
Silicon Valley Women, in Cultural Shift, Frankly Describe Sexual Harassment - coloneltcb
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/30/technology/women-entrepreneurs-speak-out-sexual-harassment.html?_r=0
======
rl3
This entire article is a smorgasbord of cringe:

> _During the recruiting process, Mr. McClure, a founder of 500 Startups and
> an investor, sent her a Facebook message that read in part, “I was getting
> confused figuring out whether to hire you or hit on you.”_

One would think having the phrases "hire you" and "hit on you" in the same
sentence when communicating with someone undergoing recruitment at your
company would be reason enough to take pause for a moment, and maybe ponder
why PR suicide seems like a good idea.

> _Mr. Canter, in an interview, said that Ms. Dent “came on strong to me,
> asking for help” and that she had used her sexuality publicly. He said he
> disliked her ideas so he behaved the way he did to make her go away._

???

> _Lindsay Meyer, an entrepreneur in San Francisco, said Mr. Caldbeck put
> $25,000 of his own money into her fitness start-up in 2015. That gave Mr.
> Caldbeck reason to constantly text her; in those messages, reviewed by The
> Times, he asked if she was attracted to him and why she would rather be with
> her boyfriend than him. At times, he groped and kissed her, she said._

That one's just downright pathological creepy in the extreme.

~~~
dkarl
I think cringe is the wrong word. We cringe when we watch The Office and see
people make social mistakes without meaning to. These are not unwitting social
mistakes. This is people being assholes because they know they can get away
with it.

Furthermore, not having met any of these people but speculating based on my
experience, I would guess that their motivations go beyond just looking for
sex and knowing that one time in twenty it will work. I think they also enjoy
the nineteen out of twenty who are repulsed and insulted but don't --
correction, hopefully, _didn 't_ \-- think they could afford to call them on
their bullshit. Very few people are genuinely indifferent to putting someone
through an experience like that, but it's very common for people to enjoy it.
Those are the people we call bullies, whether their acts are criminal or not.
I'm sure the people described in the article took care to stay on the right
side of the law, but reading this I can't help hoping that they made mistakes.

~~~
ronilan
> _This is people being assholes because they know they can get away with it._

Nope.

These people are being assholes because they ARE assholes.

Never attribute to rational decision making what can be attributed to rotten
character.

~~~
everdayimhustln
People aren't archetypes or labels; that's too black & white, un-nuanced
thinking. Psychological and sociological reseach proved most people act
however they're expected to within a given power dynamic circumstance, except
for a few outliers which will go their own way, for anti- or pro-community.

This wrong "bad apples" analogy as it applies to police or genocide
perpetrators also is dangerous because it's simply untrue. Well meaning people
will commit atrocities if directed to by a superior authority figure; the
Stanford Prison experiment and the Milgram experiments underscore this.

Instead, there must be social and business pressures brought to bear to
prevent emboldened behavior with accountability. If there is boundaryless
affluenza anarchy, spoiled brats will overtly behave however they wish. If
there are consequences, the behavior will be reduced and become covert. There
must be constant vigilance on the part of those stakeholders to enforce
consistent accountability for professional/personal behavior.

~~~
throwaway338833
Sorry but no. The two experiments you cite are ancient and riddled with holes,
they are red flags for any psychologist worth their salt. The people described
in this article are sexist assholes, plain and simple. You can argue all about
how the environment they grew up in made them that way, but not that that's
not what they are.

~~~
tnzn
Milgram's experiment has been replicated several time, even in several
cultures. Good to know social psychology researchers are not "worth their
salt"

And yeah, actually, your culture and socialization is a big part of what you
are. You can blame them, but refusing to try and understand how they became
assholes means nothing will change.

------
CydeWeys
This is a watershed moment in the VC industry. The dam has finally burst, and
we're now seeing the establishment of a new norm in which women who are being
harassed go public rather than feeling compelled to hide it. Expect to see
many men who were operating under the old norms getting ousted.

~~~
5thaccount
I expect less VCs to take meetings with women, sadly. Not because they are
likely to be problems, quite the opposite I'd wager.

That's going to be the rather depressing and sad reality of the shakeout of
this.

~~~
xenadu02
> I expect less VCs to take meetings with women, sadly.

Why? There's a really simple procedure that can solve these problems:

 _Don 't hit on, feel-up, or try to have sex with people you're in a
professional business relationship with_. That goes double for people you hold
power over (managers to employees, VCs to Founders, etc).

If you're really truly worried about false accusations then here's another fix
you can have for free: _record your meetings, texts, emails, and calls with
founders_ and/or don't meet alone.

I expect smart VCs that are interested in making money (as opposed to lording
it over others or using their position to get sex) will continue to take lots
of meetings with women.

~~~
jimmywanger
> I expect less VCs to take meetings with women, sadly. Why? There's a really
> simple procedure that can solve these problems: Don't hit on, feel-up, or
> try to have sex with people you're in a professional business relationship
> with. That goes double for people you hold power over (managers to
> employees, VCs to Founders, etc). If you're really truly worried about false
> accusations then here's another fix you can have for free: record your
> meetings, texts, emails, and calls with founders and/or don't meet alone.

You simply expose your naivete.

[http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/california-recording-
law](http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/california-recording-law)

Any recordings done without the approval of the other party are illegal
(opening you up to legal actions) and are completely inadmissible in court.

~~~
munchbunny
If you're a VC, you can just ask if it's okay that you record the meeting for
record-keeping or pick-your-reason.

------
tuna-piano
Wow, this seems terrible. For these women (and from the sounds of it, many
more) to always have to second guess if an investor likes them for good
business reasons or whether it's just because they're pretty. To always dread
meeting a new business contact, knowing there's a small but substantial chance
he'll make some awkward comment.

Some thoughts:

1\. Is this more common in silicon valley than elsewhere? (I've never seen any
remotely similar male->female sexual harassment in the non-valley places I've
worked)

2\. Is this more common among high-powered people than low-powered people
(seems definitely so)?

3\. There's definitely a double standard here. I once worked (in tech) with a
good looking former male model. There were many very suggestive comments made
to him and about him, and they made him feel obviously uncomfortable. Of
course, the women making these comments did so pretty openly and with humor,
as female->male is not really considered wrong for sexual harassment.

4\. Obviously some of these remarks are worse than others. But many people do
end up dating and marrying their coworkers (Bill Gates, Sergey Brin, Phil
Knight...). I think there is not a black-and-white line for suggestive
comments to people you are connected with at work. The line is thick and grey,
but wow do some of these guys not have any self-awareness.

~~~
tuna-piano
I just want to elaborate on point #4. I chose those examples purposefully:
Those three are all well-known business leaders who have dated or married
their subordinates. Presumably, there was a point where Gates/Brin/Knight
initiated or suggested to initiate romantic involvement.

If as it turns out the woman had not been interested, in retrospect, would the
methods of initiation seem like sexual harassment? I believe it's very likely
they might.

