5 ms·

The Vanity Fair 'Brotopia' party was way worse than it sounds

27 points by brianchu 9y ago

rdlecler1 9y ago
Anyone else find the invasion into the people lives of consenting adults chilling? This feels like a puritanical purge.
- chowells 9y ago
  An official company party is not the private lives of anyone. That's the whole point of the article. It was an official company party. Edit: for what it's worth, there's also no consent possible when there's an external power dynamic at play.
  - rdlecler1 9y ago
    The fact of the matter is, is that for busy high performing professionals their entire personal life is their professional life, but that doesn't mean that their entire professional life is their personal life. This seems to be a case of the former and that distinction was not made clear. Bolding the words "Official Party" make this an official company party. Were people from DFJ there, did they help put this together, were their busses. Yes. Did DFJ's LPs pay for the busses, booze, and catering? Unlikely. Overall I'm seeing an after-hours party of adults and friends. Don't like it? Don't go or leave early. It's sad that this guy had to dox Steve and that we're going in a puritanical direction, just because a small but vocal group of brittle spirits are so easily offended. There's a slippery slope here and while this is where you may draw the line, there's going to come a point where you're crossing someone's line.
- cmurf 9y ago
  Maybe if you're concerned about that, don't hold what is essentially a public party that will inevitably have a member of the press show up and cover it. You have to be pretty stupid to set up something like this and then get all whiny about it being exposed. If you want it private, then actually keep it private. There is no effort here to keep it private, if anything it's flaunted as if everyone else is the fool for not noticing the intentional exploitation that's going on routinely in the industry.
  - rdlecler1 9y ago
    This isn't a public party. This was a private party at a private residence.
jgalt212 9y ago
> Seriously, who has a cuddle puddle at a fucking company party? West of the Mississippi, there are no rules, or so it seems.
- cmurf 9y ago
  Uhh, yeah because Alabama isn't west of the Mississippi and didn't just almost elect a religious and racial bigot, and accused child molester for Senate rather than vote for a Democrat? Sure thing... Abhorrent behaviors happen all over this country, it's probably best to focus on exposing them and holding people accountable rather than trying to claim these problems happen over there but not in my backyard.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
DashRattlesnake 9y ago
> The Vanity Fair 'Brotopia' party was way worse than it sounds And by "worse," the author must mean more boring and less scandalous. tl;dr: The author went to a VC party; saw a celebrity, but no sex or drugs; and went home. Despite that, he wants to use it to put his allyship on display. There's nothing to see here.
- smgoller 9y ago
  The author explicitly states that he posted in order to corroborate what aspects of Jane Doe's description of the event that he could. The more people that provide evidence about a thing, the more likely others are to take it seriously. So there is everything to see here. (edited to fix verb tense)
  - DashRattlesnake 9y ago
    He provided evidence that there was a party, but there's nothing wrong with parties. He didn't really provide evidence of anything else. It's like trying to corroborate a report of a crime in San Francisco by helpfully saying "Yes! I've been to San Francisco, and it is by the bay."

27 points by brianchu 9y ago

rdlecler1 9y ago

Anyone else find the invasion into the people lives of consenting adults chilling? This feels like a puritanical purge.

chowells 9y ago
An official company party is not the private lives of anyone. That's the whole point of the article. It was an official company party. Edit: for what it's worth, there's also no consent possible when there's an external power dynamic at play.
- rdlecler1 9y ago
  The fact of the matter is, is that for busy high performing professionals their entire personal life is their professional life, but that doesn't mean that their entire professional life is their personal life. This seems to be a case of the former and that distinction was not made clear. Bolding the words "Official Party" make this an official company party. Were people from DFJ there, did they help put this together, were their busses. Yes. Did DFJ's LPs pay for the busses, booze, and catering? Unlikely. Overall I'm seeing an after-hours party of adults and friends. Don't like it? Don't go or leave early. It's sad that this guy had to dox Steve and that we're going in a puritanical direction, just because a small but vocal group of brittle spirits are so easily offended. There's a slippery slope here and while this is where you may draw the line, there's going to come a point where you're crossing someone's line.
cmurf 9y ago
Maybe if you're concerned about that, don't hold what is essentially a public party that will inevitably have a member of the press show up and cover it. You have to be pretty stupid to set up something like this and then get all whiny about it being exposed. If you want it private, then actually keep it private. There is no effort here to keep it private, if anything it's flaunted as if everyone else is the fool for not noticing the intentional exploitation that's going on routinely in the industry.
- rdlecler1 9y ago
  This isn't a public party. This was a private party at a private residence.

jgalt212 9y ago

> Seriously, who has a cuddle puddle at a fucking company party? West of the Mississippi, there are no rules, or so it seems.

cmurf 9y ago
Uhh, yeah because Alabama isn't west of the Mississippi and didn't just almost elect a religious and racial bigot, and accused child molester for Senate rather than vote for a Democrat? Sure thing... Abhorrent behaviors happen all over this country, it's probably best to focus on exposing them and holding people accountable rather than trying to claim these problems happen over there but not in my backyard.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

DashRattlesnake 9y ago

> The Vanity Fair 'Brotopia' party was way worse than it sounds And by "worse," the author must mean more boring and less scandalous. tl;dr: The author went to a VC party; saw a celebrity, but no sex or drugs; and went home. Despite that, he wants to use it to put his allyship on display. There's nothing to see here.

smgoller 9y ago
The author explicitly states that he posted in order to corroborate what aspects of Jane Doe's description of the event that he could. The more people that provide evidence about a thing, the more likely others are to take it seriously. So there is everything to see here. (edited to fix verb tense)
- DashRattlesnake 9y ago
  He provided evidence that there was a party, but there's nothing wrong with parties. He didn't really provide evidence of anything else. It's like trying to corroborate a report of a crime in San Francisco by helpfully saying "Yes! I've been to San Francisco, and it is by the bay."