Very disturbing that mere allegation by any random person can bring down a COO of a major payment processor and cause future hiring troubles to a company that's going up against giants such as Visa. Do I smell a conspiracy?
Your preferred explanation of this event is that a baseless accusation of sexual harassment was orchestrated by the big payment processors as a means of torpedoing Square's already breathless pace? And that, despite the baselessness of that claim, a major architect of Square decided to hop off the train? That despite a huge investment of time, energy and ego, the mere whisper of an accusation was sufficient to send him running?
If I may posit a more likely scenario: Square hires human beings. And human beings, thanks to a technology stack built atop a basal ganglia, like to fuck almost at the exclusion of all other things. And, due to imperfections of this stack, sometimes higher order objectives are subjugated by that enthusiasm for fucking.
And that as a result, maybe someone just didn't keep their willy in their pants, they knew it, and decided to step aside before their complicated mess got slopped on the company they helped build?
I dunno – I feel like I like the "humans are imperfect" explanation a bit better.
edit: Via a comment above by ry0ohki, this appears to be exactly what happened. http://keithrabois.tumblr.com/post/41463189288/a-note-from-k...
Yes, because a conspiracy is more likely than one of the guy's at the helm of a company notorious for its poor working environment[0] actually turning out to, allegedly, being a douchebag.
[0] http://www.businessinsider.com/the-truth-about-those-brutal-...
Although I doubt this case was some conspiracy.
I would expect that tone of comment on other boards but not here.
Also, how are they going up against Visa? They don't issue their own cards, but rather, are competing against the likes of PayPal, Bank of America, and Authorize.net.
It's not uncommon for the accused to step down, or step away, while an issue is being investigated.
just look at the stats for the amount of rapes which don't go to court.
this is a dismissing tactic to imply that sexual harassment is some sort of pseudo law that isn't fair, with often the implication that it's a giant conspiracy to allow women and evil feminists to screw over men.
sexual harassment is a crime. it's a real crime. tech has a sexism problem.
http://www.equalrights.org/publications/kyr/shwork.asp
Note this quote: "The conduct of the harasser must either be severe or it must be pervasive to be sexual harassment. A single incident is probably not sexual harassment unless it is severe. For example, a single incident of rape or attempted rape would probably be sexual harassment (it would also violate criminal laws)."
> Several months after our relationship began, I recommended that he interview at Square. He went through the interview process and was ultimately hired. I had no impact on his potential success at the company. At no point did he ever report directly to me, and I have seen his work product less than a handful of times.
http://keithrabois.tumblr.com/post/41463189288/a-note-from-k...
"In [Intercourse], she argues that all heterosexual sex in our patriarchal society is coercive and degrading to women, and sexual penetration may by its very nature doom women to inferiority and submission, and "may be immune to reform.""
Though Dworkin denied it, many, including female, critics, viewed it as such:
"Such descriptions are often cited by Dworkin's critics, interpreting the book as claiming "all" heterosexual intercourse is rape, or more generally that the anatomical mechanics of sexual intercourse make it intrinsically harmful to women's equality. For instance, Cathy Young says that statements such as, "Intercourse is the pure, sterile, formal expression of men's contempt for women," are reasonably summarized as "All sex is rape.""
Feminism, like all groups, has many overriding ideas and then within that movement you'll have disagreements and there's be a tiny minority who take extreme uncommon views that the rest of the group don't share. "All sex is rape" is such a minority and extreme view. The majority of feminists don't think that at all (I might be wrong, so please, more evidence if you have it)/.
You can find gay men who don't support gay rights, I'm sure there were (at least one) black person in Deep South of USA who supported slavery. etc. etc.
I absolutely agree that probably the very vast majority of feminists don't think that at all, and my intent was not to claim so, though it may not have been clear.