
Dress code: blue tie and male - chrismealy
http://elektronista.dk/kommentar/dresscode-blue-tie-and-male/
======
gfodor
How many times are we going to keep hearing the non-apology apology: "We are
sorry if some were offended..."? I am so tired of it, it has become a cliche.
When did the business world/lawyers decide this was the optimal legal response
to customers? My blood boils every time I read it as it is the most
disingenuous, calculated, shallow tripe you can trot out when you fuck up.
What ever happened to just owning up to your mistakes? What exactly are the
massive consequences between saying "We're sorry" and "We're sorry some were
offended"? Is it liability, lack of character, "best practices", what?

~~~
cbsmith
I actually think there are lots of cases where it is perfectly warranted.

It's a big world; if you are on the world stage, it is quite difficult not to
offend somebody no matter what you do. There are experts in the fields of
diplomacy and etiquette who devote their careers to getting this stuff right,
and usually even then there is someone offended about efforts to be so
"proper". ;-)

So, I think it is a perfectly valid apology if basically the only thing you
regretted about your actions was that it made someone upset. Most people don't
get off on pissing other people off, but they do want to live their life and
go about their business. That apology is perfect for that context.

What's freaky is when it is used for cases where you'd think there'd be a lot
more that someone ought to be sorry for. What's even freakier is when someone
everyone _pretends_ it is apologizing for more than it is.

~~~
gfodor
I don't understand this viewpoint. What _is_ an apology? An apology, at least
to me, is a statement that you regret an action you performed, and hence are
saying that if you were transported back in time and could relive that moment,
you would have acted differently. Saying you are "sorry people were offended"
does _not_ imply that you would have acted differently.

If you do not wish you would have acted differently, do not apologize. If you
do, then perform a real apology saying you made a mistake and wish to correct
it. If you simply say that you regret others being offended, all you are
really saying is you lament the fact there are people that exist that were
offended by your statement. Ie, it is a shame that people disagree with you or
are offended by your words, much like it's a shame that a stranger got a flat
tire or that science has yet to cure the common cold. Ie, it's _their_
problem, or at the very least, an existential observation of how you think
things _ought_ to be, not something that is _your_ problem or responsibility
to correct.

~~~
aptwebapps
Well, for me personally, if I've offended someone seriously then that itself
is reason enough for me to regret the action under most circumstances. I might
regret it more if I am able to emphasize with their offense, but just
offending them is enough.

But if you're attempting to apologize in public, it doesn't make sense to try
to explain that. You can say what you did was wrong, if you think so. If you
do not then just apologize simply without dressing it up with qualifications.
It doesn't mean the apology is necessarily insincere.

Some information is too delicate to transmit reliably in a public forum.

~~~
cbsmith
> You can say what you did was wrong, if you think so. If you do not then just
> apologize simply without dressing it up with qualifications. It doesn't mean
> the apology is necessarily insincere.

If you don't specify what you are apologizing for, it leaves it to each
listener to interpret what you feel sorry about. If you kill someone, and then
say "I'm sorry", that could mean any number of things, "I am so sorry that I
murdered him in his sleep so that I could take all his money", "I am sorry
that while I was trying to take all his money, he caught me, so I killed him
to stay out of jail", "I am sorry that I brought a gun with me to a robbery,
because once he caught me, I had to either kill him or let him kill me", "I am
sorry I was robbing him in the first place, I shouldn't steal, and killing him
only made it so much worse", "that guy stole from me, and I was just trying to
get the money back, but when he pulled a gun on me and said he'd kill me
rather than let me take it back, I felt I had to kill him; in retrospect, I
wish I had thought of another way to get the money back", "that guy was going
to kill me then take my money, and I'm sorry that this was the case, but the
only way I was going live was to kill him right then and there"....