Again, there are clearly methods that are right and clearly some that are
wrong. But I have a feeling the large grey area can be considered harassment
if a woman turns out not to be interested, and adoringly recalled in a heart-
warming wedding toast if they end up getting married.

~~~
rhcom2
If the women isn't interested, you stop. Seems like many men have a problem
with rejection and accepting no, that's usually when it becomes creepy.

Had Gates asked his now SO out and she said no and then he politely went on
his way like a respectful human being I really doubt anyone would cry sexual
harassment.

~~~
Tharkun
> If the women isn't interested, you stop.

I feel like this is much easier said than done. Emotions can be complex and
fickle. Many books have been written about how to woo a potential mate. There
have been tales of love potions for hundreds of years. The dating scene is
filled with people who use subtle manipulative behaviour to score.

What I'm trying to say is that it can be very hard to know whether someone is
interested. And the success of your wooing efforts determines -- retroactively
-- their creep factor.

~~~
cushychicken
It's pretty easy to tell if someone is interested in you. It's when you ask
them on a date, and they say yes.

If they say no, the respectful thing is to drop it.

Do the respectful thing. This is really uncomplicated. There aren't any "ifs"
or "buts" after that. The notion that this is the time to start wooing is
absurdly wrong. That's the time to know you've been rejected, and move on.

Accepting rejection, incidentally, seems like something many of these VCs have
trained themselves to be terrible at professionally.

------
ig1
I feel deeply uncomfortable on 500 Startups positions on this
([https://500.co/making-changes-at-500/](https://500.co/making-changes-
at-500/)) for four reasons:

1) 500Startups considered these issues to be serious enough to remove McClure
from his role but didn't publicly disclose this. This meant that he presumably
could continue to meet female founders and other WIT while still appearing to
be in a position of power.

2) A number of LPs in 500 have stated that they were not told this change had
happened and the reasons why. This suggests that 500 were trying to keep this
as quiet as possible.

3) McClure continued to represent 500Startups in his official role after his
apparent removal. A few weeks ago he was deeply involved in the launch of
500Melbourne in Australia.

4) Eight days ago Tsai tweeted "Binary Capital's Justin Caldbeck accused of
unwanted sexual advances towards female founders. Where's the outrage?" while
at the same time being fully aware that 500Startups was not disclosing
McClure's behaviour.

500 Startups has done good work in the past on diversity but this appears to
extend beyond McClure and they need to adopt full disclosure and address what
from the outside could look like an attempt to cover-up inappropriate
behaviour.

~~~
erohead
How do you know that this didn't all go down in last 72 hours?

~~~
mdorazio
Because they say as much right in the second paragraph?

"In recent months, we found out that my co-founder Dave McClure had
inappropriate interactions with women in the tech community."

"In recent months" is a hell of a lot longer than "In the last 72 hours."

------
notacoward
News flash: finance guys have predatory attitudes toward women.

OK, not news at all. VC is part of the finance industry. No, it's not
"disruptive" or in opposition to that industry in any way. Just look at who's
putting all that money in before it's doled back out to entrepreneurs. Look at
who has the power to force someone like McClure out. Yep, just a differently
decorated branch office of Wall Street.

VC partners hew to the norms of their own industry, not the industries they
invest in. The finance industry is a notorious bastion of the old boys' club
preying on everyone else, with much of the dirty work done by hyper-aggressive
young bloods vying to be among the very few elevated into the inner circle as
its older members die off. _Of course_ VCs behave this way, just like TV/movie
producers and all the other specialized branches of the finance industry. How
could anyone have expected or believed otherwise?

~~~
erikb
"toward women"? Toward anybody including each other.

------
refurb
For everyone who is wondering why these people act the way they do, the answer
is that their actions work _some of the time_. Otherwise, why would they do it
if they continually strike out?

What one person might see as harassment, another might see as an exciting
"chase". I've known women who have had guys be very aggressive (it's a fine
line) and they were quite taken by it.

This of course is not excusing the behavior whatsoever. If you lack the social
skills to see when you've crossed the line, the best approach is avoid the
behavior all together.

~~~
chasing
> For everyone who is wondering why these people act the way they do, the
> answer is that their actions work some of the time. Otherwise, why would
> they do it if they continually strike out?

Eehhhh... I don't buy that.

I think some guys just literally have no real idea to create romantic
relationships. The best they can come up with is trying to leverage their
financial power with shitty pick-up lines.

~~~
lawnchair_larry
You could not be more wrong. This absolutely works for some people, and both
participants enjoy it.

~~~
chasing
This is probably what the dudes in the NYTimes article think to themselves,
too.

~~~
refurb
You need to get out more. People have different preferences when it comes to
sexual interactions.

------
ChuckMcM
I give a lot of credit to women like Susan Fowler who were brave enough to
speak out, with starting what feels a bit like a tidal wave. I hope we see
similar light shone on institutionalized racism.

~~~
HarryHirsch
You'd rather say that she was sufficiently well connnected to make her voice
heard. Even then she came public only after she had left the company and was
employed elsewhere.

~~~
linkregister
Indeed. Anyone who was old enough to understand the Clarence Thomas sexual
harassment investigation can recall how much Anita Hill was dragged through
the mud, despite having a compelling case.

I think the fact that Susan was not currently suing Uber was the primary
reason why her story was believed by the general public. The critics who would
howl "she's just trying to make false accusations for a payday" had no
ammunition. Either that or things have dramatically changed for the better
since the 90s.

~~~
ChuckMcM

       > Either that or things have dramatically changed for 
       > the better since the 90s.
    

I expect it is a bit of both.

------
austenallred
I had always heard the constant murmur of sexual harassment happening in the
Valley, but I was never sure if there was any merit to it. I anecdotally had
never seen anything that would even come _close_ to a situation like those
described, so I kind of brushed it off.

But then articles like these come out. Wow. These are some of the kingpins of
Silicon Valley shown sexually harassing with hard, factual evidence. I had no
idea.

~~~
meredydd
Aside, and not meant at you specifically, but: Next time you hear "a constant
murmur" of harassment, racism, or other bad behaviour, _ _believe it_ _.

That constant murmur is the sound of a thousand stories like this that don't
(yet) have the coordination to hit the pages of the NYT at the same time and
become "credible". A month ago, there were dozens of female founders sitting
on stories like this who were _still_ afraid to go public. And they were
afraid because good, decent people like you, who "had never seen anything like
it" would "dismiss it out of hand" if they told.

(Obligatory disclaimers: You don't need to believe every story 100%
unconditionally, but "a constant murmur" = "multiple corroborating sources"
and should not be ignored. Also, I want to praise rather than criticise the
parent comment, because acknowledging why we were ignoring these stories is a
vital first step to not ignoring the next one we hear.)

~~~
khazhoux
> Next time you hear "a constant murmur" of harassment, racism, or other bad
> behaviour, _believe it_.

Um, no?

There's a constant murmur of racism in SV companies. I haven't seen that at
all. In fact, the opposite. Doesn't mean there's no racism, but I'd rather
have actual examples before I buy into that line.

There's a constant murmur of ageism in tech companies. I haven't seen that
either. Plenty of people over 40, over 50 in tech. Fewer over 60, but this is
a newish field still.

I've managed to go some 20 years in tech without seeing hardly any guys openly
hit on girls at work -- except a couple of cases where they're now married. So
why should I just " __believe it__ ", before reading stories like these recent
articles?

