
Ask HN: Non-Sexist Behaviour Guidelines? - tomek_zemla
Question related to the topic of multiple discussion threads about sexist behaviour in the tech industry...<p>There are many cases where it is clear ethically and legally what can be said&#x2F;done with coworkers of any sex - this is one of the cases where the person&#x27;s behaviour was clearly wrong: https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=9178681<p>However, there also some other situation in the modern workplaces where you can find yourself in the legal&#x2F;ethical grey zone. For example: you gradually become friends with your coworkers, start spending time together doing things outside of your work context. You can end up hanging out privately with your superiors or subordinates and this can eventually lead to various personal and romantic entanglements.<p>The legal advice would be: don&#x27;t. But, the modern workplace culture encourages being more then &#x27;professional coworker&#x27; to your coworkers outside of the office. And I personally think it is a good thing because it makes workplaces more human. I certainly made some amazing friends (both male and female) at the places where I worked.<p>But, my question is: has anybody with legal and&#x2F;or HR credentials and some ethical sense written any definitive guide what is OK and what is not specifically in the context of the modern office?
======
minopret
> has anybody with legal and/or HR credentials and some ethical sense written
> any definitive guide what is OK and what is not specifically in the context
> of the modern office?

Yes, they have. I am NOT one of them. I don't have one of those guides. But
I've received enough mandatory training to have a layperson's understanding of
the baseline in my national jurisdiction which is USA. The baseline is
twofold, it is fairly clear, and it is worth reviewing. Don't take my word for
it, but I think if you check your authorities you may get confirmation.

First, no "quid pro quo." That is, you should steer clear of even the
appearance that you will provide business advantage in exchange for
affectionate acts from a person who is sexually attractive to you. This
principle is an excellent reason not to ask an interviewee to go out on a date
(slightly simplifying an example from elsewhere in recent Hacker News).

Second, no "hostile environment." That is, you should steer clear of even the
appearance that you are making the workplace uncomfortable for people who are
sexually attractive to you. Decorating your desk with a calendar featuring
glamour photos of models, unless that is your duty in your occupation, is not
a very good idea.

~~~
thomasahle
I think got most of it, but I missed the connection between "people who are
sexually attractive to you" and "people who are uncomfortable with glamour
photos of models".

Or is "people who are sexually attractive to you" just a lawyer term for
"people of a sex you might want to have sex with"?

~~~
loumf
It doesn't matter if you are attracted to them or their gender and it doesn't
matter if they are offended. Having a calendar of models in swimsuits is not
going to fly. The rule must be something else.

But, honestly, if you think you might not understand where the line is, get a
cat poster and be done with it.

~~~
gbog
Looks weird to me that a swimsuit poster on my desk is not ok but deep
hypnotizing cleavage and ten meters radius feminine perfume is.

~~~
jheriko
both are wrong.

------
Jemaclus
I was talking to one of my best friends who also happens to be a coworker the
other day, and I said "Hey, if you're ever a victim of sexual harassment, what
can I do to make you feel comfortable with coming to me so that I can attempt
to help?"

She said "Nothing, really. The problem is that most harassment isn't blatant,
it is hidden and not obvious. It's like a feeling that you get from someone. I
can't tell you how many meetings I've been in where the person on the other
side of the table is regularly looking at my boobs. What am i supposed to do
about that?"

So my follow-up question to OP's is: what is she supposed to do about that?