While some of those examples _do_ offer an explanation, one can be specific
about what one is apologizing for without offering an explanation (indeed, I
think that's exactly what Dell did, and in their case I believe that is
shameful, because they ought to be sorry for a lot more).

~~~
aptwebapps
I didn't mean that you don't say what you're sorry for, just that it may not
pay to be too specific _in some cases_.

Ideally we'd all say exactly what was on our mind all the time and no one
would ever get hurt, but sometimes tact is important.

Also, in the case of something like killing someone you might well place a
higher value on exonerating yourself to the maximum extent possible than on
potentially (re)offending someone.

------
orcadk
Just to give a short recap of who this Mads Christensen guy is, coming from a
Dane:

His tag line is "Denmarks big show-off" and he basically markets himself as a
provocative bragging show-off, always with the rolexes, sports cars, slick
hair and better-than-thy appearance.

He's not perceived as a comedian but rather as an entertainer hired for
various corporate events - some obviously less successful than others.

Unless this was booked by Dell US without doing any kind of checkup, they
would've been aware what would be coming. He's knowing for his provocative
presentations and I have a hard time seeing exactly how a Danish Dell branch
would find it appropriate or interesting to book Mads Christensen. If they
wanted stand-up comedy we've got lots of skilled comedians. Mads Christensen
is not in that line of work.

To be fair I don't think Mads Christensen personally believes what he presents
on stage. It's the persona he's built up. Not that that makes it better in
this scenario, just so flak is directed where it's most appropriate - Dell,
and especially whoever made the decision to book him.

~~~
AJ007
So this would be the equivalent of someone complaining about a popular US
comedian well known for making racist jokes?

~~~
olavk
He is _not_ a comedian, more like a fashion, lifestyle and relationship
expert. When he says that men should learn to say "shut up, bitch" it is not
intended as a joke but as legitimate relationship advice. His viewpoints are
well known, and Dell got exactly what they could expect. What is surprising is
that Dell thinks this kind of relationship-advice is appropriate entertainment
for a business conference.

~~~
EvilTerran
Sounds like he's basically a professional douchebag-for-hire.

------
MBlume
This is beyond disgusting. How did the people in the room not simply walk out?

ETA: Scripts are good for these things. It's difficult, in the shock and
confusion of the moment, to decide what to do. So, here's one script. When
you're in a presentation, and a speaker starts talking like this (or talking
about "gang-bang interviews" or whatever else) you stand quietly, and you
leave. You tweet what happened. If there isn't a clear apology (and we haven't
heard one from Dell yet) you don't attend the conference the following year.
This is how we, as a community, communicate to one another what kind of
behavior is and is not acceptable.

~~~
polemic
After a recent experience of being confronted with sexism and, ultimately, not
handling it how I feel like I should have, I think this is a really good idea.
Having a script (or at least thinking about what I would do, in advance)
would've made a big difference.

A lot of the time, our natural response is to freeze or act as if it didn't
happen, and that's not ok. Raging on twitter after the fact is not nearly as
effective as direct and immediate feedback.

------
josephcooney
Picture this if you will:

Half way through Mads Christensen's 'spot/tirade' Michael Dell walks onto the
stage carrying a microphone. Mad's microphone goes dead. "Well Mads, I know we
(Dell) asked you to come along and speak today" says Michael "but your views
about women are very, very wrong. They don't represent my views, the views of
my company, and they have no place at this conference. We're going to have a
15-minute impromptu Q&A with Nicolai Moresco while I make sure the PR people
who invited Mads here today never receive another cent from Dell, and then
I'll host the panel. I'm deeply sorry for this mistake."

Michael Dell stamps his authority on things, shows leadership, puts forward a
positive message, guaranteed to be a memorable moment/talking point with
attendees rather than some the usual bland corporate crap. Wouldn't the world
be a lot better if there was more of this?

Once when I was a kid the TV station (Channel 9 in Australia) ran a show with
some highly questionable content. I was a kid so I didn't see it but from what
I gather it was pretty base. Half way through the show the guy running it
(Graham Kennedy I think) came out and said Kerry Packer (who owned the 9
network) had called up and cancelled the show. I didn't/don't care much for
Kerry Packer, but I remember thinking at the time that this was a classy move.

~~~
kingkilr
Was the show you were wathching "Australia's Naughties Home Videos"? I know
that was cancelled half way through it's first episode by the network owner.

~~~
josephcooney
Yes, I think so.

~~~
chris_wot
Yes. The story is that Kerry Packer, who used to actually watch the shows his
network put to air, started watching it and after about 5 minutes and a number
of segments of animals fornicating called the night shift operator and said
"Get this shit off the air!". After which the Channel 9 logo graphics
appeared, then it went to an ad break, after which they aired a rerun of
_Cheers_.

