
Employees of kixeye accused of racist remarks fired - justinhj
http://www.develop-online.net/news/42157/Four-Kixeye-employees-sacked-for-racism?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+developmag%2Fifbh+%28Develop%29
======
codemac
> While many in San Francisco have begun to use the term "post racist" as a
> matter-fact-statement to describe the relatively inclusive work environment,
> the difference between the mostly affluent white community on the peninsula
> and the impoverished Oakland across the bay is impossible to miss.

What? Who says that? The only time I've heard the phrase "post racist" is
either The Colbert Report, or people being sarcastic in reference to something
really racist. It's because of places like Oakland that no one I know in San
Francisco believes on any level we live in a "post racial America".

That little sentence is really offensive to me and hopefully others who are
aware of the severe and drastic gender and racial inequalities in the tech
industry.

Until I see ~10% of tech workforces being African American, I'm not even going
to begin to think about "post racial" anything.

~~~
wonderzombie
People think they are "post-racial" if they do not regularly use slurs and/or
do not self-identify as racist and/or have friends or coworkers who are not
white. Of course, when it comes down to it, very few people self-identify as
racist, making this definition not particularly useful.

BUT it is a heck of a lot easier to paper over more subtle forms of racism by
identifying racism as only the most outlandish kind, and the rest as someone
being too sensitive or what have you.

A good rule of thumb is that everyone is at least a little bit racist. It's
less of a problem if you're willing to admit it and work at it, but by
suggesting that we are post-racial (we have a black president, therefore
racism is over), white people let themselves off the hook from having to think
much about race most of the time.

------
aaronbrethorst
<http://www.twitlonger.com/show/jh72ja>

_What are we doing to make sure this never happens again in the future? Well,
even before this incident, we hired a VP of HR who has implemented a
sensitivity training program for all employees._

Which was evidently ineffective.

~~~
waterlesscloud
The point of such training is to make it less legally risky to fire people for
being insensitive.

Looks like it was effective.

~~~
arohner
Stupid question: It's already illegal to discriminate and harass on the basis
of race. Why do you need a training program to make it less risky to fire
people over it?

~~~
MartinCron
I think it's less risky because it sends a clear signal to employees that if
they're fired for being racist assholes, they don't have any real grounds for
to sue for unlawful termination.

Even groundless unlawful termination lawsuits are a pain in the ass to deal
with. It's better to discourage them than to litigate them.

~~~
arohner
If they're crass enough to sue for unlawful termination after being racist,
what makes you think 'sensitivity training' will make them not sue?

(I'm not trying to be snarky, BTW, just trying to understand hiring law, and
bad employees)

~~~
waterlesscloud
The training makes company policy crystal clear and makes it very difficult
for any employee to later claim they were unaware of said policy.

------
rickmb
This isn't racism. This is bullying, using, amongst many other things,
marginally racist remarks as a weapon. That kind of stuff is as much racism as
tasteless jokes about wife-beating constitute actual domestic violence.

This is clearly a very disfunctional and unhealthy work environment, but with
the aggressively paranoid reaction to it is equally unhealthy and most of all,
fails to address the actual problem. After firing the "racists", this is
likely to remain a toxic environment who's next "victim" could very well be a
white heterosexual male who for some other reason forms an easy target.

~~~
MartinCron
While I don't agree with your "this isn't real racism" premise, I agree that
the dysfunctions probably run deeper than that.

I'm reminded of Bob Sutton's great book "The No Asshole Rule". The actions
outlined in the blog post are undeniably asshole behaviors, and shouldn't be
tolerated in any civilized workplace, with our without the racial
implications.

~~~
23david
Thanks for the reference to Bob Sutton. I hadn't heard of his book before, and
after some research I dug up some great info and articles.

