50 ms·
Ellen Pao: My lawsuit failed. Others won’t
- dovdovdov 9y ago./.
- sgift 9y agoAnd would you care to tell others why?
- johannkaupen 9y ago"1. Please post civilly and substantively, or not at all; 2. If you have a substantive point to make, make it thoughtfully; otherwise please don't comment until you do." Dang, just above a few minutes earlier.
- slindz 9y agoIt was really interesting to hear about the potential of a troll brigade being dispatched against her during her trial. I'm not saying I buy it and have re-evaluated everything I've ever heard about her; but it raises an interesting awareness of how often carefully placed comments and bits of information can forever color your opinion on something.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- willvarfar 9y agoWhy has this disappeared from the front page? I'm reading it, return to upvote, and its gone :(
- alexjikim 9y agowhoa, same here
- anewhnaccount2 9y agoShadow flagged I guess.
- coolswan 9y agoon the front page for me.
- dang 9y agoUsers flagged it. This is obviously a substantive article by HN standards so I've turned off flags.
- rimliu 9y agoUsually the answer given to the question "why is this article on the front page" is "because users upvoted it". Now it seems what users think does not matter.
- dang 9y ago> Now it seems I get how fun it is to do the long jump, but given that we're talking about something that happens less than 0.0001% of the time, it seems fair to expect a bit better reply quality than this.
- sgift 9y agoFlagging is a separate system from upvotes. It still needs upvotes to be on the front page - which it has.
- rimliu 9y ago
- analognoise 9y agoWow, what an amazing read!
- dang 9y agoAll: this article was flagged but we've turned the flags off because it contains significant new information. Threads about sexism have upticked in contentiousness lately—as has everything else, it seems—so would everyone please take care to follow these rules? 1. Please post civilly and substantively, or not at all; 2. If you have a substantive point to make, make it thoughtfully; otherwise please don't comment until you do. Yes, there's redundancy there; we appear to need it. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- 0xbear 9y agoThat was better than I thought it would be. A real, "no holds barred" account, and well written as well. I wish there were more of these, including perhaps accounts of what others have to say about Ellen herself. This really takes the patina off the whole SV venture capital scene. It's like there are different sets of rules, one for them, and the other is for the peons who work for them. A peon would be let go after the first, like, five seconds of that private jet conversation.
- AnonNo15 9y ago>Honestly, I might have considered dating him had he been >less arrogant and less married. Ah, I see. If you are attractive enough, suddenly it is not sexual harassment anymore. I am not going to have a shred of compassion for any woman in tech who complains about harassment, while mentioning the dating opportunities that happen to come.
- khazhoux 9y agoWhat an odd criticism to make. She's stating that his arrogance and marital status made him unattractive, as he was coming on to her. A perfectly valid way to feel, no?
- AnonNo15 9y agoRejecting his advances was fine. What disturbed me is that given different circumstances she would have dated him without second thoughts and suddenly "harassment" becomes a healthy relationship. It means that similar actions would end up in different outcomes. Then where is the line between the harassment and non-harassment?
- khazhoux 9y agoRead the article please. Her complaint is about his behavior after she turned him down, and his sexual advances towards another partner. > ... Ajit had grown increasingly hostile toward me, excluding me from information and meetings > Back at Kleiner, I continued to have a huge problem with Ajit. Not only was he blocking my work, he had been promoted to a position of even greater responsibility and was giving me negative reviews. I started to lodge formal complaints about him. In response, the firm suggested I transfer to the China office. > But when I told fellow junior partner... she grew uncharacteristically quiet. Then she said something I never expected: She had been harassed by Ajit, too. He’d asked her out for drinks to talk shop, and in the course of the evening he started touching her with his leg under the table. > Later that night he came to her room in his bathrobe, asking to be let in. She eventually had to push him out the door.
- 9y ago
- smokeyj 9y agoThis article goes all over the place. Can anyone make a good summary of what point she's trying to make? It reads like an unfiltered stream of consciousness. I think she's trying to be convincing and using her writing style to do that - but for me bullet points are more convincing. From what I read, her account is 99% about her personal experience and not he industry at large. How does this equate to "sexism in the valley"? Honest question.
- mador 9y agoThat might be because it's an excerpt from a book that's coming out.
- mikekchar 9y agoMy understanding of what she wrote is that there are not that many people who control most of the money in the valley. These people are all connected. She seems to feel (again, my understanding of her writing) that the people she was working with represented a fairly large percentage of the movers and shakers. From that perspective, I can understand how she might feel that her personal experience was a good representation of sexism at the top levels of business in SV. I admit to having absolutely no idea if this is correct. The more interesting question, from my point of view, is whether or not this is really a "sexism in the valley" issue, or if it's a sexism in the halls of power issue. I get the impression that she feels that there are a few powerful people in SV who are perpetuating the problem, but I actually think the problem is much deeper than that. While I've seen problems with sexism (and racism) in my career as a programmer, it's been pretty rare. On the contrary, when I've been privy to the goings on higher up the ladder (or over in sales) it has shocked me. When I talk to people in other industries it's been similar. My friends who worked their way up in large hotels have had some incredible stories. So, focusing on SV is doing a bit of a disservice, I think. I can fully appreciate that she can't talk about things for which she has not experience, so SV is what she feels is in her vision. But I don't think it will do any good unless we realise that people in power often feel that they can take whatever they want. And often they are unfortunately correct.
- matt4077 9y agoIt's a literary style called an 'essay'. I think it's well-written. I don't think it's trying to actually make the case for silicon valley's sexism–except that it'd be highly unlikely that all this happened to her (and a coworker as well) and nobody else. If you need further convincing, I submit most of this thread as exhibit 2. Then, maybe check out posts on reddit from the time of her trial.
- jankotek 9y ago> One day, I was part of a small group flying from San Francisco to New York on the private jet I am sure life is very difficult for women in Sillicon Valley, but could we start talking about other issues? 99.999% people are less privileged.
- BadassFractal 9y agoI'm assuming the point here is that if women in board rooms are treated like normal human beings, then civility and respect will soon after trickle down to their less powerful peers who also experience sexism and being left out.
- azinman2 9y agoOther issues? HN is about the tech industry. It shouldn’t be all roses and technical bits — the unsavory underbelly definitely deserves to be exposed. And unfortunately minorities experience negative things unique to who they are, so it’s important to hear them. The private jet doesn’t matter here — it only demonstrates that discrimination occurs from the very bottom to the very top.