~~~
tpush
Believe it or not, there is stuff happening that you are not aware of. If your
first reaction to hearing such things is "Well I've never seen it, therefore
it probably doesn't exist", maybe some self-reflection is in order.

~~~
khazhoux
Thanks for the tip. I didn't realize other stuff happens around me.

But still, there's lots of "constant murmurs" that don't pan out, and in many
cases they're driven by agendas. It's easy to make or perpetuate claims when
there's no attribution, no specific examples, etc. Just vague innuendos.

So if some vague innuendo is contrary to my personal experience, yeah I won't
believe it as fact.

Kudos to these women for bringing VC sexism out of the realm of murmurs.

~~~
tpush
Sure, I'm not saying you should 100% believe everything you hear. Just that
dismissing such things outright based on a lack of personal experience is also
not the right way.

~~~
khazhoux
Dismissing would be wrong. Absolutely!

The poster above me said (and emphasized) that when there's constant murmurs,
you should __believe it__. Very wrong. Keep an open mind, but don't "believe"
it outright just yet.

~~~
tripzilch
You're not from the US (originally), are you :) Polarising is a cultural thing
there. "You're either with us or against us".

(I guess it's a cultural thing from their two-party system or something)

------
auganov
"Apologies" like Chris Sacca's [0] don't make you too hopeful.

    
    
      Often I have committed as their first limited partner and encouraged them 
      to use my name and participation to attract other investment. I’ve 
      introduced them to my fund’s most loyal investors and made sure they have 
      had the opportunity to make their case rather than get lost in an inbox. 
      I’ve also connected them to our trusted service providers saving them the 
      time and frustration I experienced when trying to get my first fund off 
      the ground. Above all else, I’ve rolled up my sleeves and spent the time 
      mentoring many of them in how to approach the business itself and how to 
      navigate the inevitable challenges that arise.
    

Yea, that's what VCs do? Just apologize and take a bit of time to rethink
stuff, nobody's going to be reassured by lame platitudes.

[0] [https://medium.com/@sacca/i-have-more-work-to-
do-c775c5d56ca...](https://medium.com/@sacca/i-have-more-work-to-
do-c775c5d56ca1)

~~~
deegles
What would be enough to you?

~~~
geofft
It would be a good start if he came to this realization on his own, instead of
right after being contacted by the New York Times going "Hey, we're going to
publish a story about your sexual harassment, do you want to dispute this
account".

~~~
sillysaurus3
People make mistakes. Sometimes those mistakes go back years, and sometimes a
sudden traumatic event can snap someone out of the patterns of behavior they
fell into.

The point is that it's probably a mistake to treat him the same way you'd
treat certain kinds of felons. Part of that is to give him an opportunity to
contribute in a positive way to the world, like everyone else. If he's
genuine, then isn't there some way to do that?

~~~
obstinate
Normally people have to do some penance before forgiveness, especially as the
crimes grow more heinous. Continuing to live the rich and privileged life you
were leading before, more or less untouched by the hand of justice, does not
count for much in this dimension.

~~~
sillysaurus3
Certainly. But what does justice look like here?

If nobody knows or nobody's willing to venture a guess, then we should at
least acknowledge that complete social ostracism is a massive penalty. Are you
sure the punishment fits the crime? It seems more likely that there's a
reasonable middle ground, but maybe someone has a persuasive argument to the
contrary.

~~~
geofft
I don't see any sign that "complete social ostracism" is the actual outcome
here, or even a plausible outcome.

~~~
sillysaurus3
His reputation is in ruins. It remains to be seen whether anybody will do
business with him. Both of those combined equals social ostracism, so we
should at least be sure it's warranted.

~~~
geofft
This sounds remarkably like the sort of sky-is-falling rhetoric I heard on
this website when Brendan Eich was pushed out of Mozilla. He's now the CEO of
a of a two-year-old startup with $7M in funding. I'd love to have my
reputation ruined in the way Brendan Eich's was!

It is technically true that it remains to be seen whether anybody will do
business with him, but I strongly suspect they will. For the purpose of
accurately testing this hypothesis, note that he _already_ retired from both
Lowercase Capital and _Shark Tank_ a couple months ago:
[https://lowercasecapital.com/2017/04/26/hanging-up-my-
spurs/](https://lowercasecapital.com/2017/04/26/hanging-up-my-spurs/)

There are a couple of projects listed there (Zach Braff's new ABC show, his
new podcast, some different form of investing): we can see if those come to
fruition.

~~~
BrendanEich
Dragging my name into threads about harassment is lazy analogizing. Adding the
post hoc, propter hoc fallacy (I got a CEO startup job and funding after being
"pushed out", therefore because of that) is just dopey. I founded Brave, it
was not just a job offered to me.

Nothing about my exit from Mozilla made fund-raising or building Brave easier
than it would have been without my exit. If I had stayed at Mozilla and
managed to sell the Brave plan internally (unlikely), I'd have had lots more
funding and market power. What I've done has been achieved through careful
planning, hard work, and help from the great team I recruited.

You can stop dragging my name into these kinds of HN threads now (two and
counting!).

------
Apocryphon
How is it that the old money industries of Wall Street and Hollywood, no
vanguards of gender egalitarianism themselves, seem to have less flagrant
sexual harassment issues? Do they keep them under wraps or are they just more
mature by now?

~~~
rubicon33
The tech industry, for all it's faults and transgressions, is still a
relatively progressive industry (emphasis on RELATIVE). "Old money industries"
have been getting away with this type of behavior for decades, if not
centuries. Women in those jobs probably see no point in reporting it or coming
forward. Why would they? It's not going to make headlines that the secretary
at Goldman Sachs gets propositioned for sex by top executives. She's just
going to lose her job, in all likelihood.

So I would argue, it isn't that those industries have less flagrant sexual
harassment. It's that you just don't hear about it. It doesn't make headlines.

~~~
nickpsecurity
See Wolf of Wall St for most vivid example. I'll also add it's extremely
common in sales all over the country. Especially telemarketing, phone sales,
boiler rooms, and so on. A large number of women I've talked to over the years
in those positions say it's crazy. That movie even brought flashbacks for at
least one I talked to who told me of huge parties with barbeque, pools, drugs,
and tabs for employees for beer and hotel rooms. I actually went to the first
half of one of that company's parties at her invitation. Too crazy and too
many hard drugs for me so I left. I've seen similar stuff at corporate offices
of what you'd consider boring industries where on the executive or senior
level they'd waste company money on parties with dates, secretaries, hookers
or whatever. Nowhere near as extreme as the Wolf but same problems.

So, yeah, I have probably over a hundred anecdotes especially in sales but in
general saying the right-leaning, ultra-capitalist areas have a lot of it
nobody cares to report. Plus, it gets worse in "right to work" (aka fire
without cause) states where there's limited job availability or the man/woman
being harassed has been at company so long them not getting a reference can be
held over them. Lots of reasons not to report.