<http://bobsutton.typepad.com/my_weblog/the_no_asshole_rule/>
[http://blogs.hbr.org/sutton/2007/03/why_i_wrote_the_no_assho...](http://blogs.hbr.org/sutton/2007/03/why_i_wrote_the_no_asshole_rule.html)
[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-sutton/the-no-
asshole-r...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-sutton/the-no-asshole-rule-
part-_b_49678.html)

The Kixeye CEO may have not intended to let things go this far, but from his
remarks ( part 1: <http://www.twitlonger.com/show/jgntgj>, part 2:
<http://www.twitlonger.com/show/jh72ja> ) he shows a stunning lack of empathy.
One big red flag for me was how he doesn't say how he is planning to make
amends with the black contractor and the black community. So it's pretty clear
to me that Will Harbin is part of the problem here, and likely is an asshole
himself. The company's investors and leaders should take this as a wake-up
call and either demote or fire him. They won't reach their potential with
'asshole leadership' in place.

A fish rots from the head down.

------
codenerdz
I cant help but feel that this qu33riousity guys is coocoo. While I think that
what he was subjected to is unacceptable, his rhetoric reminds me of
conspiracy nutcases that said that US government played a role in the WTC
tragedy:

"And it’s not a matter of generalizing white people, rather it’s being real
about the culture San Francisco creates. Other people of color, including some
black people are in on it too, but the thing to remember is that there have
always been people of color down with white supremacy. Matters of colonization
run deep throughout the years and beneath our flesh, behind our eyes."

~~~
esperluette
It's sad but true that some members of a minority always find that it's in
their personal best interest to be the "good" exemplar of a minority in the
opinion of the majority. Think about women who enforce the patriarchy as so
that they can be metaphorically patted on the head by men (Phyllis Schafly,
Ann Coulter). It's extremely common.

~~~
agateform
Do you mean the Feminist meaning of patriarchy?(from wikipedia) ""The
patriarchal construction of the difference between masculinity and femininity
is the political difference between freedom and subjection."[27] In feminist
theory the concept of patriarchy often includes all the social mechanisms that
reproduce and exert male dominance over women."

Patriarchy Feminist theory basically mean women are victims, man have power
over woman and are conspiring (conscious or unconscious) oppressors. It is a
very toxic and sexist theory, it ignores mens issues and it's also an Apex
fallacy. Just because the majority of people at the top are male it does not
mean they represent the majority of man. Did you know that in USA women hold
the majority of the vote?

However I agree that people should not be forced in to gender roles and maybe
that is what you meant when you wrote Patriarchy.

>metaphorically patted on the head by men

The majority of men (including traditionalists) don't treat women like dogs.
Traditionalist men even believe in sacrificing their lives to save womens
lives. A lot of modern men also believe in that sacrifice.

~~~
anu_gupta
> Traditionalist men even believe in sacrificing their lives to save womens
> lives. A lot of modern men also believe in that sacrifice.

No, they really don't. Or rather they may say they do, but when it comes it,
then they don't. See the recent study of ship evacuations for proof, it's
women and children last.

------
jacalata
"We don’t even tolerate people brining up concerns of racism here."

Wow. I assume that somewhere along the line, that guy misunderstood 'zero
tolerance of racism'.

~~~
csomar
Nope, but you don't want topics where the conversation can get heated like
politics or racism.

~~~
jacalata
I'm confused: are you the guy being quoted?

------
columbo
I'm one of the people who posted on the previous thread that didn't agree with
the tone/method of the original blog post. Not that it matters in the
slightest what I think. However, I'm glad it turned out this way.

~~~
flyinglizard
I did not like it either. I thought it was laid with racist overtones and
stereotypes. I also thought that it is peculiar that someone would choose to
introduce themselves as a "poor black queer" instead of bringing forth their
personality or skills or ideas.

Newsflash: if you are interesting or do cool stuff I don't give a fuck about
your skin tone or sexual preference.

~~~
MartinCron
_I don't give a fuck about your skin tone or sexual preference_

Just a friendly heads-up, the phrase "sexual preference" is like fingernails
on a chalkboard to a lot of people, as the word "preference" implies choice
which isn't in line with our best understanding of how sexual orientation
works.

I'm not offended, but I'm guessing you don't want to accidentally offend
people. After all, you don't give a fuck.

~~~
graue
I consider myself fairly progressive about these kinds of things, and this is
the first I've heard about "sexual preference" being problematic. Is it really
used to justify the belief that what gender(s) you're attracted to is a
choice? What term should we use instead?

~~~
MartinCron
I believe that "sexual orientation" is favored. The parallel I like to use is
being right-handed or left-handed. It's not that lefties "prefer" to use their
left hand for tasks requiring dexterity, they are oriented that way.

------
w1ntermute
This was a very disturbing incident, and I can only hope that it was an
isolated incident and not indicative of a larger trend in the startup
industry. The demographics are skewed enough as it is when it comes to this
industry.