I'm a hetero white male manager. And I have no idea how to answer that
question.

~~~
ierio
>I can't tell you how many meetings I've been in where the person on the other
side of the table is regularly looking at my boobs. What am i supposed to do
about that

This is just blatant non-sense. I am immigrant working in US. I can't tell you
how many times women have brushed my arms or tried to grab my ass. I am male
and have english accent.

What are people supposed to do when you are sitting at exact opposite side ?
Close the eyes ? Even if you are directly looking into women's eyes she could
be feel that you are looking at her boobs. Its just her own insecurities
speaking out. I would not hire such flamboyant bitch.

Also, mind you with diversity comes time to adjust. You can't mix people from
all over the world ( India, China, UK,Australia, Mexicans ) and expect them to
follow your culture right away. People from India and China ( including Taiwan
) are very hardcore. Many times I have seen they refuse to mix and adjust
according to US culture. When I was working in boston for big software company
, which also had Indian and Chinese folks, these people would get coffee
within their own group and refuse to invite/mix with others. Many of my
friends experienced similar thing.

I believe parent commenter is just non-sense believing everything said to him.
I would certainly steer away from such person being my manager. One of the
managers responsibility is to listen to everything and make good judgement
call which he clearly fails to demonstrate.

~~~
dang
> This is just blatant non-sense.

This violates the HN guidelines.

Telling someone that their factual recounting of their own experience is
"blatant non-sense" is a serious breach of civility, which is the #1 rule
people are required to abide by here.

------
cjbprime
My two cents:

As you point out in the question, you're never going to receive a set of rules
that you just have to follow like a checklist, because the same behaviors can
be consensual and encouraged between one pair of people, and non-consensual
and creepy between another pair of people. That's normal.

The only definitive rule is: don't hurt people. If you hurt someone, even in a
small way -- and you will -- apologize sincerely when called out, and try
harder next time. No-one expects you to never make (non-huge) mistakes; just
to learn from the ones you make.

~~~
randallsquared
> you're never going to receive a set of rules that you just have to follow
> like a checklist, because the same behaviors can be consensual and
> encouraged between one pair of people, and non-consensual and creepy between
> another pair of people. That's normal.

And awful. That's one reason that this problem looms larger in technical
circles: we're already far more likely than the average to be socially awkward
or otherwise ill-equipped to navigate these waters. I can be a fun and flirty
person in the right group, but at work I do my best to act as though I am
completely without sex/gender and as though everyone else is, too. If sexual,
gendered, or racial topics come up, I say nothing on those topics and try to
extricate myself from the situation. If the situation is around my desk, I
quietly dive back into work. This is the only way to have an acceptably low
risk of late night realization that I said something that someone could have
taken as harassment.

~~~
pekk
Whether they are socially awkward or not, I don't think it's fair to say that
technical people are more prone than others to sexual harassment (or rape, for
that matter).

~~~
falcolas
Why is that fair to say? Can you back that up at all?

~~~
pekk
I said it isn't fair to say. I sure wish people would read before reflexively
downvoting.

------
falcolas
As callous as it sounds, be friendly and "open" with co-workers, enough so
they will are more likely to let you know that you make a mistake rather than
going than directly to HR.

Everyone makes mistakes, but so many HR departments have zero tolerance
policies towards perceived sexual harassment, and if it goes public you're
doubly screwed... if you can get someone to talk to you first, you have a
chance to identify and learn from the mistake, without being hung out to dry.

After having my own extremely negative run-in with HR about this kind of
issue, I am very gun shy about expressing anything even remotely resembling a
personal opinion around women.

------
tzs
There is an important difference between tech companies and many other kinds
of workplaces. Tech has a greater tendency to consume people outside of work.
Many go home from a day of programming, and relax by programming open source
or hobby projects. They want to socialize with other tech people, because tech
is their life.

Most other lines of work don't seem to spill out as much from the office, and
people in them seem to socialize more outside their field. If X and Y are
married, I think P(X is in field F|Y is in field F) is generally higher when F
is a tech field than when it is not.

So even if tech were 50/50 male/female, I think we'd still have more problems
than other fields (although if women were equally represented and powerful,
more of the complaints would be from men being hit on by women at work...).