The host was Doug Mulray, who was fired the very next day and who said on his
radio show that "I am the first man in Australian history to be pulled off by
Kerry Packer". I doubt that Graham Kennedy would ever have put his name to the
show.

Sadly, after his death, someone decided that it would be a good idea to
actually air the show. It wasn't as bad as Packer said. It was worse.

~~~
josephcooney
Thanks for the clarification Chris. As I said, I didn't watch the show.
Apologies to Graham Kennedy for confusing him with Doug Mulray.

------
kylemaxwell
I'll keep an open mind about the company for now, because I've not found their
side of the story (this occurred a few weeks ago), but Michael Dell should
personally and sincerely apologize for his company. This doesn't match _at
all_ what I have long understood to be their internal culture.

~~~
callil
If this is true, how were people not walking out?

“The IT business is one of the last frontiers that manages to keep women out.
The quota of women to men in your business is sound and healthy” he says.
“What are you actually doing here?” he adds to the few women who are actually
present in the room.

Are you kidding me?

~~~
jquery
Honestly to me that sounds like a sarcastic joke. Surely he can't be serious.
Regardless, that kind of "comedy" is wholly inappropriate for a corporate
event.

------
petercooper
The crazy part of this is it seems once he started spouting this crap, no-one
from Dell pulled him off stage and did any damage control! So people say
"let's not judge Dell," etc but we can judge their employees' lack of action.

If someone speaks like this at an event I'm running and I'm within earshot,
I'm getting in their face, no matter how famous the speaker. I'd hope other
organizers and chairs would act similarly.

------
unimpressive
Review:

Christensen is the best speaker I've ever heard, a paragon of equality. After
hearing his deeply enlightened views on women in the workplace, my whole
perspective on hiring and employee management changed. Absolutely recommended
five stars A++.

XKCD: <http://xkcd.com/958/>

EDIT: Let this be a lesson to other companies out there, vet the people you
book for...anything.

~~~
dredmorbius
Humor, irony, and subtlety, even with the xkcd link, are generally lost on the
HN crowd.

~~~
unimpressive
It's funny because that comment shifts every half an hour or so between
getting a few upvotes and then getting a few downvotes.

Even if I end up with some downvotes in the end it's worth it just to watch
the lovers and haters contest each other.

EDIT: It's too bad people can't leave a reason for up/down voting, it would be
interesting to see weather people actually think I believe that, or if they
just didn't think it was funny.

~~~
makeramen
I'm staying neutral on this one, but I can imagine that may people don't think
this comment contributes much to thoughtful discussion of the topic. Promoting
these comments, or even not downvoting them creates a culture where these
comments become accepted. I can see a comment like this (if upvoted) easily
starting one of those "pun trains" commonly seen on reddit.

I don't see anything specifically wrong with the ironic humor of the comment,
HN does need to lighten up sometimes, but if we let one of these get
upvoted... it will only lead to many more by precedent. The line has to be
drawn somewhere. I personally wouldn't want to see a HN where each topic has
10+ "witty/ironic/humorous" comments. I go to reddit for that.

~~~
unimpressive
>I can see a comment like this (if upvoted) easily starting one of those "pun
trains" commonly seen on reddit.

It actually did, there's a copycat at the bottom of the page. Which I
downvoted.

I actually felt bad about that aspect. A joke told twice or more is spam IMO.
And while good natured spam is fine on Reddit as you say, on HN it dilutes the
signal to noise ratio.

------
etherael
I know it's fashionable to have a knee jerk reaction and not actually check
backstory etc, but just quietly. <http://www.madschristensen-
foredrag.dk/mc/Aktuelt-og-media> This guy is clearly a comedian / over the top
on purpose, to say that he actually genuinely believes the purposefully
crafted bullshit on display in this particular article is to say that Les
Patterson from Australia actually thinks that it's appropriate to be a
permanent drunken idiot, or Guido Hatzis
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=domXumvTVI8> really thinks everything he says.

Actually, do US comedians have this brand of self deprecating over the top
humor? Nothing springs to mind, perhaps this is why it doesn't translate well?

As to whether the choice of this guy was appropriate? Different question but
even there you'd need to assume that the audience wouldn't "get" that this was
all an act and honestly felt insulted by it. I guess it's already clear
they've misjudged their audience but it maybe wasn't so obvious beforehand
that this would actually be the result?