~~~
chaostheory
I don't feel that this is a recurring issue in the startup industry. However
based on my past work experience, this is definitely not an isolated incident
for the video game industry. The only difference between different companies
is how they handle it when it arises.

I do remember when working at one of the big three video game publishers:

1) HR and managers would repeatedly educate both new workers and existing
employees on both racial discrimination and sexual harassment on a semi-
quarterly basis.

2) HR would give anonymous surveys regarding workplace environment every
quarter.

Regarding the last item, at my last stint at a gaming company; a co-worker
reported a case of racial discrimination and it was handled promptly and
professionally. There was no time for anyone to blog about the subject. I'm
going to agree with other people, HR wasn't doing their job effectively.

~~~
wonderzombie
How often and how likely are you, yourself, likely to be a target of racist
language? And how keyed into the more subtle forms of racism are you? I mean
these as serious questions, not rhetorically.

The thing is, you have to be really careful about selection bias and
confirmation bias, here. This example happened to be one of the most egregious
examples, the easiest to spot. A lot of the more subtle cues will fly right
over your head, especially since a lot of behavior with racist over- or
undertones is not something white people are exposed to or experience. (I
include myself in this statement.)

Granted, I am assuming you are white, chiefly based on the demographics of HN
and the tech community in general.

~~~
chaostheory
> How often and how likely are you, yourself, likely to be a target of racist
> language?

I'm not white, but I'm still extremely not likely to be a target of racist
language. In most tech offices, they try to do a good job to avoid unnecessary
lawsuits that can cost in the millions. I also feel that tech offices tend to
have more educated people on a whole, which massively helps.

> And how keyed into the more subtle forms of racism are you?

I'm aware. "subtle cues" do not "fly right over" my head

~~~
wonderzombie
> I'm aware. "subtle cues" do not "fly right over" my head

Fair enough. On the basis of the previous threads on this topic, it seems to
me, at least, that most HNers who bothered to comment didn't or don't get it.

------
un1xl0ser
It is quite clear that this was not an inclusive working environment. Some of
the comments on their own are not overtly racist, but it is certainly walking
thin line.

I've had a situation that was sort of similar where a co-worker made a comment
on my clothing being too uhm, urban. Jeans, oversized hoodie (hood up), and
shit kicker boots. I was sick, and it was freezing out walked into a meeting
and it was announced that Eminem just walked into the meeting. My reply was
(paraphrased) that "Is that the only white rapper you know, I don't look
anything like Eminem". I guess I was looking for something like Sage Francis
or Necro, but I digress. I felt singled out for the way that I dress. Now I
guess that anyone can debate here if what I said or the initial comment was
racist, but I would say that it wasn't, just ignorant and stupid. That said,
if that comment was slanted ever so slightly to the fact that I have some
Jewish heritage, it would trigger a soft spot and would have REALLY irked me.
Had some issues with that early in life.

So considering the more over-the-top racist comments, and initial reaction of
management when confronted, this whole situation is really awful and should
not happen. Instead of debating if this is really racism, we should probably
just try to limit and control it's effect on our lives. It exists, it's all
around us and you don't have to look very far, even in tech companies.

~~~
mratzloff
> I've had a situation that was sort of similar where a co-worker made a
> comment on my clothing being too uhm, urban.

That's not the same thing at all. The guy in question was accused of dressing
too "thuggish" when he was wearing skinny jeans and wingtips. In other words,
because he was black, regardless of what he was wearing.

A joke was made about how you were dressed because you had a hoodie with the
hood up and are apparently white... like Eminem[1][2][3][4].