Sometimes I think tech companies should set up some kind of internal dating or
matchmaking site, and establish a rule that if an employee is interested in
exploring romantic or sexual relationships with coworkers, they have to go
through that site. Communication otherwise must be kept on a professional
level.

~~~
noir_lord
> Sometimes I think tech companies should set up some kind of internal dating
> or matchmaking site, and establish a rule that if an employee is interested
> in exploring romantic or sexual relationships with coworkers, they have to
> go through that site.

I feel a great disturbance in the force as if a million lawyers cried out in
horror/glee and where at once silenced.

~~~
njloof
We can call the app "Lawyr". Swipe left to quietly leave the company, swipe
right to sue.

------
Spooky23
Not an attorney or HR person, but I've led groups with up to about 100 people.
You can't write such a guide because you need to take into account the
perceptions of the people who you work with.

End of the day, you should always proceed with caution when establishing out
of work relationships with co-workers of the opposite sex. You should not
engage in romantic or sexual relationships with coworkers.

The risk in both situations is that you're potentially (and unwittingly)
creating a workplace perceived as hostile or rigged. Many people are hesitant
to confront issues Tha bother them when it involves the person who is banging
the boss.

Other things to consider:

\- HR is not your friend. They are there to protect the company from you. If
you need a confidant, talk t a therapist or trusted friend.

\- There are plenty of nutjobs out there, and one of them may decide that you
are the source of their misery. If you run into this, keep a written log of
interactions with the person.

\- Most problems can be avoided by listening to others and treating people
with respect.

\- If you are a supervisor and learn of an issue, deal with it immediately.

------
powertower
In all honesty, the way it works is like this -

1\. Attractive male opens door for female. Female blushes, there is no
problem.

2\. Unattractive male opens door for female. Female reports unwanted behavior.

( _" attractive" does not have to mean "physically attractive", it could be
another quality_)

And I'm not being smug here with the above. No matter what, life is a
popularity contest.

Outside of that example, with grey zones, it's all on a case-by-case bases, as
far as what appropriate behavior is.

But if you need an actionable answer, then realizes that right now we are
living in a time where victimhood is the predominant social "virtue"... People
are seeking it, promoting it, and pretending to be outraged over it (e.g.,
social justice) - and will do anything to get attention.

So if you are a male, it's best not to have any type of non-work contact and
non-work dialog with opposite sex co-workers, unless you want to be the
subject of another world-trending tweet and/or 1000 point + 500 reply HN post.

As anything from a simple compliment, to a obvious joke, will be interpreted
in the worst of ways.

~~~
smeyer
Have you actually seen someone in your workplace reported to a manager or HR
representative for holding open a door outside of a larger pattern of
behavior? I've never in my life seen anyone get more than a dismissive look
for holding a door, regardless of gender or attractiveness.

~~~
powertower
That part was meant to show the general bias of it all through a figuratively
made example. I didn't think anyone would take it literally.

~~~
smeyer
>And I'm not being smug here with the above.

That's what threw me off, so sorry with the confusion. I can also state that
it doesn't fit my personal experiences even in a figurative sense, but that's
a comparison that I don't think is easy to make in a few comments back and
forth online.

------
codezero
Unfortunately there are (at least) two different issues here.

    
    
      1) Where is the line for legal liability
      2) Where is the line for individuals
    

1) is pretty well defined, talk to your HR team about that, in fact, you
should probably have some kind of manual with the general outline, every
company I've worked at with > 50 employees has this as a standard practice,
smaller than that, probably not.

2) I prefer to consider Karl Popper's reframing of the Golden Rule: "The
golden rule is a good standard which is further improved by doing unto others,
wherever reasonable, as they want to be done by"

This unfortunately requires some communication about what people would want,
and establishing that usually involves some communication which in and of
itself may cross the line, woops. You simply can't assume you know what
someone wants, or what they are OK with, so the line for individuals will
always be variable, and you can only do your best to be conservative and take
feedback to heart.

------
tbrownaw
The office I work at has several married couples. Some of who have been
working there together since before they became couples. Some are at
significantly different levels in the corporate hierarchy. Supposedly there is
or was one person who "reports" to someone that has nothing to do with their
day-to-day work or the rest of their team, because otherwise they'd be
(indirectly, a couple levels apart) reporting to their spouse.

I _think_ \-- but don't have the employee handbook in front of me -- that
corporate policy is limited to requiring that reports-to relationships be
disjoint from screwing-eachother relationships.