~~~
polemic
Here's the thing: it's not humour. It's misogyny thinly dressed as an "edgy"
dig so that anyone who protests can be deflected with this sort of defence.
It's a tried and true technique to broadcast bigotry and slander with a wink
and a nudge.

I'm not saying you agree with his sentiments, but I am saying that it's not ok
to say "it's just a joke". And it's not ok for Dell to let him continue to
moderate their conference - even if they didn't realise what they were getting
into, they should have removed him at the first sign things were not as they
seemed.

PS we have very different definitions of 'self-deprecating'.

~~~
etherael
> PS we have very different definitions of 'self-deprecating'.

It's self deprecating when you make ridiculously over the top statements about
how awesome you are because it makes you look like an idiot. That old "I'm a
pretty big deal around here" chestnut.

It _is_ humour, whether or not it is taken as such is a different issue, when
Bill Hicks gets up on stage and repeatedly tells people in advertising to kill
themselves, he's not actually serious. Some might _take_ that seriously but
he's a comedian and it's humor.

If an advertising exec is heinously offended that he was just repeatedly
directly told he ought to kill himself because he will never amount to
anything or accomplish anything good in his life, does that mean that it
wasn't humor?

You may well have a point about the venue potentially being inappropriate for
this kind of thing, however to actually take the content of the comedy
literally and seriously and be offended by it is just completely missing the
point.

~~~
polemic
> _"It is humour, whether or not it is taken as such is a different issue,
> when Bill Hicks gets up on stage and repeatedly tells people in advertising
> to kill themselves, he's not actually serious. Some might take that
> seriously but he's a comedian and it's humor."_

Firstly, the standard of conduct for the moderator of a corporate event is not
the same as for a comedian working his routine in a club.

Secondly, Bill Hicks used outrageous punch-lines to underscore a biting social
commentary to his paying audience. This guy used weak jokes to push misogyny
onto a captive audience. I'm pretty sure Bill Hicks would have been less than
impressed with you equating the two.

> _"however to actually take the content of the comedy literally and seriously
> and be offended by it is just completely missing the point."_

This is more misdirection ("oh, I didn't _literally_ mean it, _lighten up_ \-
I suggest you read this: <http://therealkatie.net/blog/2012/mar/21/lighten-
up/>). I take the intent of the message seriously, and I find it offensive. It
is not missing the point, but until you recognise the directly destructive
effect of telling women they shouldn't even be there, _even in jest_ , from
the pulpit, you will won't get it either.

~~~
etherael
"This guy was not funny" is a different criticism to "This guy engaged in
straightfaced serious misogynistic commentary" is a different criticism to
"This guy should not have been hired for this particular venue".

The only thing I have a problem with is the statement "This guy engaged in
straightfaced serious misogynistic commentary". And that _is_ a large portion
of the criticism here, it's missing the point.

~~~
dspeyer
It's hard to be sure without a full transcript, but there doesn't seem to have
been any actual humor. Or plausible attempt at humor. Just serious sexism in a
flippant tone.

Why would people laugh at this? There are three possibilities:

* Classic Flippancy: The idea of women outside the kitchen is absurd to the point of humor.

* Self-Parody: This level of sexism is absurd, and we're laughing _at_ the character with the microphone. This is Sacha Baron Cohen's "Borat" schtick and it's very hard to pull off because of Poe's Law.

* Commonality/Relief: This is what we've all been thinking but can't say because of the PC police. It's such a relief to be in a safe space where we can say it. This is the how most "observational humor" functions.

Options 1 and 3 _are_ seriously misogynistic even (especially) if the audience
laughs.

~~~
etherael
I agree, I am just saying it's abundantly clear that it's option 2. Look at
the guy's website if nothing else.

------
jlgreco
Nearly impossible to read that article with that stupid bar thing hanging over
the text on the left side.

~~~
Groxx
Eh, that's one of the less offensive ones I've encountered. Narrower than
most, and not animated.

edit: oh, it's just a bit buggy. make your window narrower, and it disappears
:) that makes it _way_ better than most I've seen.

~~~
jlgreco
<http://i.imgur.com/nw6TM.png>

That's what it looks like to me with my browser maximized. How people design
things like this and don't do a quick check to make sure it works well for
different reasonable browser window dimensions is beyond me.