- Powerofmene 9y agoHonest question here, what does privilege have to do with the conversation that took place in her presence and the questions directed to her during the conversation? Is it okay because she had the privilege of riding in a private jet? I am not sure I am understanding your comment.
- vidarh 9y agoDo we not spend a lot of time talking about other issues? And are not harassment an issue that also affects less privileged people?
- icebraining 9y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=jankotek https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=jankotek Physician, heal thyself
- Angostura 9y ago
- BadassFractal 9y agoNobody I know in the SV founder/investor scene talks openly about their sex worker preferences, their porn habits or desperately tries to trick their coworkers into surprise romantic weekends together. However, I'm clearly not exposed to the demographic that is all about that, and I'd love to know more about it. What is it about that group of people that makes them behave that way? Do they feel they're too powerful to be reported? Do they just not have the EQ to understand how they make others around them feel? Someone steel man that one for me.
- khazhoux 9y ago> What is it about that group of people that makes them behave that way? Your question overgeneralizes. You're attributing to the group, the qualities of a small number of individuals.
- BadassFractal 9y agoThere have been several women coming out in the past few months reporting VC partners behaving in a similar manner, hence that being a trend vs being about "just that one group of people"
- khazhoux 9y ago> What is it about that group of people that makes them behave that way? Ok, maybe I'm just parsing words here, but your statement can be read as: "that group of people [VCs and CEOs] behave that way [sexual harassment]" Which overgeneralizes, because this still appears to be a small number of offenders, despite the recent outings. That said, I'm willing to believe/accept that the same qualities that make someone think they should be CEO or a power-investor, and not a lowly peon worker, translates into a higher likelihood of douchebaggery.
- Powerofmene 9y agoIn a word, power.
- probably_wrong 9y agoInteresting read. I wonder if the "paid army of trolls" she mentions followed her to Reddit. That would definitely explain the campaign against her.
- laksjd 9y agoThis xkcd came to my mind when I read that: https://xkcd.com/1019/ https://xkcd.com/1019/ It's sobering to think about how easy it must be (for a sufficiently funded organisation) to effectively determine "public discourse" on a large number of topics. Then again, never underestimate just how willing people are (all on their own) to grab their virtual pitchforks without much consideration.
- dahdum 9y agoShe was CEO during the start of a wave of subreddit bans and the dismissal of a very popular Reddit employee (Victoria). Whatever her actual level of involvement in those decisions, I think it's reasonable to say the pitchforks came out because of them. As the trolls found more real or imagined "dirt" about her, it escalated as many were eager to believe it.
- kristofferR 9y agoIf I remember correctly she also made some incredibly dumb Reddit comments which indicated that she didn't get Reddit at all.
- ramblerman 9y ago> "paid army of trolls" would definitely explain the campaign against her. She banned a number of subreddits, including /r/fatpeoplehate and revengeporn. A move that strikes pretty deep at what people consider to be an open platform where votes define everything. Subsequently she fired Victoria Taylor, an incredibly popular moderator at /r/ama. This combined with the perceived idea that threads discussing these issues were being banned, caused a huge backlash against her.
- ternaryoperator 9y agoFor a fairly interesting summary of KP's replies / defense, see this article [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pao_v._Kleiner_Perkins https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pao_v._Kleiner_Perkins
- dvfjsdhgfv 9y agoThis bit is interesting: > The defense also argued that Pao was paid more than most of her male colleagues. While salaries had previously been redacted from legal documents, the trial revealed that Pao's salary after bonuses eventually reached a peak of $560,000. It would be interested to know the salaries of people who had the exactly same position before and after her. If the salaries are at the same level, it's difficult to talk about discrimination.
- matt4077 9y agoIf you read the article, you'll notice that her salary isn't even mentioned. There are many ways to discriminate. What she does allege is, among other things, being denied a promotion based on feedback that was manipulated to make her look bad.
- humanrebar 9y agoI presume the bulk of VC compensation isn't salary. And, long term, the real billions come in opportunities to invest and professional connections.
- ralusek 9y agoI think that it's really interesting that conversations about venture capital and conversations about engineering both get to be lumped into a more general conversation about sexism in Silicon Valley. A lot of engineers have a good bit to say against the existence of widespread sexism in engineering, myself included. Engineering in computer science has long been represented by a nearly nonexistent barrier to entry outside of one's capabilities and their relevance to the position. Even traditional, and technically very relevant, lateral predictors to output are such as formal education, are largely ignored. Your accomplishments and capabilities interviewing are ultimately what get the hire, with very few exceptions. Anybody who has been in a hiring position can speak to the utilitarian pursuit of the placement; race and sex are the last thing on the mind come hiring time. All of that being said, however, I don't find it remotely hard to believe that Ellen Pao's recounting of her experience in the world of venture capital is far from the truth. I'm actually relatively certain that she's spared us a good bit of the details. But this isn't engineering, this is finance; quite rarely about the utility of any particular individual in a role, and almost entirely centered around pretty horrible characteristics. Cronyism is the most important characteristic in the club, trading favors, trading connections, looking the other way, getting away with this, getting away with that. The whole thing is a zero sum game, because nobody within is creating any value, you're only ever vying for a piece of the pie baked by the outsiders who actually produce things. As Pao points out, any partner you have largely considers you as a mechanism by which they are to have less investment capital available themselves, and any senior sees you as a way to bubble up the greatest picks for them to skim off the top. The point is that the business is not about merit, it's about being in the club and playing ball. To deviate from the standards of the club just means you're less of a sure thing when it comes to being a crony, and it doesn't take much to understand why a woman is an outsider in a club like this. So when we talk about sexism in Silicon Valley, let's please not conflate these two very different businesses. One of them is made up of worker bees, and we don't care what kind of bee you are as long as you're outputting honey. The other one is literally Wall Street pretending like it's anything but.
- icebraining 9y agoI don't find it remotely hard to believe that Ellen Pao's recounting of her experience in the world of venture capital is far from the truth Can you clarify this? I'm confused because it seems at odds with the rest of your post.
- devnonymous 9y agoReading the comments here I get a feeling not a lot of commenters are reading the entire post (please do), or are reading after already deciding that they won't agree with what they read (if that's the case, please don't bother with the comments and move on to the next HN article) I thought it was an insightful read as much as I dislike the arrogance that SV seems to possess despite its ignorance of the rest of the world... And the accompanying culture that spills out of that combination of arrogance and ignorance. SV culture has a lot of problems, sexism is one of them.
- dkobran 9y agoReally interesting glimpse into this world. It's unfortunate that this article is getting negative feedback on HN. I think we all need to be careful not to belittle/condemn issues that don't personally affect us.