[1]
[http://cdn.preview.thumbplay.com/VAN/Thumb_Preview/Wall/UMG/...](http://cdn.preview.thumbplay.com/VAN/Thumb_Preview/Wall/UMG/Eminem.Eminem_Hoodie_2-00602498893142-800x800.jpg)

[2] [http://images.hitfix.com/photos/703638/eminem-
hoodie_article...](http://images.hitfix.com/photos/703638/eminem-
hoodie_article_story_main.jpg)

[3]
[http://www4.pictures.gi.stylebistro.com/Eminem+Tops+Hoodie+0...](http://www4.pictures.gi.stylebistro.com/Eminem+Tops+Hoodie+0SBZ914m06Bx.jpg)

[4] [http://inthehoodie.com/blog/wp-
content/uploads/2009/06/emine...](http://inthehoodie.com/blog/wp-
content/uploads/2009/06/eminem.jpg)

~~~
un1xl0ser
Uhm, those comments were not connected in the story, it was wingtips provoking
the RUN DMC comment. Baggy jeans and thuggish were connected in the story,
which does make some modicum of sense. If anything I would say that the
skinny/wingtip == RUN DMC comment was more worrisome because it is completely
out there.

Lots of rappers wear hoodies. My point wasn't that anything there was racist,
just that you do get comments for dressing differently, not fitting in. Those
alone don't make this racist, the other comments do.

So is it that baggy jeans are less professional looking, or a racially
motivated attack on urban lifestyle and dress. It doesn't matter really, the
rest of the comments provide enough of a backdrop for us to make our own
conclusions, which is all this is.

------
mmanfrin
Not surprised that a hiring campaign like the one they ran would lead to
hiring of childish people.

------
btilly
This is a common response in dysfunctional workplaces.

A problem comes up, identify some scapegoats, fire them, put out a PR
statement.

Whether or not this is meaningful won't be obvious for some time. But at most
dysfunctional workplaces the problems go deeper than the scapegoats fired, and
problems persist. With an overlay of, "You got my friend fired!"

~~~
mratzloff
Scapegoats or not, I bet the remaining employees are more careful about the
things they say from now on.

------
mathattack
Racism or Bullying - either way props to the boss for firing 4 people over it.
If you leave that unchecked, it destroys a corporate culture.

------
mynameishere
Everyone is trying his best to be PC, but the real takeaway is that you have
to be careful not to hire some ultra-sensitive pantywaist thug who publicly
cries "racist" at every shitty joke, giving your company weeks of terrible PR
to clean up.

 _“Hey he’s dressed like Run DMC, does he know how to rap?”_

Oh, the poor darling. Let's ruin a bunch of people's livelihoods over this
apparently wicked comment.

~~~
indy
you sound racist

~~~
barking
He sounds angry and a bit OTT to me. Inferring that someone is a racist (as
you're doing) is extremely serious. Your remark comes across as a bit creepy
actually

~~~
roguecoder
First, no one inferred that he _was_ racist, they said what he had said
sounded racist. Second, why do you think it's "extremely serious" to consider
something someone said racist? I consider racism itself extremely serious, but
there's no consequence for expressing racism in a quasi-anonymous comment
environment. There's not even any consequence for being called a racist. I am
utterly confused as to how saying that racist statements sound racist could be
"extremely serious", in that we should refrain from doing so. What
consequences do you expect to follow?

Actually being a racist? Bad. Pointing out that something sounded racist? An
opportunity for the person who said that to apologize and reframe or withdraw,
perhaps leading to a less racist environment.

~~~
Torgo
You're missing the point. It's unavoidable that if you say "you sound racist"
that that attributes a trait to the person rather than their behavior, and is
not much different than saying "you are a racist." The rule of thumb is
address the behavior rather than the person, which is why the corrective
response is supposed to be something like "wow, what you said sounded racist"
It's a subtle but important difference. Then you are inviting the person to
ask themself internally "did I mean what I said?" or "do I want to sound
racist to other people?" instead of going on the defensive because they as a
person are being labelled a cultural undesirable. If you make a statement
about the person themself there's no avenue forward for discussion or
correction, you just made an enemy. But if you make it about the speech, even
if they get defensive about it you can clarify that you are addressing the
behavior.

There are consequences here because there is username, user identities are
often shared across sites, and there is a karma system here. They may be mild,
but obviously karma is consequential or it wouldn't exist as a concept on the
site. Your score is your aggregate reputation among other users. People fear
saying things that will lower their karma.

