Hacker News Reader

Comment by blazespin | Hacker News Reader

The problem is that men misconstrue the natural social and friendly tendency of most women as sexual advances. There needs to be more education in this respect with men. Just because a woman is chatty and willing to collaborate doesn't mean she wants to sleep with you. I know that sounds sexist, but honestly, I think women just are naturally or at least culturally (does the difference matter in this case, really?) more social and teaching that to immature men would cut off 80% of these situations.

View on HN

Even if I take your assertion seriously, he should have been warned to stop at the first accusation. Literally all he needed to do at that point was to not try to date within the company, even the most clueless guy figures that out after a formal warning. If not, I question his basic reasoning skills.

This isn't a case where it was the first accusation nor was it where he or other people in management were unaware (the issue was escalated), the behavior was inappropriate.

The problem is the management was told there was an issue, repeatedly, with evidence, by several people, and choose to not act upon it. Doesn't matter if it's sexual harassment or incompetence, employees won't tolerate bad cultures if they can help it.

This is a lot of things, sexual harassment, work culture, accountability, office politics, etc., but some guy being clueless about women isn't one of them.

If you read the original blog post, you'll see your comments have nothing to do with what actually happened.

The problem is that there seems to be a terrible, unbelievably toxic culture pervading nearly every department at Uber.

Also, "I know that sounds sexist" is a fucking terrible caveat.

> The problem is that there seems to be a terrible, unbelievably toxic culture pervading nearly every department at Uber.

I wonder if such things are limited to Uber or more widespread than we believe it to be. I have a fear that these incidents are more common than I believe them to be and that because we have our heads down and focusing on an end-goal, we don't notice that some of our colleagues are being traumatized by people we admire/put in positions of power.

They are definitely not limited to Uber, but I'd also surmise that they're just as prevalent (if not more so) outside of tech/startups in the Bay Area.

> I'd also surmise that they're just as prevalent (if not more so) outside of tech/startups in the Bay Area.

I would agree with you that certain industries and areas would have equivalent if not higher prevalence. Investment banking comes to mind.

From experience, retail banking is worse.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_and_type_II_errors

>I think women just are naturally or at least culturally (does the difference matter in this case, really?) more social

This is really sexist.

I think there's a fair point to be made that some gender norms around friendliness in women are often misconstrued by men as flirtatious. Or put another way, women are expected to behave in a more "flirty" way, or they're seen as cold and bitchy. But if they do act more flirty, they're seen as "leading men on".

I think the technical term for this is "Some Grade A Bullshit", but it's been a while since I read a sociology textbook.

None of this really has anything to do with the case at hand though.

Is sexism a blindfold? A noiseless barrier where nothing can pass through?

I would define sexism to be believing facts solely based on a persons gender. This does not mean that if you had evidence that one sex was better at something, and you reached a conclusion based on that, then that would be sexist.

For example, it's quite obvious that men are taller and stronger than women. It's not sexist to say that, as it's based on clear evidence.

I'm unaware of the evidence the original poster has, but I would leave room for doubt that he/she does have some before immediately branding him/her a sexist.

There's something wrong with the way you think if you view an accusation directed towards a statement as an accusation towards the person who said it instead.

Branding someone's speech as sexist is implying they are sexist themselves. Who else would, in neutral context, make sexist statements without being a sexist?

Besides which, if you understood my point I don't see how you could view a statement like "Gender X is better at Y" as being sexist in it of itself. You would need to see the supporting evidence or lack thereof of to decide whether the idea conveyed is sexist.

you throw that accusation around too lightly. why don't you ask what the person meant?

Do you think there are any gender differences re: personality traits?

It's technically sexist, but not really that bad sexist. Likewise the statement "I believe women tend to be more often attracted to men than to women" is sexist, but not very shocking.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com