- matt4077 9y agoOh, this is nothing. Back during the trial, even HN was overrun by the vilest misogynist and racist memes.
- arkitaip 9y agoSo very little has changed. HN is a cesspool when it comes to sexism and diversity.
- 0x8BADF00D 9y agoSexism and diversity mean very little to me when faceless corporations define the narrative scope in which they apply. These are clearly rich and privileged people problems.
- grabcocque 9y agoIt often seems like the whole Valley scene is just a hotbed of reactionary techbros doing their darnedest to keep tech White and Male. The thing is, I thought the tech scene was supposed to be progressive and enlightened, but increasingly frequently it is not. It feels to me like this sort of Valley is increasingly looking like a dinosaur, a worldview and mindset we should be striving to move away from if the tech scene is to become what it aspires to be, egalitarian and enabling.
- Inconel 9y agoAren't Asians fairly well represented in tech, particularly at the larger SV firms? If they're trying to keep things exclusively White, I'm not sure they're doing a great job of it. This of course isn't to say that bias/discrimination isn't a problem and that there isn't a ton of progress to be made on hiring employees of diverse backgrounds. Slightly tangential, but what's the generally accepted definition of "techbros"? I see the term used quite often but never really understand who exactly it applies to, it just seems like a nonspecific putdown. I don't work in SV though so I could just be out of the loop.
- grabcocque 9y agoProbably, because Asians are positively stereotyped as being good at STEM. But a stereotype is still a stereotype.
- Inconel 9y agoIt's late, and sometimes my reading comprehension sucks, so just to be extra clear, are you suggesting that the representation of Asians in tech is due to the stereotype of Asians being good at STEM and not the fact that Asians are well represented in STEM fields at the college/university level, and subsequently are mostly likely quite competent in these fields which are often required in the tech industry?
- matt4077 9y agoIt's probably a bit of both, exactly in the way that the underrepresentation of women is also perpetuated by the stereotypes that work to convince many women to stay out of tech in the first place. IT has, for example, become the easiest way to get to the US on an H1B visa. As a result, Asia saw a boom in IT education, has many qualified instructors coming back from the US etc. It also helps that IT is probably the highest-paying profession where language skills are somewhat secondary.
- trabant00 9y agoOne thing to remember: it's only one side of the story from somebody who had/has serious financial interest depending on the outcome of the scandal. It kind of worries me how most comments take the allegations for granted.
- GoToRO 9y agoFirst time that I read a comment that reminds everybody that this is only one side of the story. Do you make the same comment on all stories? and if not, why not?
- zakk 9y agoI think it's clear that the other side of the story is a concept that applies chiefly to controversial stories. And this story is extremely controverial. No wonder people rightfully remind there's another side.
- archagon 9y agoPerson sues powerful firm for rightful reasons → powerful firm hires people to stir the mud → mud-stirrers create controversy → story now has "two sides" → balance fallacy causes powerful firm to come out on top in the public eye. I think it's also important to remember this pattern. It's been coming up a lot in recent years.
- zakk 9y ago> "rightful reasons" Not according to the judge. You may say they were rightful, and many people are discussing it. But at the same time you have to understand that a person trained and appointed to determine if the reasons are rightful, said they are not. That's were the story started to have two sides.
- icebraining 9y agoNot according to the judge. Jury.
- dreta 9y agoAn interesting read. Though, for me, VC in general is not the kind of job that favors people who are nice. When people are rude to you, or try to use you, there's a multitude of ways you can interpret that. For Ellen, it's sexism. What baffled me was that in the opening paragraphs she felt the need to point out that the powerful men were white. For me, it set the tone for the whole article, and painted a clear picture of her attitude towards the case and people involved. Given the current political climate in SV, it's a poor attempt at manipulation, and doesn't help her come off as reasonable.
- icebraining 9y agoIt's your prerogative to have a different perspective on the facts presented. But "manipulation" implies intent to deceive, which shouldn't be thrown unless you have good reasons to do so.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- SeanDav 9y ago> " I was sure the white men booked on the flight..." I agree, saying it was white men who were booked on the plane did sound a bit off to me, but also consider the environment she worked in: > "When venture capitalists say — and they do say — “We think it’s young white men, ideally Ivy League dropouts, who are the safest bets,” then invest only in young white men with Ivy League backgrounds, of course young white men with Ivy League backgrounds are the only ones who make money for them." There clearly is a culture in her industry of judging people by age, colour and sex so it is likely that she has become used to doing the same, at least in terms of colour. This does not make her comment right but it does give it context and should not detract from her main arguments.
- gizmo 9y agoI disagree. Ellen Pao is a woman of color, and she has no choice but to be aware of how she is perceived by others and by white men in particular. White guys can afford to be color blind, because racism doesn't affect them personally. She doesn't have that luxury. A coworker showing up at your hotelroom door in a bathrobe is not "rude". It's textbook sexual harassment. Sexual harassment isn't just in the eye of the beholder, there are clear rules for professional conduct and those rules were repeatedly violated. Note that the _majority_ of women in tech report having been sexually harassed to some degree. So I don't think your skepticism about sexual harassment is helpful, given how ubiquitous it is. Your suggestion that Pao has a specific negative attitude towards white men (i.e. she dislikes white men) is beyond the pale. This is a really underhanded attempt to discredit her.
- nip 9y agoAre some comments moderated (deleted without the deleted mention)? There was a really interesting comment (turning into a thread) about the double standards of women but I can't find it anywhere anymore.
- retox 9y agoThis is a staff promoted thread that the community voted to hide, of course the staff are in here crafting the narrative.
- dmitrygr 9y agoYes. Same reason you cannot reply to the first comment from dang or flag this post. This IS the party line
- icebraining 9y agoIt's not deleted, but it's hidden by default, apparently. You have to click on the [+] in AnonNo15's post.
- woodman 9y agoHer complaints about the office politics make up the bulk of the text - I experienced much the same as a man. Her complaints about woman specific issues, like accidentally having an affair or being upset about not being able to take off 4 months in an insanely competitive industry... I'm not terribly impressed. The sex talk complaint is interesting though - consider whatever emotional response you've arrived at, but with a slight twist: a straight man having to listen to gay men talk about gay porn stars. So what are we talking about here, 'don't ask don't tell'? Because I'm totally fine with that - I don't enjoying hearing the sexual fantasies of my coworkers (regardless of orientation), anybody know why that didn't work for the military?
- borntyping 9y ago"Don't ask, don't tell" meant something very different in the US military - barring openly LGBT people from service, but allowing "closeted" LGBT people to serve.