~~~
njloof
I'm having trouble parsing that. Can you say it again, only in PROLOG?

------
joe_the_user
_The legal advice would be: don 't._

I'm totally unqualified but I think that the legal advice still stands. And it
like what this means that any romantic entanglements with subordinates will
end with serious liability if there's a situation where anyone objects.

It seems as if recent events also show that it is hard to know what really
happened in any particular event and once someone crosses one line (even a
line that doesn't seem to immediately offend anyone) in the world of
relationships, they can easily be accused and even convicted of crossing every
line. That might not be fair but it's life. It's kind of like car accidents -
some accidents might be legally and clearly one person's fault but you should
drive to have no accidents, not to simply not the one at fault. When improper
sexual relations get to the level of legality, both people's lives are damaged
and logic dictates that's often going to be unfair to one of them (and logic
leaves us in the lurch determining apriori which, despite the ideology and
vituperations of all parts of the political spectrum).

 _But, the modern workplace culture encourages being more then 'professional
coworker' to your coworkers outside of the office._

Indeed, at the start-up workplace seems to. And recent events also seems to
cast this approach as a train wreck (wrecks) waiting to happen.

------
wtbob
> You can end up hanging out privately with your superiors or subordinates and
> this can eventually lead to various personal and romantic entanglements.

That's typically a bad idea anyway. I know that we in the hip, cool developer
world like to pretend that an organisation can be flat and rankless—but it
really can't.

I think it's completely appropriate for superiors and subordinates to
socialise in groups (and kudos to the tech world for keeping that tradition
alive when so many organisational cultures are stomping it out), but private
socialisation should be limited to those who are on the same level.

As for specifically sex-related issues, the only thing I can think makes sense
is to scrupulously treat every team member the same, and don't date within the
organisation—and if, despite one's best intentions, one _does_ form a
relationship, then one or both parties should leave.

------
mqsoh
You should try your best. If you fail, and you make someone uncomfortable,
then everything that happens after that is based on your reaction to being
informed of it.

Do you think the other person is full of shit? that they're out to get you?
That there's far too much coddling of women and minorities in the world today?

Or are you honestly trying to do the right thing?

Here's two examples. Wadhwa met his criticism by saying that over sensitive
feminists are hurting themselves and other women, that they're out to get him
and stuff about slander.

That ESA engineer with the South Park t-shirt made an honest apology and
probably made a lot of new friends.

------
jheriko
i could really go for some of these guidelines too.

i like to think i am fairly equal minded, but at the same time i do put my
foot in my mouth and fall into the misogynist camp more than i would like.

some things are obvious, but every once in a while i state what seems like
obvious truth and get slammed for it just because there is a woman involved.

(don't get me wrong, i also put my foot in my mouth because i am an ass)

as with all such things the best defence is to not be in the wrong place at
the wrong time doing the wrong thing, so to err on the side of caution.
although, it can be difficult to even see what that is if you get comfortable
working in male dominated environments...

i don't think male dominated environments (or female) are going to go away.
simply because the evidence points to the fact that the more freedom you give
to people to express themselves, and choose careers, the more the inate gender
differences come to the fore and dominate the statistics.

the best way to get women into STEM is to be a 3rd world country with terrible
human rights policies.

------
yuvadam
Guideline #1: Be an ally. [1] [2] [3] [4]

There are no more guidelines.

[1] -
[http://www.scn.org/friends/ally.html](http://www.scn.org/friends/ally.html)

[2] - [http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/11/things-allies-need-to-
kn...](http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/11/things-allies-need-to-know/)

[3] -
[http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Allies](http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Allies)

[4] -
[http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Resources_for_allies](http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Resources_for_allies)