~~~
rokhayakebe
The other side of this coin is that many people have sex at work. So when a
guy/gal comes in and sees this is the MO they may try to participate.

~~~
Jach
There's sex at work, but there's also just many relationships that start or
get set up at work and lead to marriage. Put men and women together in an
environment that already cements a shared general interest and you're going to
see that. People who treat every fellow employee the same as an amorphous blob
are operating under a strange way of viewing the world.

------
coloneltcb
Buried lede: Dave McClure implicated and is out of daily operations at 500
Startups

~~~
rryan
/That's/ the lede you're taking away from this story? Some asshole's fall from
grace?

~~~
nickpsecurity
Personally, I prioritize "A problem got solved" over "people are talking about
problems." One thing I like about this article, the Uber situation, and so on
is they're getting some results. The massive problem still remains and is the
lede but that's another good one.

------
Mz
_Saying anything, the women were warned, might lead to ostracism._

The problem is that women are already being ostracized. When you can't get
hired or you can't get VC money or you can't get business connections because
the only time men will talk to you is to hit on you, you are already basically
dead in the water as a business person.

How do we get out of this dead end?

~~~
AnthonyMouse
> How do we get out of this dead end?

It's a chicken and egg problem. The biggest systemic factor is the absurd
gender ratio, but if the consequences of that are self-reinforcing then the
status quo remains.

Many people have the instinct to turn to anti-harassment policies and
enforcement, but that's like trying to fight cancer with aspirin. It might
help a little bit but it's no cure no matter how much you use, and too much
will cause problems without solving any.

But "we need more women in tech" is just the problem statement. Nobody seems
to actually know how to get there from here.

~~~
ewjordan
One obvious step is that we need to do what we do in every other subject:
force all children to learn enough tech to figure out whether they are good at
it or not by making it a required class. When schools do that, they find that
tons of girls excel at programming, but probably never would have tried it if
it hadn't been mandatory.

Dealing with harassment in the industry is also key, but even if that was
eliminated completely it wouldn't close the gender gap that exists by the time
kids graduate high school. And the educational bit is much more
straightforward to implement, it just takes a lot of money to be thrown at the
problem.

~~~
solnyshok
"forcing all children to..." is never an answer

~~~
ewjordan
Forcing all children to go to school has been an answer for a few generations
now, and even with the crappy imperfect education system that we have, it's
paid off immensely. I'm merely suggesting that tech is now important enough to
warrant inclusion in that curriculum as a way of making it slightly more
relevant and less crappy.

------
rdlecler1
Has anyone seen a policy on how to handle sexual harassment allegations in the
work place? If it comes down to 'he says she says' do you fire someone even
though you don't have evidence? Similarly, if you don't fire someone and new
allegations come up later then it makes the employer look like they are an
enabler.

~~~
kevinburke
> If it comes down to 'he says she says' do you fire someone even though you
> don't have evidence?

If an employee of yours said they were raped by another employee, would you
make them go to the hospital and get a rape kit before believing what they
said?

If an employee of yours said they got mugged and lost their laptop, would you
demand security camera footage before replacing it?

You should default to trusting your employees. You hired them! They are
invested in the company, potentially with equity! Especially in at-will
employment agreements, I think this should be much closer to "Management
reserves the right to let go of anyone at any time for any reason" than the
criminal standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt."

~~~
dragonwriter
If you don't do any validation, this will be noticed and you will encourage
false reports as a means of settling unrelated personal scores.

That management reserves the right to dismiss for any reason doesn't mean that
dismissing based on bare unconfirmed complaints is reasonable, either morally
or from a business perspective.

~~~
andyburke
Where are you working that you can reasonably imagine this happening? The
risks of someone making this claim are so, so high, yet you believe someone
would do this just to 'settle unrelated personal scores'?

~~~
nitwit005
You'd think we wouldn't need a security camera in our break room to stop
people from stealing other people's food, but we do. People do all sorts of
petty crap. If you expect rational behavior, you're going to be disappointed.

~~~
nickpsecurity
I envy that. I eat out or hide my food just because they won't put a camera in
ours. Too much stuff stolen. I did get a thief once by putting a special
ingredient in it then leaving it _clearly marked with large letters and
warning_. They probably thought, "Screw him. He can't prove nothing." Jokes on
him. :)

Just did it once, though. I put a lot of effort into avoiding harming innocent
people. The bar is getting lower and people are often tired so someone might
grab it thinking it was a sample or something. Just too tired to be smart or
something. So, continuing to avoid the fridge except looking for any freebies
company provides. :)

------
tiredwired
Harassment goes both ways. I have worked in Silicon Valley for 8 years. I have
heard women managers and even a CEO say and do inappropriate things. Not only
did the woman CEO say horrible things about her employees, she was also a bad
CEO.

~~~
nailer
I've watched a COO of NYSE listed company on stage at company meeting describe
something bad as 'gay' with 0 repercussions

------
gcatalfamo
As I was trying to say in the techcrunch submission, without defending the
real assholes, my honest takeout by the whole sexual harassment threshold in
the bay area or the US in general is that you could never end up together or
even married with a colleague in that paranoid atmosphere.

Which is exactly what I did where I live in Italy. Happily married and yes,
after saying things to a colleague of mine that would have made me accused in
the bay area.

------
1024core
On the one hand, I cringe when reading such accounts, and wonder which one of
the people around me are engaging in such behavior?

On the other hand, I'm glad these women are going public, as nothing scatters
cockroaches like sunlight.

------
likelynew
I don't know if it is appropriate to say, but I think overt preference in
hiring females is one of the biggest cause. Almost every tech company hire
women with less qualifications to improve the the diversity. I know it is for
the best, but in personal experience, it is very spoken thing between some
males. Few interpret inside their head that the females are for them. I think
it is evident even in snippets of this article: "I was getting confused
figuring out whether to hire you or hit on you." It kind of means that she is
not qualified to be hired, according to him, but.. I don't know, it is a
complex relationship.

------
smmsnsks
Avoiding this situation is why I never meet women 1:1 outside of conference
rooms, yet Mike Pence was roundly mocked for doing this.

~~~
gizmo
Regardless of intent, this contributes to the problem.

A lot of mentoring and networking happens on a 1:1 basis, and if men refuse to
meet women 1:1 in situations where they would meet with other men, then women
will lose out on career opportunities.

~~~
sokoloff
This. In taking a new role several years ago, I had selected a woman to be
part of my new leadership team. I was counseled by a peer (of sorts) to never
take a closed-door 1:1 meeting with her; that it was simply too risky.

How the hell am I supposed to run a department without ever having a closed-
door 1:1 meeting with 1/4 of my leadership team? I ignored the warning and
things of course played out just fine, but it did give me some pause that
people would think that simply having a meeting would be too risky to
consider.

~~~
likelynew
I also think the same way. In my experience, most single guys can be divided
into two categories, ones who have predatory attitudes for girls or the ones
who has fear talking to females. Both are actually bad for the girls.

~~~
wruza
Your experience seems to be unique, because there are lots of single guys who
don't have both. As if you stated that being single is a deviance at least.

------
goatcurious
I remember coming across a 2011 article on similar behavior by a New York
investor, where I could not figure out whether the writers were condoning the
behavior, in an almost fawning tone, or highlighting a problem.
[http://observer.com/2011/11/charlie-odonnell-women-in-
tech-d...](http://observer.com/2011/11/charlie-odonnell-women-in-tech-dating-
dealflow/)

Just read it again, it is beyond cringeworthy.