- matt4077 9y agoWow, so much to unravel. First: "Don't ask, don't tell" wasn't about sharing your sexual fantasies in minute details. It was simply about your sexual orientation, and it was discriminatory because it was obviously accepted to mention your opposite-gendered spouse, or have a photo of them somewhere people would see it. And since you experienced the same as a man: how often did one of your superiors set up a fake meeting on the other side of the continent, which then turned into an attempted 'romantic getaway'. Did you also have to physically push him out of your hotel room, where he showed up in his bathrobe?
- woodman 9y agoHaving been in the military when DADT was the rule of the day, I can tell you that it was applied a little differently than your characterization. Yes, locker room talk happened among the junior enlisted (E1-E3), yes the straight guys could get away with it while the gays missed out. That was the extent of it, after you hit NCO there was pretty much no more sex talk - and I never once saw a photo of another dude's wife. We knew everybody's orientation and didn't care so long as we didn't have to hear about it. As far as the hotel story. Yes, I've experienced a much lower budget version of that - I had a gay VP setup a meeting at an empty satellite office. He made his pass and I stared blankly for a couple of seconds before continuing my work on the white board. On another occasion I had a female coworker show up at my hotel room asking for some help with the presentation she was working on, I handled that the way you should: "I'll meet you in the lobby in 10 minutes."
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- dmitrygr 9y agoYes. But as a man you're not allowed to complain about that. Men cannot be discriminated against or harassed. /S
- Powerofmene 9y agoThere are lawsuits filed consistently in courts throughout the US that say differently.
- dmitrygr 9y agoEdit: very very few filed and very few won
- pjc50 9y agoTook less than 30 seconds to find a counterexample http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/20/lenscrafters-settles-fema_n_880709.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/20/lenscrafters-settle...
- Powerofmene 9y agoPer the EEOC, in 2015 171 claims were filed for sexual harassment by men. While it is a tremendously small percentage of the more than 6,000 claims, I would assume like domestic violence, men are exceedingly reluctant to file for personal reasons.
- narag 9y ago
- Boothroid 9y agoMen often have to deal with loads of shit at work also, but if you are a straight white man you don't have a handy discrimination card to play.
- Powerofmene 9y agoDiscrimination and harassment laws are gender neutral and sexual preference neutral. If you are sexually harassed by someone in the workplace, female or male, you have the right to file a complaint and/or a lawsuit. If you are discriminated against because of age, disability, religion, orientation, etc, then skin color is not relevant. Skin color is relevant if you are discriminated against because of your race.
- Boothroid 9y agoPoint is, if you are one of these protected groups you can dress up regular assholery as discrimination.
- Powerofmene 9y agoTrue but then isn't it incumbent on those around the jerk to say "not cool." Bottom line is a hostile workplace can be a hostile workplace whether from assholery or blatant sexual harassment. Some would say that gay jokes are assholery but to someone who is gay it may create a hostile work environment. Neither are appropriate. The take away is be aware of your environment, you words and your actions because they all matter.
- rovek 9y ago> True but then isn't incumbent on those around the jerk to say"not cool." Bottom line is a hostile workplace is a hostile workplace whether from assholery or blatant sexual harassment. I agree that the general takeaway should be "don't be an asshole" but it's important to differentiate assholery and prejudice in the wider debate because the legal ramifications are different. Edit: Rogue apostrophe
- Joeri 9y agoIt's easy to get hung up on the particulars of Pao's story and get sidetracked into defending or judging her, but I feel that is besides the point. I am more interested in the wider notion of why she wrote this article: to point out that sexism in tech is a thing, and that it shouldn't be. I'm wondering though: is this just about sexism, or is it about professionalism and maturity? Getting hit on by someone higher up the hierarchy than you can make it impossible to do your job, so that behavior is clearly unprofessional. But getting yelled at by your boss for shipping a bug is also unprofessional, and can also make it a toxic work environment. I'm not saying the two are the same, just that both are examples of unprofessional behavior that many places will tolerate. Isn't it time we have conversations about what it means to be a professional in tech? Maybe other industries suffer less from these things because they have a longer history and have more guild-like working practices, where professional behavior is more clearly defined. In tech people get away with wildly unprofessional behavior as long as "they get stuff done", and personally I never felt that was acceptable. Maybe this stuff is also sort of everywhere. Plenty of industries have toxic working relationships. Why isn't professionalism part of standard education tracks? I studied CS and I never learned about what it means to be a professional software developer. How do you have productive conversations with coworkers? How do you organize your work effectively? All of these things you're supposed to figure out on your own, but looking around I can tell that mostly people never do, or only do so after decades of getting it wrong.
- the-dude 9y agoWhy: because money, she is promoting her book. Tech: she wasn't in tech at Klein, Perkings sjizzle-my-nizzle, she was in finance.
- tnone 9y agoAssuming this is all true, it would confirm my suspicion that when people talk about techbros, they're talking about the rich 0.001% handling the money rather than the vast bulk of the sector. Conflating the two is eminently useful to some, but it has no bearing on most of the people here. It's a fight of the elite, using popular talking points and media influence to wage a battle using the reputations of tens of thousands as crass collateral. Aside from a workplace fling with one sleazeball, apparently there's a seedy pleasure trip she didn't get invited on and a plate of cookies. Then the corporate ass covering when she started making a fuss in a company handling millions of dollars. However, let's face it, competing at that level requires a certain kind of drive and ruthlessness, and it'd be naive to assume Pao is somehow exempt from this. It's an excerpt from her book, published to promote said book. Of course it's going to be 100% sympathetic. Here's a more neutral take on things, which includes the portion conspicuously omitted here: the lawsuits her husband's embroiled in, and the plus hundred of millions he potentially defrauded pension funds of, which incidentally lines up with Pao's sought damages. They sound like they deserve each other, and are eminently capable of playing their victim cards for full effect to paper over their own mistakes. https://www.vanityfair.com/style/scandal/2013/03/buddy-fletcher-ellen-pao https://www.vanityfair.com/style/scandal/2013/03/buddy-fletc...
- matt4077 9y agoYeah, she explicitly mentions that vanity fair article. Among other things, she calls out vanity fair for questioning her marriage, based on the fact that her husband had had previous relationships with men. It's also somewhat strange how you're trying character assassination by proxy. And that this is a four-year old article, so the story apparently didn't actually go anywhere. I also believe she does a good job of outlining how the treatment of women is distinct from a general "you have to be aggressive" style of workplace behaviour. What often strikes me most unfair is how women get told to be aggressive ("own the room", as it's called in the article), but then easily faulted for being too aggressive. "Shrill" is one of these words reserved for women only.