~~~
ralphsaunders
I employ the 'readable' bookmarklet for situations like this.
<http://readable.tastefulwords.com/>

~~~
jlgreco
Yeah, that's what I eventually ended up doing. I only bothered to turn on my
bookmark toolbar and use it in this case though because I had a particularly
strong interest in reading this article. In most other cases I would have
passed it by.

------
losvedir
Wait, so is he a comedian MC'ing the event? If it's a roast or something, and
he's poking at the fact that there's not a lot of women in tech:

 _The IT business is one of the last frontiers that manages to keep women out.
The quota of women to men in your business is sound and healthy_

As in, what are you guys doing to cause not a lot of women to be in IT. It's
almost as if there's a quota!

If that's the case it's still terrible and tasteless, but at least sort of
comprehendible. If he's serious and those are his actual beliefs, the
situation is so far outside the range of reasonable corporate behavior, I
don't know what to think. I'm just perplexed, really.

~~~
jsnk
He's an act, the similar manner Christopher Hitchens was about religion and
Jeremy Clarkson is about cars. Not that they are fakers, but their
presentations are intentionally over the top and insensitive to arouse
interest and entertain the audience.

Danish Dell fucked up this time. This is really not the kind of PR Dell can
afford to receive.

~~~
MBlume
I don't recall Hitch ever being "over the top" about religion -- he simply
called spades spades.

------
jtoscano42
... did this seriously happen? How absurd that in 2012, people with hateful
viewpoints such as these are given the stage.

~~~
perspectiveless
It's mind boggling that this could happen. And that when it happened no one
did anything. Why wasn't this person booed off the stage?

~~~
tomjen3
Chock can do that -- and somebody has to be the first guy to get up, which can
be quite scary.

------
MaysonL
Dell really should just liquidate and give the money to the shareholders.

------
chris_wot
Someone needs to be fired. Preferably the Danish CEO of Dell.

------
tomjen3
I am quite lacking words here. Not that some people believe this -- some
people hates Jews, so why not women -- but that they would him on stage.

The only guess I can come up with is that we currently, or until very
recently, had politicians with power in the government who wanted quotas for
the number of females in the boards of companies. This may be what he referes
to when he talks about having a nice female ratio.

What gets me though is that usually US companies go way too far on the other
side on the PC issues like this.

------
peterwwillis
Well, Dell is getting plenty of PR out of this, so congrats to the people who
hired the Danish version of Andrew 'Dice' Clay.

 _Little miss muffet, sat on her tuffet, eating her curds and whey. Along came
a spider, who sat down beside her, and said, "What are all these bitches doing
in Information Technology! Eyyyyy!"_

------
peterwwillis
Well, Dell is getting plenty of PR out of this, so congrats to the people who
hired the Danish version of Andrew 'Dice' Clay.

 _Little miss muffet, sat on her tuffet, eating her curds and whey. Along came
a spider, who sat down beside her, and said, "What are all these bitches doing
in Information Technology!" Eyyyyy!_

------
maclaren
Unreal.

It's especially brutal that people involved in tech believe they're changing
("improving") the world yet decide gender determines skill.

What really matters: the people without prejudice - who will hire/work with
talented engineers regardless of gender or race - will have an advantage via a
larger talent pool.

------
board7786
While some might say I've missed the point of the article for making the
following comment, I think it's somewhat relevant to the whole concept of the
author's argument:

USE SPELLCHECK.

I don't disagree with the sentiments of the author. The tech industry is one
that is very much male dominated, and one where women are very much
underrepresented. Some of the brightest people I have worked with in my time
in the tech field have been women, and I welcome the opportunity to work with
them; or anyone regardless of race, creed, color, background or sex, as long
as they're intelligent and can do their job and do it well.

But when I read something put up for public display on a high-traffic blog
such as this, and the author forgets to use spell check... I can't help but
point it out.

------
antidoh
"You're getting a Dell, dude."

I guess that was a typo, one too many commas.

~~~
shasta
And it was "dude, you're getting a Dell"

------
duck
I wanted to read this, but the gigantic pop-up won't let me on my tablet. Oh
well, now I don't.

------
drats
That page had a totally obnoxious in-page pop-up which half-loaded and took a
full 15 seconds to load all the parts (background image of popup and
importantly the close button).

------
ktizo
If Dell are going to pull this kind of shit then don't buy things from Dell.