~~~
erdle
He's now an investor in The Wing

------
nashashmi
Isn't there an inherent culture among men that dates all the way back to
middle school, high school, and college that somewhat sets the tone for
inappropriate behavior later in life?

These kinds of behaviours happen a lot and begin at a very young age. And they
seem to be okayed by nearly everyone then. Why don't these things stop before
they begin? I almost feel sorry for the men in these stories because the rules
seem to have changed on them at some point and nobody told them when.

Let's be clear! These actions are not ok in any work setting at any work level
in any industry in any situation of diversity or lack thereof. Further, these
actions are not ok in college, in high school, or middle school and in any
area of education.

Today the focus is on the investment industry, but it happens everywhere, from
the bar to restaurants to company meetings. And these articles need to do
generalize the environment beyond startup valley. Everyone should be put on
alert. Even bystanders.

~~~
djhworld
You can't tarnish all men with the same brush though. Not all men exhibit this
behaviour.

~~~
tnzn
You forgot the hashtag, mate. #notallmen.

------
snikolic
Made me think of this NYT article from 2010 which mentions the fundraising
experience of a female CEO/Founder.
[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/18/technology/18women.html](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/18/technology/18women.html)

Some gross anecdotes about Bay Area VCs showing naked pictures of themselves,
asking about her husband's sexual performance, etc.

(For the record, the company she was trying to fund has been quite
successful.)

------
CSMastermind
I've known Marc Canter for almost two decades now. I've been to his house, out
to dinner with him, in classes he's taught, and at startups he's been a part
of. I have never once seen him hit on anyone. He's also not a particularly
powerful person in silicon valley. He is very socially awkward, however.

I'd, personally, like to see the proof before I condemn the man.

------
notadoc
I wonder how ubiquitous this behavior is? And how often it applies to reversed
gender and same-sex scenarios as well? Do general demographics play a role? In
any given male or female dominated industry, is the less dominant gender more
likely to experience harassment?

Many people I know (both female and male) have been come onto in a work
environment by someone they are not interested in, or experienced an
inappropriate scenario or comment, or experienced unwanted flirting or
propositions. I think most people simply don't talk about it outside of their
friend or social group.

------
taytus
Wow, think for a second how hard is to be an entrepreneur. All the shit we
have to deal with at so many different levels. These women goes beyond that,
literally putting everything on the line. Much respect.

~~~
maxxxxx
This has nothing to do with being an entrepreneur. The same behavior happens
on all levels.

~~~
mhluongo
Entrepreneurs aren't protected the same way employees are, FWIW

------
naiveattack
Scroll down to the bottom comments for real personal anecdotes and
experiences; and contrasting perspectives.

The bottom comments are important to complete this discussion if you are
willing to entertain different thoughts.

I won't say more here, because I want people to actually be able to find this
comment. Unlike the ones at the bottom.

Cheers.

------
nhumrich
I always knew women had an unfair disadvantage in this industry. But I never
realized it was this bad. This is a whole different level then I imagined, and
makes me want to throw up. On behalf of my gender (im a male if that wasnt
obvious from my lack of awareness) I would like to sincerely apologise. Women,
please keep telling us these stories. Please have the strength to "go public"
with this information. It helped me realize the severity of the situation,
hopefully it will spread.

------
RangerScience
As a man, I really value these clear, blunt accounts. It's like a bug report
with details - here's what I need to know to identify the problem, and begin
addressing it.

------
zebraflask
I would find it highly ironic if start up culture ends up adopting some
variation of the "Mike Pence Rule" (which he got from Billy Graham) as a
result of these incidents. Some of the comments sound like they suggesting
similar things.

------
sethbannon
It takes such incredible bravery to call out this kind of behavior in a palce
that can feel too much like an old boys club. I'm in awe of these women. From
Susan Fowler to Niniane Wang to Leiti Hsu & Susan Ho to the ones in this
article. I don't know any of them but they are the catalysts of progress. It's
up to all of us to make sure this is a turning point for an industry that
needs to do so much better.

------
stefek99
About sexism - I think it's a problem of culture in general - it is not
socially acceptable for a young lad to approach attractive lady and say "I'd
like to mate with you".

(it requires courage, game, pre-frame...)

All these VCs and senior managers - they are in position of power - too bad
their sexuality is so oppressed - they should get some training how to
tactfully deal with it, how to tactfully approach potential partners and maybe
introduce "get out of jail free card":

1) I know I'm in position of power

2) You know you are attractive

3) We both know it is inappropriate

4) But hey look, I like you, we could create a great team

5) Because I'm biased I won't be participating in the recruitment process

6) Your recruitment will be purely based on merit

7) If you want to date with me, that's great...

8) ...if not - I'll make sure my attitude won't affect you

9) And BTW I'm in a dating season now, so if you say "no" it's not big deal at
all.

That's 9 bullet points, you can add 10th just because:

10) I respect you, if you feel offended for any reason that's OK too (it's OK
to be not OK). I act with the highest degree of honesty, transparency and
integrity. If you decide to report to TechCrunch remember to get my name
right.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Succ%C3%A8s_de_scandale](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Succ%C3%A8s_de_scandale)
\- "there is no such thing as bad publicity"

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Too bad several of those things are impossible - "my attitude won't affect
you" \- "I won't be participating in the recruitment process" \- "its not a
big deal". Because emotion is involved, there will be fallout from a 'no' (or
even a 'yes'). And because of #1, they can't just not participate. Somebody
will ask their opinion, or even take their silence as an opinion.

There's a very good reason people in a position of power are strictly _not to
'date' folks_ that work for them, or apply to work for them.

~~~
stefek99
> And because of #1, they can't just not participate

1) I know I'm in position of power

The moment the "get out of jail free card" is used, there are no further
comments so that silence is not an opinion.

> take their silence as an opinion

We can improve the exact wording, we can iterate on that.

------
edwinyzh
Visiting the page I'm getting this error: Invalid URL

The requested URL "[http://%5bNo%20Host%5d/2017/06/30/technology/women-
entrepren...](http://%5bNo%20Host%5d/2017/06/30/technology/women-
entrepreneurs-speak-out-sexual-harassment.html?"), is invalid. Reference
#9.360e4cdb.1498896362.1047f8d

------
rini17
No one noticed the photos with rather pin-up poses?

------
DrNuke
Douchebags are always one too many but Silicon Valley, like every other human
environment based on ambition and greed, is surely not the safest / shiniest
congregation on planet Earth?

------
lebanon_tn
> Lindsay Meyer, an entrepreneur in San Francisco, said Mr. Caldbeck put
> $25,000 of his own money into her fitness start-up in 2015. That gave Mr.
> Caldbeck reason to constantly text her; in those messages, reviewed by The
> Times, he asked if she was attracted to him and why she would rather be with
> her boyfriend than him. At times, he groped and kissed her, she said.

> “I felt like I had to tolerate it because this is the cost of being a
> nonwhite female founder,” said Ms. Meyer, who is Asian-American.

As abhorrent as Caldbeck's behavior was, what difference does being nonwhite
make? It doesn't seem like white female founders don't get sexually harassed.