- tnone 9y agoAnd chauvinistic and sexist is a word reserved for men, but few seem to notice that. Equality goes both ways. I looked around for a follow up to the lawsuits but the Vanity Fair article is still the most informative. Her husband's problems did go somewhere: he lost and is now appealing. You can call it character assassination by proxy all you want, but the company people keep is still relevant, especially someone whose finances you are legally tied to, and when he's made exactly similar claims of discrimination over matters he had more than a professional interest in. I allow for the fact that she's a victim, but the article above is not going to let us decide that. I do not listen and believe.
- stonewhite 9y agoI can't help but feel that this story doesn't really add up. > I recommended that she not report it. She is sharing her story with her team, possibly seeking ways of retribution, and when she finds out a story that can help her cause, and _this_ is her response? To what end?
- archagon 9y agoEmpathy?
- stonewhite 9y agoYou don't just go around in a company naming a senior partner and his exploits for "Empathy", not when the stakes are that high.
- heavenlyblue 9y agoShe just realises that the issue she was against was well over her power, and the woman she was speaking to was even more powerless than her. If you wish then a pragmatic decision here is to not let her out in the world knowing she'll basically kill herself. That's why kids should not speak to strangers.
- c3d 9y agoPlease quote a part of the Damore original memo where he explained women were inferior (except, maybe, in numbers as far as the computer science field is concerned)?
- yorwba 9y agoPlease quote a part of vertex-four's comment where they claim that Damore's memo explains that women are inferior. Charitable readings and all that. Although vertex-four probably did mean to imply what you are challenging, I can still agree with the denotation. Someone who gives a scientific explanation (or worse, a "scientific" "explanation") for the status quo to suggest that nothing can be changed about it, would offend a lot of people. Especially those who are disadvantaged under the status quo and want to see that change. Edit: Ironically, it seems like my explanation of the things that offend people offended some people. (Or maybe it's something about my tone. Not sure.)
- TheSpiceIsLife 9y agoI don't understand why anyone should feel offended about someone using a "scientific explanation" in that way. Shouldn't we laugh at and ridicule those people for their outdated beliefs? What's there to be offended about by something that isn't true?
- ZeroGravitas 9y agoSaying things that you know not to be true is pretty much the standard way to offend people.
- vertex-four 9y agoIt can be difficult to laugh at an idea when you see widespread evidence of it from multiple sources on a regular basis, unfortunately.
- TheSpiceIsLife 9y agoSure, yes, I agree. That doesn't mean the correct course of action is to force societies hand to accommodate someone's hurt feelings. I argue the correct course of action is for people to develop resilience and emotional maturity.
- mrleiter 9y agoImagine being constantly reduced to your body. No matter what you do. That hurts. It simply does. It takes away everything you are responsible for, your intelligence, your success, your ideas. You are nothing more than an object for the opposite gender (in most cases women are objectified as a matter of fact, but there is also objectification by women). A little more empathy would do much good.
- kgwgk 9y agoAre you talking about Jenna Jameson or Ellen Pao?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- natecavanaugh 9y agoI totally agree sexism is a thing, not just in Silicon Valley, but in every strata of our society. And I'm saying this not just as a life long conservative, but also as someone who has had many strong women in his life who have absorbed a ton of crap simply because they are women, including my mother, grandmother and basically almost every woman I've ever met. I don't like blaming of societal issues for a person's achievements (or lack thereof), but at some point, you have to admit, the same gender who bewilderingly sends dick pics to strangers, talks crudely about women behind their backs, and views them as a means to a physical end, maybe we don't see how we interact with women or at least admit that many of our gender demean women in ways that equates to bullying in one form or another. I normally don't like victim culture, or people who assume the intentions of others to prove discrimination, but I don't think we need that for many cases when it comes to women. Men and women, on the general, have different societal and interpersonal strengths, and I love all of it (yet don't assume or exclude those strengths from either gender). But if I'm honest, men and women both have their own forms of aggressive behavior in getting ahead, but men do it even more aggressively, frequently and overtly than women, and often at the expense of women. Personally, I love each gender's strength. But I absolutely loathe the behavior of many, if not most, of my gender's treatment of anyone in a "weaker" position. We must do better, for no other reason than each of our strengths is a responsibility to use it to help those who are victimized. We can hide behind a meritocracy of which we enjoy hidden benefits, but at the end of the day, we should ask, is it because we really are better suited to a task, or have we institutionally created a system that enforces our biases and preferences? It's probably a mix of both, but until we see our own part in this, were can't actually improve anything.
- ComputerGuru 9y agothe same gender who bewilderingly sends dick pics to strangers, talks crudely about women behind their backs, and views them as a means to a physical end, maybe we don't see how we interact with women or at least admit that many of our gender demean women in ways that equates to bullying in one form or another. Whoah. The fact that some of the 3.5 billion people that share the same sex as myself engage in this lewd behavior renders my* neutrality and view defunct? Talk about stereotyping!
- cerealbad 9y agocollectivism or individualism america, you have to choose one.
- strken 9y agoArticles like this really make me aware that men and women like Ellen Pao and her former partners live in a separate parallel world: three degrees, $10 million golden parachutes, private jet flights to ski resorts, affairs with a creepy married co-worker in Germany, machismo-driven muscling for VC connections, bisexual finance wizards who kickstart an Ivy-League LGBT program, dominance games over which chair an exec sits in, PR firms hired to smear uppity former partners... it's like a movie. I worry that the media looks at cases like this as typical of the experience of women in tech, and downplays the impact of obvious and unobjectionable steps like "recruit junior devs from the ranks of biology grads" and "give expectant mothers maternity leave" because systemic changes aren't as interesting as diversity training or a VC partner's lawsuit.
- trhway 9y ago>I worry that the media looks at cases like this as typical of the experience of women in tech well, it is hard to blame the media when even most people in the tech consider the Ellen Pao's case to be a case of genuine sexism and not just a case of a jerk in a skirt who was bitching about a coworker using the company's fax to send scans of the brain cancer stricken mother, and who tried to hijack and milk a bit for herself the cause of anti-sexism. And after Reddit failure (which has all her typical fingerprints all over) she seems to be trying to get back at riding the cause. Not every woman with unsatisfied ambition is a victim of sexism. Not every such woman gets her day in court. Ellen Pao did get hers.
