wanting
to buy a yacht or upgrade the girlfriend or plain old greed. You don't even
give men the credit of asking them if they might pay enough attention to their
own kids to lose a moment's focus when one is born.

People like you see stupidity, lack of focus, and incompetence in men as
simply individual traits. At the same time you treat women as some sort of
broad idiot class, implying that women need to justify to you that popping out
a kid won't jeopardize the business. You're the reason one of my friends in
grad school wouldn't tell anyone she was pregnant for months and months and
months, so that no one would deny her a research or teaching assignment or put
her on some involuntary leave.

edited for asterisks. And one last comment: if you think the woman you are
doing business with is not good at business, stop doing business with her. If
you think she is, give her enough respect to figure she'll deal with children
appropriately, and don't ask stupid questions about whether she'll lose
interest in her own company. If you want to ask who will handle x business
aspect if she takes leave, that's fine, as it is not a stupid question.

~~~
ShardPhoenix
>People like you make me REALLY angry.

Same to you buddy. Guess we'll have to fight it out in the political arena
like anything else people can't agree on.

PS I didn't even say the things I believe that would really make you angry,
like "pregnant women and women with young children probably shouldn't be
working at all, and definitely not running a startup".

PPS That's a hell of a lot of wild assumptions about what "people like me"
believe" off of one sentence.

~~~
tptacek
This was already fought in the "political arena", and your side lost, because
your side is dumb. But you keep flying your freak flag proudly, anonymous
retrograde goofball. We'll all just take turns pointing out how stupid your
arguments are.

~~~
ShardPhoenix
Ah, good old Whig history. Well, as we can see from the rise of the Right
world-wide and of neo-Reaction among thoughtful people online (hey, I used to
be liberal too, you know), you may not be on the 'winning' side forever. So
try not to be such an arrogant douchebag now, lest you fall that much harder
later.

------
Mz
_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.

~~~
stcredzero
_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.

------
orky56
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.

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

~~~
Aloisius
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.

------
vii
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_...](http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/04/male_rape_in_america_a_new_study_reveals_that_men_are_sexually_assaulted.html)

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.

~~~
wpietri
"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.

------
Holbein
"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](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?

------
frozenport
>>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).

~~~
tptacek
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.

~~~
dingaling
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?

~~~
tptacek
It's presumably just as unlawful, and obviously the same kind of bullshit.
Yes.

------
mhewett
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.

------
facepalm
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.

------
JDDunn9
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.

------
Ransom_
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.

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

------
yaelwrites
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. :)

------
jdhzzz
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...

------
RDeckard
Strong white-knighting in this commentary.

------
AngusMcQuarrie
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
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.

~~~
scott_karana
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.)

~~~
kansface
You are directly responsible for yourself and anyone you employ. You have some
responsibility for the actions of those you do business with insomuch as you
can stop doing business with them. Lets start here.

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

~~~
abracar
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."

------
rando289
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...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2013/01/30/girls-ladies-folks-
heres-a-visual-guide-to-what-you-should-call-that-group-of-individuals/)

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](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girl)

------
javert
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.

~~~
wpietri
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.

~~~
javert
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.

~~~
wpietri
Sorry, the last line was the novel part. The "what about people of differing
levels of privilege" bit is standard and well answered.

No advantage is absolute, and all generalizations describe tendencies. That
there is also white privilege or tall privilege doesn't negate that their is
male privilege, or prevent people from thinking about it. So as a white guy,
there are many circumstances where I get boosts from one, the other, or both
that non-white, non-guy people may not get. There are some circumstances where
being a fat person costs me, but that doesn't erase the advantages from being
male.

Some sorts of feminism focus purely on the male-female issues. That's often
fine; the problems, evidence, and solutions are often specific, and there's
plenty to deal with. Others view various sorts of prejudice as part of a
connected system. You can read about intersectional feminism for more:
[http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Intersectionality](http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Intersectionality)

------
ElComradio
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.

------
transfire
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.

~~~
fmdud
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?

~~~
pekk
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.

~~~
fmdud
I've seen this argument so many times at this point they blur into one. It's a
watered down version of "She was asking for it" when talking about about a
rape case. The way someone looks or the clothes they have on doesn't give you
carte blanche to harass/assault them.

I'll show you what I mean:

>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.

This is the exact same kind of victim blaming as in "She was asking for it".
He's telling women to make themselves look unattractive, implying that they
are partially to blame for their own harassment because of what they were
wearing, or how they looked. Saying "well, it's _bound to happen_ " isn't good
enough.

>You can't have it both ways.

>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.

These two quotes both show that he really is talking about harassment and
assault. The OP article wasn't talking about relatively harmless (if
inappropriate) workplace flirting; some couples meet at work. That happens.
The difference is that those kind of things generally begin with very subtle
signals over an extended period of time. The context of this article, this
thread, and implicitly this comment (by explicitly agreeing that women are
asking for this harassment to stop) is one of harassment and assault.

>You can't lure a client with your looks and then always expect totally
platonic behavior from them.

>Mother Nature quite clearly has other designs.

I don't need to break this down. It's so shitty.

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

------
mkempe
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.

~~~
mkempe
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?

~~~
wpietri
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.

~~~
mkempe
You assume and assert so wrongly that I have not put much thought in what I
said, and that I don't have empathy for the victims. I've witnessed and been
subjected to harassment. These stories, and now your comment, make me
viscerally sick.

~~~
wpietri
In which case, you'll need to write your point better. People can't react to
what's in your head, just what's on the page.

What I said is a pretty common response to your point, and often comes from
people who have been through the wringer: not just the initial harassment, but
also the enormous difficulty of speaking up. Read more on the topic and you'll
see what I mean.

~~~
mkempe
You're so smug and condescending, repeatedly ascribing thoughts, knowledge, or
lack thereof -- without evidence.

In Sweden women, and men, don't tolerate any of this kind of behaviour, and
are _certainly_ not taught to keep quiet. Since you position yourself as
knowing everything and dispensing lessons, you surely already knew all about
how women are treated and expect to be treated in different cultures. Or maybe
you think it's really wrong that in Sweden we teach girls that none of this
sexual harassment or obscene language is tolerable and none should be treated
with silence.

~~~
wpietri
I'm responding to what you wrote. I of course don't know what you're thinking;
I'm trying to convey the impression that your paragraphs left me with. An
impression you asked for, by the way.

I'm not saying anybody should be taught to keep quiet. I'm saying that you
judging other people's actions without knowing their situations (as in
"Walking away silently is not the appropriate response.") does not demonstrate
thought or empathy. There are legitimate reasons why victims of sexual
harassment and assault choose silence, and I think it's important to respect
those choices.

If we want to fix their silence, the solution isn't to moralize and say that
they're doing it wrong. They already have enough to deal with. The solution is
to change things so that the incentives around reporting are better.

------
orionblastar
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.

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