~~~
bduddhebd
In this particular case, Caldbeck was exclusively (and clumsily) harassing
Asian women.

~~~
lebanon_tn
Despite this aspect of the case, framing it as a problem of being "nonwhite"
implies that Caldbeck's harassment extended to black or hispanic women for
example, which it did not.

------
tomcam
Have things become worse or is Seattle different? I saw none of this behavior
during my tenure at Microsoft (1996-2000). Admittedly I am a dude, though a
lifelong feminist.

~~~
matt4077
There was an interview with Sara Lacy(sp?) from Pando where she says that it
changed when the founder demographic changed. Before, it was either nerds, or
older, experienced people from Intel, Cisco etc. Now, the "bros" are starting
companies.

She credits The Social Network with being a self-fulfilling prophecy.

------
tawayyy
One thing that always makes me very sad is to see women working nearby top
males in a company to look nowhere like normal women, but more like top
models. Sometimes this happens just because a very beautiful woman is also
very smart, but given the frequency of this thing I bet that there are cases
of a conscious bias to select hot women. Now if you hire on purpose beautiful
women that's a pretty good recipe for disasters.

------
partycoder
Takes a lot of courage to do this. People that fight their employers can
sometimes be seen a problematic during background checks and can be dismissed
for BS reasons (or not providing a reason at all).

------
NelsonMinar
I'm ashamed of my colleagues and my industry.

~~~
kevinburke
You can work to make it better! A lot of the recommendations in the Holder
Report would be useful for any company.

------
rargulati
Here we are, a moment where history changes, but human nature doesn't.

It is true: these women are brave and correct in action. The men failed in
their professional responsibilities. Silicon Valley has the advantage of being
the keeper of a market where the individuals in the labor pool have greater
rights than their counterparts in Hollywood and Wall Street (where similar
ongoings are typically kept hush-hush).

Yet what will be the outcome? Will the men with money now be afraid to take a
professional meeting with a woman for fear of their own desires OR for fear
that something negative will come of it? If the risk of a meeting may now
include the risk of a lawsuit / losing your position and reputation, the
calculus doesn't work out.

This could lead to a strange dystopian outcome: segregated funnels. Women VCs
/ Male VCs - some overlap may occur, but most end up meeting with their own
gender.

Or not. Just a thought experiment on incentives and outcomes. Most likely
we'll go back to regularly scheduled programming in a few months time. Some
folks get kicked out, and a new batch will be there to replace 'em.

------
ngneer
These are horrible stories.

Interesting to see if folks on HN have had the experience of being attracted
to an interviewee/interviewer, or investee/investor, and how they dealt with
it given the complexities involved.

~~~
sokoloff
Of course I have. I've also found waitresses or bartenders or other people
attractive. If there wasn't a drive for sex programmed into us (as a species),
we (as a species) probably would have been out-competed in evolution.

How you deal with it is by ignoring it when it would be inappropriate to act
on it (or at most, treat as a pleasant-but-valueless part of your day).

Now (being married and holding very strict views on monogamy) it's perhaps
even more clear/easier than when I was single, but even then it was clear that
you don't hit on your waitress as an example. That easily extends to
interviewees and subordinates at work or anywhere else where someone can't
freely and without consequence say "Hey, maybe I'm flattered, but I'm
definitely not interested."

(For full disclosure, I have dated colleagues before and know of and support
intra-company romances where there is no supervisory relationship. You don't
have to close your eyes and pretend you will never find anyone at work to be
subjectively attractive. You just have to not ever be an asshole about it, and
that's not that hard a goal.)

------
pfarnsworth
Good. Hopefully this change sweeps across all occupations are areas of the US
and abroad.

------
LordHumungous
Wealth protects you in America, and these VC's know it.

~~~
gragas
Where in the world doesn't wealth protect you?

~~~
nthcolumn
Russia

~~~
gragas
Putin's keeping 'em in line

------
austincheney
Yet another reason to NEVER move to silicon valley.

PROS:

* if you land a job at a Fortune 50 company you could end up making $300k after 5-6 years if you are a badass. These are all big ifs.

* lots of sunshine

* easier access to venture capital

CONS:

* high taxes

* real estate is 10x inflated compared to most of the rest of the country

* actually, everything costs more there. The valley also has the highest gasoline prices in the country. Even food is more expensive there.

* the top employers have, in the past, colluded to illegally not hire each other's developers

* illegal sexual harassment appears to be a cultural norm

* housing shortages

* weird local politics (social justice warriors are actually a thing there)

\---

In summary the valley looks like a great place for founders (if male) but
horrid for employees.

------
itengelhardt
_> Lindsay Meyer, an entrepreneur in San Francisco, said Mr. Caldbeck put
$25,000 of his own money into her fitness start-up in 2015. That gave Mr.
Caldbeck reason to constantly text her; in those messages, reviewed by The
Times, he asked if she was attracted to him and why she would rather be with
her boyfriend than him. At times, he groped and kissed her, she said._

Nice! Here's grade-A material for the 46. President of the United States of
America /s

edit: added /s because it apparently wasn't obvious to some out there. Further
clarification: This is a sarcastic comment on the fact that the USA have a
president who has publicly admitted to sexually harassing women. With that
person at the helm of the nation, how can anyone be surprised by others
behaving similarly?

------
fjfkdjfjfjd
This is a little off-topic so mods, please flag/move as needed. (Wasn't sure
if I should make this an Ask HN or not).

I feel I may be a victim of a false accusation of sexual harassment. I am
really not sure how to proceed at this point. I have not put up a fight for
fear that I could loose my job (which may already be in the works at this
point). Management has not used the term "sexual harassment", only the
verbiage that "I have made a female employee feel uncomfortable".

As I am currently in a temporary internship position due to end in a few
months, I am not so concerned about this job, but this experience has made me
very concerned about being falsely accused in the future of sexual harassment
or rape. Should I just avoid all interaction with women at work completely?
How would I do this with a female boss? (refusing to meet with her in
private?)

Any advice is welcome.

~~~
peteretep
Take legal advice, not HN advice.

~~~
fjfkdjfjfjd
Good idea! Thank you! Being this is an internship ending in a few months, I
feel it might not be worth it, but definitely in the future, when a permanent
position or clean criminal history may be at stake, I think a legal
consultation would be appropriate. I just wonder, is there anything I can do
to reduce such risk other than just being extremely cautious when speaking to
women?

------
watwut
> a volunteer organization who went directly from "I don't think I can see a
> movie tonight" to "This situation is making me uncomfortable" with nothing
> in between.

She tried to tell you gently in the way girls are taught to reject men while
still being nice to them. If you reject dude other way, some tend to t get
insulted anyway.

You did not get it, so she informed you flat out about how she really think
about the situation. You got angry :).

Don't force us to walk super tight balancing act where being nice is too
subtle, but telling it flat out is wrong and there are maybe two magical
phrases (different for every guy) that are allowed. For one, not every girl
has such super high social skills. For the other, there is no way to win in
that situation.

~~~
manfredo
Communications that are subtle and ambiguous are highly likely to be
misinterpreted, and it is not reasonable to assume that the recipient reached
the intended conclusion. Depending on what the above poster meant by
escalating to "This situation is making me uncomfortable" I may or may not
agree with the above commenter's statement that the person being approached
acted irrationally.