- Nursie 9y agoYeah, that really struck me as well. I've been in tech for close to 20 years now. I get paid pretty well compared to the national average pay, and globally speaking it's off the charts. But the figures and activities mentioned there are completely alien to me. This is the (a?) world of high finance and I can't relate to it. I've seen a lot of casual and systemic sexism in the tech industry, in the trenches and at the coal face so to speak. I think it's often this that is the focus of criticism of the industry as a whole, and I think it's this that's a valid criticism of the tech industry. To be absolutely clear - From what I've read here, Ellen Pao was treated really, really badly and has a whole litany of valid complaints, I just don't recognise the business painted here to be "tech".
- Al-Khwarizmi 9y agoSexism in Silicon Valley or sexism among the corporate elites? I doubt the average tech worker, who doesn't travel in private jets, casually talks about porn actresses and sex workers at their job. However, I have often heard and read such anecdotes about elite executives, also in non-tech sectors. I'd say that kind of attitude is more related to the impunity that comes with power than with tech or non-tech.
- b4ux1t3 9y ago> I doubt the average tech worker, who doesn't travel in private jets, casually talks about porn actresses and sex workers at their job Or, if they do, they look both ways before doing so. The old joke "How does every racist joke start? By looking around" applies pretty handily.
- kelukelugames 9y agoHits too close to home. I had a co worker who would only tell "jokes" when the manager or the one woman on the team wasn't around.
- b4ux1t3 9y agoI'm not even against the telling of jokes that are. . off-color. But they really don't belong where you might cause distress. If you think something is offensive enough to warrant looking around before saying it, maybe save it for home. My girlfriend (a Jew) and I crack Jew jokes all the time. . .at home. Even though no one in my workplace is Jewish (that I know of), I still wouldn't crack most of the jokes we use at home in my workplace. It's just not appropriate, not by any reasonable standard.
- kelukelugames 9y agoMaybe the degree is different. At my last job the CEO joked about sex with his twin's wife in the hallway. A director looked at porn during hackathon. A manager told some awkward story about his sister in law and stripper poles at a team outing. And an employee made some dumb sexual pun. Guess which one got in trouble. Maybe the higher up you are the more brazen you can be.
- Myrmornis 9y agoI definitely sympathize with her regarding the clear sexual harassment. But my main reaction to this is what an awful world her career was in. Horrible, boorish men, ugly business deals. A world with no aesthetic, no charm, no taste, no honor, no humanity. I would say that any decent person who finds themselves in a career like that in a business world like that should get out, immediately. Switch careers or switch countries. You only have a few decades in the Universe.
- Boothroid 9y agoIndeed. If she were being held back by sexism in her drive to find a cure for cancer etc. I would have more sympathy. As it is my sympathy is limited by the fact she was pursuing a career focused largely around pure greed.
- humanrebar 9y agoPeople are boors, people tell stories about boors, and then only boors (or people tolerant of boors) are interested in working in those industries or at least at those companies. It seems cyclical. I'm not sure punishing bad actors is enough to escape this kind of culture trap.
- jansho 9y agoI'm honestly disappointed that many commenters here are making a lot of judgment about Pao's intentions. It's like no one read the piece properly. Here, let me help you (and get your walls down!) --- Claim 1: She's over-reading an already tough environment (which btw men also face) for sexism. See the Ajit Nazre harassment section. Also note that Pao wasn't the only one targeted. See the male-only ski trips/ club visits/ etc section. It's bullshit to say that it's not their fault that women are uncomfortable talking about porn stars. It's unprofessional anyway. And seriously, a top venture firm can't afford to accommodate for all members of their team? "I was later told that they didn’t invite any women because women probably wouldn’t want to share a condo with men." Still a big presumption to make; Pao may actually be OK with this. I get the male buddy bonding thing, but arguably doesn't this make it harder for women to feel part of the team too? See also the Flipboard section. Now this I'm very familiar with; make a suggestion, be promptly turned down, another guy makes the same suggestion later and wahey! Back slaps all around. See also the section where she was excluded from meetings, discussions and 'scoops.' See also the section where others (white, male) more junior than her received promotion and she didn't. --- Claim 2: Pao is out for attention. Seriously I can't even - OK, I'm not going to do a reference here. Think about it: Pao is well-educated and has a very good position at a top firm. She's also just started a family, and instability is the last thing anyone in that position wants. It will take a very serious claim to risk all that. She was also very aware that the odds are overwhelmingly against her. See section when she asked other women who had sued powerful firms over discrimination. One even said "It’s a complete mismatch of resources. They don’t fight fair. Even if you win, it will destroy your reputation." See section about how her firm launched an aggressive media campaign to discredit her, including "click farms" to spread negative rumours about her incompetency etc. How Vanity Fair (!) suggested that her marriage was a sham because her husband previously had gay relationships. She did lose, but for what it's worth, she did end up getting attention - the right sort I would say (see the "Pao Effect".) --- Claim 3: Pao did it for the money." See section when she was offered money to leave quietly. Though "When I spoke to the COO, he asked how much I wanted in order to quietly leave. “I want no less than what Ajit gets,” I said — which I suspected was around $10 million. The COO gasped." The same Ajit as above. Oh yes she's releasing a new book, but seriously, is the profit really enough to make it her primary intention to sue for harassment? And as mentioned above, even if she won, she would have lost her reputation. There's a reason everyone applauds whistle-blowers, and no one wants to hire them. --- Claim 4: Sexism is only an emergent behaviour of a toxic industry. To fix sexism, we have to instil professionalism. This is true and a good intention, but forgive me this is also belittling the issue of sexism. For sure, women aren't the only ones with negative experience. You could say the same for other minority groups such as black, LGBTQ etc, and yes even overworked white, male juniors. But sexism is a major part of what makes the environment toxic. Women make 50% of the global population! And clearly many women in tech experience uncomfortable issues rooted in sexism. If you want to instil more professionalism, you will also need to cover sexism in the training. See section where the firm admits that they don't even have a HR department until recently. See also comments that claim women are using their gender as a card. So f---ing patronising. See section where the firm has very low female presence in the board. It's true that there is a shortage of females in tech, making recruitment harder. But this is why we need to go beyond professionalism training. To get more gender balance, we need to start at schools. So for those tired of the whole "women are victims" yada-yada (I admit that I also feel the same) for what it's worth, people are now paying attention and working harder to encourage girls into STEM subjects, and make the tech environment more inclusive. --- Running out of time, but I hope this is enough food for thought.
- dandare 9y agoEllen Pao may have lost the trial but she changed - me. In 2015 I saw a tech world ruled by meritocracy with sexism and discrimination being the evils of the Med Man era. Two and a half years (and many other affairs) later I see how naive I was and how much more difficult is work in tech for women.
