5 ms·

Not speaking dismissively of Susan's contribution, but I think so. Her story snowballed into a lot of shady shit going on at Uber, and Kalanick wasn't ousted as

Not speaking dismissively of Susan's contribution, but I think so. Her story snowballed into a lot of shady shit going on at Uber, and Kalanick wasn't ousted as a direct result of her allegations. Weinstein himself kicked off a pattern of high-profile ousters based directly on the allegations. I think they're slightly different scenarios, and contributed culturally in their own way, and why she was one piece of a broader picture in Time instead of person of the year by her lonesome. (I realize the irony in my typing this, that I appear to be saying Weinstein was responsible for something a number of people would argue a woman started, but hey. That's not what I'm saying, and you get my point and what I'm trying to say.) Put another way, Susan didn't go after a high-profile leader directly. She went after systemic issues in a company. Weinstein, on the other hand, showed a lot of people that high-profile leaders are vulnerable to public attention, and that became a slightly different species of snowball. Both are cultural contributions.

tyingq 9y ago
I wouldn't dismiss the butterfly effect so quickly. She was certainly early in this wave, and the cumulative inertia has to be part of why things ended up as they are.
- jsmthrowaway 9y ago
  I don't. I think the allegations against Weinstein were severe enough that they could have stood alone, and didn't vastly benefit from the cultural change that Susan started with Uber. The point being made was that Weinstein might not have happened had Susan and Uber not happened, and I'm not sure I agree with that. Which is NOT to say I discount anything that did, which I'm guessing from voting I did not express clearly enough.
  - tyingq 9y ago
    The allegations against Weinstein are mostly years old though. Is it just coincidence they were raised in this current climate? Fowler's revelations contributed to an environment that made it easier to speak up. Edit: The reason I find Fowler somewhat unique is that her background, credentials, writing skills, etc, made her hard to dismiss. It was very believable, perhaps to some that might have tended to challenge similar stories. So it seemed to open a door for women that had similar stories, but not the same level of gravitas. It also primed the media to pay attention to this area.
    - jsmthrowaway 9y ago
      Yes and no. People spoke up before Fowler; why are we hinging the culture on her? Something I think a lot of people are overlooking is that she was heard on a larger scale than anybody before her, but lionizing her as a result is actually disrespectful to the plethora of examples who came before her and were just unlucky (I guess?). I can think of a number of prominent examples within tech that didn't get any of the attention outside of tech, but I will not rehash them here. That, to me, indicates that something else shifted culturally to allow the Uber thing to help contribute to that environment. What is that? Was it the scale of Uber? Was it something about Fowler? Was it that the same power dynamics that suppressed revelations about Weinstein were starting to degrade within insular tech? I'm personally curious about it, and I don't think Fowler's blog post was solely responsible and folks should start making conclusions about cultural shifts, is my only point. Edit to your edit: Careful; you're lightly claiming that accusers before Fowler were unbelievable and easily dismissed.
      - tyingq 9y ago
        " Careful; you're lightly claiming that no accuser before Fowler was believable." Heh. Hopefully I'm given the benefit of the doubt on that. She bordered on unassailable, which is difficult to do when recounting anything. Edit: Ugh, really? You're reading something that isn't there.
        jsmthrowaway 9y ago
        Well, you might have just hit on it, actually: that assumes our job is to assail an accuser. Maybe that changed.
  - rsynnott 9y ago
    Sure, but would they ever have been published prominently? Historically, there's been a bit of a code of silence about this sort of thing. It's quite plausible that the Uber story loosened things up a bit.
heedlessly2 9y ago
Travis resigning had little to do with Susan Fowler story. Travis' mother died. He thought he could mourn and be CEO at the same time, but he decided he couldn't handle both

tyingq 9y ago

I wouldn't dismiss the butterfly effect so quickly. She was certainly early in this wave, and the cumulative inertia has to be part of why things ended up as they are.

jsmthrowaway 9y ago
I don't. I think the allegations against Weinstein were severe enough that they could have stood alone, and didn't vastly benefit from the cultural change that Susan started with Uber. The point being made was that Weinstein might not have happened had Susan and Uber not happened, and I'm not sure I agree with that. Which is NOT to say I discount anything that did, which I'm guessing from voting I did not express clearly enough.
- tyingq 9y ago
  The allegations against Weinstein are mostly years old though. Is it just coincidence they were raised in this current climate? Fowler's revelations contributed to an environment that made it easier to speak up. Edit: The reason I find Fowler somewhat unique is that her background, credentials, writing skills, etc, made her hard to dismiss. It was very believable, perhaps to some that might have tended to challenge similar stories. So it seemed to open a door for women that had similar stories, but not the same level of gravitas. It also primed the media to pay attention to this area.
  - jsmthrowaway 9y ago
    Yes and no. People spoke up before Fowler; why are we hinging the culture on her? Something I think a lot of people are overlooking is that she was heard on a larger scale than anybody before her, but lionizing her as a result is actually disrespectful to the plethora of examples who came before her and were just unlucky (I guess?). I can think of a number of prominent examples within tech that didn't get any of the attention outside of tech, but I will not rehash them here. That, to me, indicates that something else shifted culturally to allow the Uber thing to help contribute to that environment. What is that? Was it the scale of Uber? Was it something about Fowler? Was it that the same power dynamics that suppressed revelations about Weinstein were starting to degrade within insular tech? I'm personally curious about it, and I don't think Fowler's blog post was solely responsible and folks should start making conclusions about cultural shifts, is my only point. Edit to your edit: Careful; you're lightly claiming that accusers before Fowler were unbelievable and easily dismissed.
    - tyingq 9y ago
      " Careful; you're lightly claiming that no accuser before Fowler was believable." Heh. Hopefully I'm given the benefit of the doubt on that. She bordered on unassailable, which is difficult to do when recounting anything. Edit: Ugh, really? You're reading something that isn't there.
      - jsmthrowaway 9y ago
        Well, you might have just hit on it, actually: that assumes our job is to assail an accuser. Maybe that changed.
- rsynnott 9y ago
  Sure, but would they ever have been published prominently? Historically, there's been a bit of a code of silence about this sort of thing. It's quite plausible that the Uber story loosened things up a bit.

heedlessly2 9y ago

Travis resigning had little to do with Susan Fowler story. Travis' mother died. He thought he could mourn and be CEO at the same time, but he decided he couldn't handle both