If the person being approached followed up the ambiguous rejection with
something along the lines of, "I don't want to go out with you, please do not
approach me again" then that's a totally reasonable response; it's escalating
from a soft "no" to a hard "no".

If the person being approach said something to the effect of, "you're
harassing me with repeated advances after a rejection" then I'd consider that
behavior to be irrational. The person who approached communicated denial in a
very ambiguous manner that could easily be interpreted as asking for an
alternate time to go out. It isn't rational to call a co-worker a harasser for
asking somebody out after giving an ambiguous denial. Granted, if they
continued to make approaches after giving an unambiguous denial, like the one
written in the 2nd paragraph, then by all means this is harassment.

~~~
watwut
I assumed literal "you are making me uncomfortable" \- I think it is best to
go with what parent wrote. The "you're harassing me with repeated advances
after a rejection" does not sound how real people talk.

I also think that saying whatever gets the person away is rational - through
it might be rude in context. I mean, you assume that saying something
insulting or exaggerated is irrational, but that is not how we judge
rationality in other contexts.

My experience was that when collegues started bullshit (not harrasment but
they had many jokes about women targeted at me), being nuanced and nice and
"rational" did not made situation better. Just longer while they had fun and I
definitely did not. Answering in hostile rude way right away turned out to
work much better - issue largely ceased to exist.

I think that the expectation that women should be the nice one is what creates
a lot of problems. It is teaching girls ineffective communication (which
leaves them thinking only two options are HR or leave). People on the spectrum
honestly don't get nice, people who test boundaries don't see nice as boundary
and jerks find nice funny.

~~~
manfredo
I really doubt you truly mean "whatever gets the person away is rational". Is
it okay for me to call anyone who asks me out harassers in order to discourage
subsequent approaches? There's a vast difference between a firm rejection and
accusing a co-worker of a fire-able offense - potentially even a crime. If
somebody is insulted by the former then the have their only their own
insecurity to blame. On the other hand, even if no complaint to HR is made the
latter statement is going to make people stress over the possibility of losing
their job, potentially even facing legal repercussions.

> I think that the expectation that women should be the nice one is what
> creates a lot of problems. It is teaching girls ineffective communication
> (which leaves them thinking only two options are HR or leave). People on the
> spectrum honestly don't get nice, people who test boundaries don't see nice
> as boundary and jerks find nice funny.

This is essentially what I'm trying to say. The hesitation to unambiguously
accept or reject advances and instead expect people to communicate indirectly
by "reading the signs" is an inherently broken situation because it's
inevitable that those ambiguous signs will be misinterpreted at some point.

~~~
watwut
> Is it okay for me to call anyone who asks me out harassers in order to
> discourage subsequent approaches?

The word harassment does not even appear in parent comment. Neither is HR. You
added it to shift the topic which is an open and easy to see lie. "You are
making me uncomfortable" and "fire him hr please" are not nearly the same.

For that matter, rational is different category then "fair". Unfair or even
unethical dudes don't get to be called "irrational" (unless someone defend
their harassment by calling them dumbass).

> This is essentially what I'm trying to say.

In this story she unambiguously informed him that he is making her
uncomfortable. That is not even as open rejection as can be, but also feedback
on what the reason for not continuing conversation is. You are extrapolating
her rejection to entirely different things as words says. That is expecting
her to walk the fine line, guess in advance how you re-interpret words and
come up with answer perfectly tailored to your personality.

She tried nice as overwhelming majority of dudes would understand correctly,
did not worked, she started to be direct. But she apparently should not be too
direct.

~~~
manfredo
> The word harassment does not even appear in parent comment. Neither is HR.
> You added it to shift the topic which is an open and easy to see lie. "You
> are making me uncomfortable" and "fire him hr please" are not nearly the
> same.

Please re-read my original comment in this chain, I'm dealing with two
hypotheticals depending on what exactly is said.

> In this story she unambiguously informed him that he is making her
> uncomfortable. That is not even as open rejection as can be

If that's what occurred then this is the situation I describe in the 2nd
paragraph, which I explicitly write is a reasonable thing to do.

> but also feedback on what the reason for not continuing conversation is.

Depending on what exactly is phrased it may also be feedback conveying "there
is a good chance I am telling HR you're harassing me." Again, as per my
original comment I'm describing my opinion of the situation depending on what
exactly is said.

> You are extrapolating her rejection to entirely different things as words
> says. That is expecting her to walk the fine line, guess in advance how you
> re-interpret words and come up with answer perfectly tailored to your
> personality. She tried nice as overwhelming majority of dudes would
> understand correctly, did not worked, she started to be direct. But she
> apparently should not be too direct.

I am not expecting any line to be walked. She should not avoid trying to be
too direct, but just the opposite. This whole problem likely arose because the
first response was interpreted overly optimistically (thinking she wanted to
see the movie on a different day, when she just wanted to say "no") and
interpreted the second response overly pessimistically (thinking there's a
good chance she was going to report him or her to HR, when she just wanted to
say "no"). Again, indirect speaking is exactly what I'm attempting to dissuade
because it creates situations such as these.

~~~
watwut
> Depending on what exactly is phrased it may also be feedback conveying
> "there is a good chance I am telling HR you're harassing me." Again, as per
> my original comment I'm describing my opinion of the situation depending on
> what exactly is said.

Well then, leave her alone.

However, she literally said "you are making me uncomfortable". That is neither
threat nor rude. It is literally direct and honest communication.

You are not trying to dissuade indirect speaking, you are complaining that she
started to talk directly when indirect failed.

~~~
qb45
And it invites him to try to make her feel comfortable until she freaks out
and goes to HR or NYT. Sometimes it's better to just say no. You don't owe
explanation to anyone.

------
bdamm
I have a confession to make.

With few exceptions, I cannot work with a woman without thinking about having
sex with her. It's not like I'm trying, it's more like the thought is a
blinking red light and I can't help but look at the thought. Then I realize
the thought is absurd, but it's already happened. This normally doesn't leak
out, but for some women, I will give them "eyes" and usually feel bad about it
afterwards. But that can be persistent, and for the woman, must be kind of
creepy feeling.

I'd love for this to not be the case, but after years of it, I'm at a loss as
to how a man changes this somewhat foundational part of the brain.

The women for whom I don't have that thought almost always follow remarkably
strict professional conduct to a T. The equivalent for a man would be top-
button done up and formal slacks every day, never smiling. I actually really
like working with these women because it's kind of a relief.

~~~
pnw_hazor
Does the red-light blink around your sister or Mom?

Put your female colleagues in the sister compartment of your brain.

~~~
bdamm
Maybe this is easier if you've had a sister. I never did. And I can't sit
across the table from a skin-flashing admin assistant and think of her like my
mom, who is in her 70s. It doesn't work.

~~~
passive
The fact that you use the term "skin-flashing" here is a little concerning.
Perhaps it was just meant as a shorthand for attractive woman, because
otherwise you've taken a woman's choice of dress and behaviour and made them
part of your neurosis. Unless of course she is giving you the Basic Instinct
treatment (is that too old a reference for this site?), in which case I'm
entirely out of advice for you.

------
mirimir
Yes, this is it, I think. I knew this guy, many years ago, who bragged about
walking up to random women, and asking if they'd like to have sex. He said
that he got slapped a lot, but also had lots of sex. I think that he was just
BSing, but who knows?