- FuriouslyAdrift 9y agoA much better article written to show more than one perspective from a few years ago: https://www.vanityfair.com/style/scandal/2013/03/buddy-fletcher-ellen-pao https://www.vanityfair.com/style/scandal/2013/03/buddy-fletc...
- jessaustin 9y agoMost VCs wouldn't tolerate such boorish behavior on the part of execs at their investments. (They might let it slide for a time, for tactical reasons...) Why do limited partners put up with it when the VCs do it?
- bobcostas55 9y ago>and downplays the impact of obvious and unobjectionable steps like [..] "give expectant mothers maternity leave" This is a bit off-topic, but maternity leave is neither obvious nor unobjectionable. There is significant empirical evidence that shows that policies such as long paid maternity leave harms women's wages and career progression. Have a look at: * The impact of Nordic countries’ family friendly policies on employment, wages, and children https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11150-007-9023-0 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11150-007-9023-0 * Is there a glass ceiling over Europe? Exploring the gender pay gap across the wages distribution https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/92046/1/2005-25.pdf https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/92046/1/2005-25.pdf
- semi-extrinsic 9y ago> long paid maternity leave harms women's wages and career progression Of course it does. What it benefits is the actual human beings in question (child, mother, father). Most humans think that significantly increasing the well-being of your family, and in particular your infant, is a whole fucking lot more important than wages and career progression. Like all things in life it's a trade off, but an unobjectionally good one. Analogy: if a woman (or man) spent 8 hours every day of every vacation secretly working, they would definitely get better wages and career progression. Would you recommend everyone starts doing that?
- spennant 9y ago> if a woman (or man) spent 8 hours every day of every vacation secretly working, they would definitely get better wages and career progression In a meritocracy, sure...
- urbanj 9y agosucks that your mother didn't care enough about you to make you into a decent human being.
- davrosthedalek 9y agoRE your analogy, I don't think this is true in general. There are many jobs/people where the downtime is needed to perform better. That's certainly the case for me and in my field. To your main point: You are absolutely right. Germany, for example, tries to symmetries the problem by allowing fathers to take part of the maternity leave. But of course, especially in high paying jobs where companies have to invest a considerable amount into a worker to train them, a maternity leave, or any other reduction of total working time at the company, will affect the salary. The question is now: Do we, as a society, treat the privilege to raise a child as adequate replacement of the lost salary/promotions etc? If not, who makes up for the difference?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- bane 9y agoI think it's very important to parse Pao from the reprehensible behavior she describes in her workplace. Being polite, Pao does not come off well in her own personal story. But she was also swimming in a garbage pit. I have no doubt that what she writes about is true, and probably even holds back on much of the frat house nonsense. There can be entire semesters spent at school exploring other avenues that she might have pursued, and in most cases she truly really was a victim of a truly terrible environment nobody should have to work in. But for those of us who remember the case well while she was at Reddit, she also isn't only an innocent victim and had made some really bankrupt decisions all on her own. I don't get the impression from this article that she's really done any soul searching since then and she even tries to soft-peddle her affair with a co-worker as just a little bit of a school girl crush and doesn't mention various other questionable behaviors that became public as a result of her lawsuit. There's a lot of thought that equality in the workplace should not mean "start slotting women into the existing power structures and processes", but should instead take into account differences in style and ideas that women might naturally bring. But it goes both ways, terrible behavior also can manifest itself in different ways. As innocent as Pao seems to think she is in her own bad behaviors (which she either ignores here or downplays), her former co-workers also don't think there was any particular harm -- they're both wrong. To truly respect Pao, you have to also respect that she was capable of making bad decisions and that she needs to own them. In my mind, her behavior is not as bad as her former colleagues, but she could probably throw a softball and hit them. Pao's story is important to tell, but she lacks the personal credibility for people to care. I really feel like if she were a bit more open about where she also messed up, and her motivations, she would come across as a much more empathetic story teller that would get more people's attention and give her better credibility than her former colleagues. But her general unwillingness to publicly confront, and get out in front of, her own behavior leaves her story vulnerable to various naysayers and that's a shame.
- whostolemyhat 9y agoThis is such a strange view - you don't care about Pao's side of the story because she's not a complete paragon of virtue? You also seem to be basing that on her time at Reddit, during which, as the article mentions, she was being smeared by Kleiner?
- redm 9y agoMany of the issues raised by Ellen seem to be bad traits of VC's when dealing with people in general. I didn't have any "good" experiences with VC's for many of the same reasons. They look down at you; they are casually dismissive; they are manipulative; they lie as necessary, etc. They seem to be only as friendly as needed in case they suddenly decide they want to invest. I'm curious how similar or different my experience would have been pitching Ellen Pao.
- dmix 9y agoAny type of job with even the least amount of authority - however insignificant it ultimately is as long as they can assert it without recourse - attracts the worst type of people. I call it the 'nightclub bouncer syndrome'. Then again VC is a 'retail' style job and any job where you are continually put into forced social situations can make you cynical and impatient with people. So there's also that side of the equation. Thirdly, it's also a type of job where you're surrounded by 'yes men' trying to suck up to you. You never get the type of negative feedback loops about your behaviour that you normally would/should. American bigco CEOs and celebrities are notorious for having this problem.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- minipci1321 9y agoSomething doesn't add up.... when my co-worker or manager makes sexist or racial jokes, my experience tells me that a) the immediate issue to be solved is not the sexism or racial discrimination in my line of business, but this specific person. The only solution -- this person needs to be replaced, not taught to behave (let alone persuaded to change views), and that b) his/hers personal issues very probably don't stop at women and minorities. But I understand that we have this whole lot of discussions recently simply because, there are too many of such types kind of accumulated in one place, which makes replacing them all even less probable. So how the industry believes this can be successfully addressed at this scale? I'd think the behaviour of people on the plane she described is simply about basic human decency? So, everything now needs to be codified by HR? "Don't speak of pornstars when on the plane with other people", "Don't bring into conversation how you tortured small animals when a kid"?
- Klockan 9y agoThe problem is that you can't fire everyone who makes racist or sexist jokes from the industry since they will just group together and start new companies. Those companies will thrive until they become large enough to gain media attention, at which point it leads to another scandal with lots of firings and the cycle repeats.
- abtinf 9y ago"I didn’t have time to go through all my emails to figure out which ones to give Kleiner, so during the discovery process we gave them practically everything, some 700,000 emails — most of which we could have legally withheld. ... During depositions, they brought up everything from my nanny’s contract to an exercise I’d done in therapy where I listed resentments. Emails to friends, emails to my husband, emails to other family members, even emails to my lawyers." This is the single most incompetent legal behavior I've ever heard of. It shows such a profound lack of judgement that, by itself, it is enough to blacklist Pao and every lawyer advising her.