~~~
jimnotgym
I don't see the relevance. Asking a random stranger for sex is certainly
outside of our normal social conventions, but this is not the same as using
your power and position to coerce someone into having sex with you.

~~~
mirimir
I consider them both to be sociopathic. Asking random women for sex is
arguably also coercive.

Edit: I note that smart robbers and rapists scope potential victims by making
innocent requests. Then escalating.

~~~
naasking
> Asking random women for sex is arguably also coercive.

Asking is coercion now? I'd like to hear that argument.

~~~
mirimir
"That's a damn fine coat you're wearing ..." ;)

~~~
zo1
That sounds more like a compliment. You're jumping through hoops.

~~~
mirimir
The next question is "May I borrow it?"

------
s73ver
I hope this becomes more and more common, leading to actual protections
against it, and not the "We're totally serious about combating harassment and
sexism, this time, for reals" response that it seems has the the norm for the
past several years.

------
louithethrid
I deeply, and with all moral conviction i can muster - detest people who have
so much power they can abuse it, while i having no power and no chance to
abuse it, at least get the chance to redocrate my inability and envy as moral
outrage and principles. That is detestable. Very.

------
idibidiart
If this is what happens in Silicon Valley, I wonder what happens in Wall St
firms.

~~~
eugeneionesco
...men on WS go after models not nerdy looking chicks interested in math and
finance? :)

------
bt4u2
This is silly. Don't reduce me to some risk averse weakling because I'm not
willing to put my neck out for strangers for little to no reward. If you're
like that, and you regularly go to Africa to help people, more power to you.
I'm not. Most people are not.

~~~
dang
We detached this subthread from
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14676851](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14676851)
and marked it off-topic.

------
honestoHeminway
Clearly the valley has no problem with social isolated tech-types rising to
power- and not advancing socially. Sorry, this is not just a moral problem-
its the problem of a socially self isolating caste coming by rise to power
back into human contact and then abusing it.

~~~
neilparikh
The people accused of harassment in this article are VCs, not "social isolated
tech-types", so I don't think your statement is relevant at all.

------
BadassFractal
It's an explosive combination of socially maladjusted nerds who suddenly ended
up in positions of power in a location/industry with rather few women for them
to influence with that authority + a new wave of progressive women trying to
break into a male dominated space.

It's going to be a rickety ride for sure.

On a personal note, part of me was refusing to believe that someone like the
partner at Binary was even possible in this day and age, I had never run into
this myself and concluded this must have been a caricature at best. I must
admit I was wrong to assume that, turns out those people are real. Hopefully
there are very few of them, but I might have to change my mind on that one too
soon.

~~~
api
> socially maladjusted nerds who suddenly ended up in positions of power

A lot of people who are socially awkward when they're young work hard to
overcome it. Some just naturally grow out of it.

But some find a "trick" to avoid having to overcome it.

The trick is simple: be an asshole. Being an asshole doesn't require any
actual social skills, and very few people will challenge you. Most people just
go along to get along since they don't want to risk the social cost or spend
the energy to raise the issue. It's a great way to superficially escape social
awkwardness without having to actually work at it.

------
pjwal
Let's use this opportunity to clean out the stink. Including the fact that
[https://www.linkedin.com/in/jsmarr/](https://www.linkedin.com/in/jsmarr/)
made Friendster (somewhat) popular by taking users registrations to hack into
other user accounts.

Register your email and password here: Now we will use your registration
details on the major sites to scrape all the data we can. Huge violation that
Joseph Smarr has never answered for.

~~~
circadiam
lol why are you talking about this 10 years later? aren't there bigger
atrocities...

------
drenvuk
How much of this is actually illegal? In workplaces you have legal recourse
but in this situation it doesn't seem like there's anything you can do except
blast their name out there for everyone to see.

~~~
dragonwriter
The groping is probably illegal independent of workplace context, the stuff
done in hiring is as illegal as if it was done during employment, much of rest
is probably not illegal.

~~~
tuna-piano
I'm not commenting on the ethics of this, but the woman who was "groped"
stated that she consented to it. I know this may seem distasteful, but whether
she allows the kissing/groping because she's attracted to him or because she
just needs his help, it's still consent in my mind:

"I felt like I had to tolerate it because this is the cost of being a nonwhite
female founder,"

~~~
dragonwriter
Toleration, as described there, is not consent.

------
azylman
I really hope that stories like this will let us stop blaming specific
companies like Uber and accept that this is a problem with our industry. We're
never going to be able to fix this as long as we keep sticking our heads in
the sand and pretending it's not a systemic issue.

~~~
nickpsecurity
As with all corporate evils, it will require leadership from the top down
establishing clear standards of behavior with strong enforcement.
Simultaneously, external pressure via media, lawsuits, and missing key talent
can be applied on companies not doing it or reinforcing those half-assing it.

~~~
mhluongo
Not sure I agree- because investors aren't in the same category as employers,
it's harder for a founder to get any sort of justice for discrimination or
harassment. AFAIK, the bar for a lawsuit is much higher.

Also, most of these firms aren't huge organizations- they're small management
teams with a couple partners and associates / analysts. From what I can tell
on Crunchbase, Binary Capital was just Justin Caldbeck and Jonathan Theo
before it imploded.

------
rokhayakebe
HN Women. I am a male and I am genuinely curious. Is the following SH or does
the position of power the person holds make it SH or does the environment
(workplace) make it SH.

"“I was getting confused figuring out whether to hire you or hit on you.”"

~~~
novavex
A bit worrying that this is ambiguous, but I would say that it is largely
because of the position of power. Like someone mentioned earlier, "hire" and
"hit on" should never be in the same sentence.

And as a common courtesy I believe people shouldn't be hitting on their co-
workers in the workplace in the first place. That makes everyone
uncomfortable.

~~~
rokhayakebe
But there is this [https://www.popsugar.com/career/More-Couples-Meet-Work-
Than-...](https://www.popsugar.com/career/More-Couples-Meet-Work-Than-
College-1002109)

------
microcolonel
PSA: If you are an honest man who manages or works with women in any capacity,
please keep complete audio records of your time at work. File storage is
cheap, a false charge will cost you your livelihood and damage the reputation
of your entire industry. If you live in a jurisdiction which requires more
than one present party to consent to recording, run for your life.

P.S. not at all insinuating that the accusations here are necessarily false.

~~~
josephpmay
This is illegal in many states

~~~
microcolonel
Just realized it's illegal in California, what a sorry and oppressive place
California is. Most of the wonders in California appear to be natural, and
stand in spite of human intervention rather than because of it.

~~~
linkregister
Yeah it was the naturally occurring silicon deposits that got SV started.

Film reel trees are the natural resource that got Los Angeles to be the
entertainment capital.

Excellent sun coverage with access to ample water from snowpack helped the
Central Valley dominate the nut industry... Well that is true!