- zebraflask 9y agoYea, that's a surprising move. The "we have nothing to hide, we'll give you everything" approach to discovery can end up with exactly what happened, if the other side likes to use war of attrition and pressure tactics: deposition questions, and related lines of inquiry, that have no relevance to the issues. They're engaged in solely to wear out and dishearten the producing party. You'd think her counsel would have known this. How hard would it have been to run a few keyword searches and get some paralegals or junior associates to filter out the irrelevant material? There are discovery firms that do this as their entire business. Or file a motion or two? And I say that with no strong opinions about either side of the case. It just looks like a bad litigation move. Edit: It also creates the impression that her counsel either didn't take the time to sort through her evidence thoroughly enough, and/or that offloading a massive dump of unfiltered emails would inconvenience the other side's counsel enough to give her leverage. Neither seem like a winning move. The first makes her side look unprepared, and the second makes her side look like it was playing games of its own.
- FireBeyond 9y agoPretty much exactly this. Sort by "From" and thread conversations. Far easier than by date. As an executive, Pao just deciding that this was acceptable, either at the behest of her counsel, or with their approval, demonstrates "poor risk management behavior" that I wouldn't want in any company executive.
- 9y ago
- moon_of_moon 9y agoTwo possibilities: 1] She brought value to the table and was discriminated against. 2] She brought little value to the table, was one of those whiny entitled people (ooh look I have all these degrees, now I should automatically be promoted), who cannot accept the truth, and resorted to sleeping with a senior partner to compensate and when it all fell apart she got offended. It could be either. She has to convince the world it was [1] not [2].
- lettergram 9y agoHow are the turning off of flags determined, Dang? Not trying to be rude, but unless there is a set criteria it seems prone to bias...
- kelukelugames 9y ago>He wanted me to go to school — to learn to be a stand-up comic. I'm doing this! Some guys are really good at laughing and joking with management, but I am awful. One time a partner walked away from me without saying a word because he didn't like my comment about sports. I felt like that one black woman on Insecure when she shows up to a hockey game to suck up to her bosses and nobody remembers her.
- KKKKkkkk1 9y ago"On January 4, 2012, I sent an email to the managing partners presenting all the facts as clearly as I could and asking for substantive changes and either protection from further ostracism or help with an exit." What is "help with an exit"? Aren't partners at VC firms free to leave?
- andreamez 9y agoIt means a help to find a job at another firm.
- gerbilly 9y agoEvery visible trait that makes you seem different from the rest of the in-group counts as a 'demerit.' - Are you a woman in a male dominated field? -1 - Are you a racial minority relative to the dominant group? -1 - Do you take time off in a 24/7 work culture? -1 - Are you gay? -1 - Are you transgender? -1 - Do you have a physical disability? -1 . . . If you have enough of these, then the group will likely reject you, and will also rationalize your rejection along the lines of performance or poor 'fit.' Groups have to take specific proactive steps to prevent this kind of behaviour from emerging naturally. What can you do to help? If you see evidence of discriminatory behaviour: denounce it immediately and publicly.
- dlwdlw 9y agoYea, it's a weakness to have to constantly be evaluating a situation with "Was that because I'm black/female/gay/..." Power comes with the leverage of keeping a function DRY and re-using it. One small change is leveraged across everything. Large changes though are unwanted because of the harm than can happen.
- habosa 9y agoI found it really interesting to read this today, even though I followed the case to some extent when it was originally in the news. With all of the scandals that have hit Silicon Valley in the past year (Uber especially) I have to wonder what the coverage would look like if Ellen filed her suit today? I think it would be much more sympathetic and the outcome would likely have been different. In fact I bet we would have seen some resignations at KPCB, no trial required. On one hand I feel bad for Ellen since she was possibly a victim of timing. On the other hand, it's possible that Ellen inspired the other women who have since spoken up and she had to take the defeat in order to move the conversation forward.
- khazhoux 9y agoNow that I've read her own account, I have the same impression I got years ago: maybe, in addition to an environment of harassment, she wasn't actually that good at being a VC. She recounts the Flipboard incident -- she spotted a good deal early and was shot down, and then others took (a worse) deal for themselves. So... yeah, they ignored and steamrolled the junior partner. Cutthroat and not nice, but it's not shocking behavior unless there's evidence that this only occurred with her or with other female partners. Short of that, I'm willing to believe that this is a full-contact sport, since there's million$ on the line. So I'm left with two takeaways: - KP has/had a big problem with partners like Amit, and their tolerance of it. - Ellen herself was likely not a top performer, but she fails to recognize that.
- alexandercrohde 9y agoIsn't that beside the point? Whether or not one particular woman is a great investor or not isn't so substantial. What is substantial if we have a broken system that perpetuates the ingroup and doesn't make avenues for the actual talent (e.g. Warren Buffet) in if it's not bro-y enough.
- khazhoux 9y agoRephrasing: KP's environment certainly seemed hostile. But maybe she was marginalized there not due to sexual harassment, but because she wasn't a top performer. I'm not excusing bad/illegal behavior. I'm just saying, speaking as a manager: underperforming employees frequently fail to understand that their peers are achieving more (sometimes MUCH more) than they are, and this lack of self-awareness can lead to placing blame on the wrong thing.
- yuhong 9y agoI just noticed that software patents and employment anti-discrimination laws have some very similar problems. With the performance of manual labor jobs and physical patents the tests tends to be relatively objective, and that was probably what both laws was designed for. With many other jobs and with software patents this is often not the case, making the laws much easier to abuse for example. As a side note, this is also why anti-discrimination laws still make sense for things like public places and voting, because the test for whether someone is able to vote for example tends to be objective.
- GoodAdmiral 9y agoIt's great to get to read Ellen Pao's perspective. Most of this is not news to us, but the brigading in this thread is strong. It seems like many men see this kind of sexism as just normal behaviour.
- Manager 9y agoEllen Pao 'resigned' because she displeased too many people. Her style was a little too autocratic for the Reddit culture. For instance and if I recall correctly, telling the 'Ask Me Anything' moderator to move to video interviews and then firing her when she refused. Pao instructing the entire Reddit team to upsticks and move to the one city.
- Zooper 9y agoThe new boss: just like the old boss, but gets to have her ivy league friends write sexism articles about her, despite courts with lower burdens of proof (preponderance) finding none.