15 ms·

Worked across very liberal and very conservative places in tech. Neither is pleasant. In my opinion, the American self-image and self-worth largely characteriz

• ionised 8y ago
  > This isn't about left vs right or kkk vs blm. I've noticed this for a while now. I moved beyond the old left/right political football team-style arguments long ago because the political landscape has changed and become much more muddied. I don't think the traditional spectrum applies anymore and I'm noticing more and more that others are seeing the same thing. It still seems like most of the populace is stuck slinging shit at the 'other' though. Honestly if a person still thinks in terms of left/right I don't think they are contributing anything whatsoever to any current political debate.
• itronitron 8y ago
  what was unpleasant about the very liberal workplace?
  • badrabbit 8y ago
    Same as conservative. Someone telling me what is ok and not ok to believe. I did not show up to work to get a brain-wash. I joined a company,not a cult.
    • itronitron 8y ago
      point taken, that definitely seems over the line
    • CharlesW 8y ago
      > Someone telling me what is ok and not ok to believe. Like what?
  • roenxi 8y ago
    There is the unreachable ideal of political neutrality, then there are the achievable murky states of "neutral enough" that we can strive to achieve in daily life. A workplace should be, first and foremost, a place where work is done. The march of history has proven that allowing people who are mistaken in their beliefs to contribute positively has achieved great things. Consider, for example, Fritz Haber - many of his beliefs and principles are clearly bad ideas, and his overall contribution is overwhelmingly positive. This is a particularly good example of a general principle that exists up and down the industrial underpinnings of modern western civilisation. Politics entering the workplace, and monocultures in particular, represent a threat the the mechanisms that allow corporations to drive good outcomes. Nobody should want that, especially considering that even apparent fact sometimes turns out to be wrong.
  • throwaway1230n9 8y ago
    Not the OP, but twofold: Being told that certain hobbies/beliefs I had were explicitly disallowed to be discussed, whereas comparable statements on the other side were perfectly OK, and having the situation escalated on me aggressively when I asked to understand the apparent hypocrisy. (These were not radical things, by the way, take an example as 'laser tag'; I'm leaving out detail as I'll mention in my second point) Secondly, following from the first, the fact that I have to post something even as innocuous as this this anonymously out of fear of retribution of it was linked with my professional identity.
• fatjokes 8y ago
  Absolutely. I completely disagree with the whole "bring your whole self to work". No! Bring your professional self to work. The counter-argument is that the causes relate to discrimination in the workforce. I.e., BLM needs to be supported because blacks are underrepresented in the American tech workforce. I disagree these need to be equivalent. It's possible for a company to promote hiring underrepresented minorities without allowing employees to advertise their political beliefs. What happened to never talking about politics on the first date or at your job?
  • austinheap 8y ago
    It's called corporate social responsibility. Companies advocate for their bottom line and their employees at the same time. As a gay dude that grew up in Ohio -- and had people yell "fag" when I got my diploma at graduation -- I'm beyond happy that the next generation of LGBTQ engineers won't grow up with the same level of hate I experienced. The arc of moral justice is only bent when force is applied.
    • badrabbit 8y ago
      You only say that because it's convenient for you. You would not like it one bit at the conservative places I worked at. It really is a two way street and u-turns are allowed.
      • taysic 8y ago
        This is an important question - how much personalization is ok within a workplace? I am grateful I've worked in really professional environments - nothing overtly political or anything. It might have been a bit bland, but honestly it helped us stay focused on the work.
      • mcphage 8y ago
        > You would not like it one bit at the conservative places I worked at. So the commenter says that he looks forward to the next generation of developers not experiencing the hate that he has experienced. You say, he’d be unhappy at conservative places, presumably because he’d still experience that hate. So then why do you wonder why he pushes for politics in the workforce? His goal—hell, it should be all of our goal—is to stamp out places where such hate is encouraged.
• paulcole 8y ago
  If my coworker doesn’t believe I have a right to not die from a chronic illness, thinks I shouldn’t have the right to get married, or thinks less of someone because of the color of their skin, then I don’t respect them as a coworker or a human being.
  • gameswithgo 8y ago
    That this is downvoted here is really a depressing thing. Does hackernews actually represent the average, highly educated tech professional? If so we are in for a very bad time.
    • sosense 8y ago
      Keep politics out of the workplace. Just because you support the things listed, it doesn't mean everyone has to hear about it and succumb to your outspoken politics. Go out on the street, go home, go anywhere else and be political. At work, just shut up and work.
      • natch 8y ago
        “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing.” Politics does come into work with things like family leave policy, hiring, promotions, corporate giving, corporate mission, etc. It’s inescapable. Even denying it doesn’t make it go away. Feel free to take your own advice and shut up yourself, but it’s up to other people to decide for themselves what they will speak up about, knowing the price they may pay for, in some cases, confronting whatever they are up against.
      • paulcole 8y ago
        I wasn’t talking about thinking that taxes are a little high. We’re talking about fundamentally bigoted and hateful beliefs. I refuse to believe that someone who holds those beliefs is able to separate those beliefs from how they treat others in the workplace.
      • amanaplanacanal 8y ago
        Well, here's the deal. The employer gets to decide, since it is their company. Before I retired, there were a lot of things I didn't like about work. I thought management regularly made bad decisions, in a number of different areas. But if you are an employee, you go along with what management wants, or you move along.
• jmeyer2k 8y ago
  Gay/LGBTQ rights and tolerance in the workplace is way different than donating to Trump. I understand if you don't think a company should support a political party, but LGBTQ/gay tolerance meetings don't fall into that category. If you put this into the context of some other progressive social movement such as giving women equal opportunity to men, it makes more sense. A company would not be out of line giving seminars about gender equality in the workplace even though some people may disagree. It's not a partisan issue. It's about acceptance and tolerance.
  • kronin 8y ago
    "tolerance" swings both ways. Unless you choose to be intolerant. The majority of people who spout tolerance and acceptance at me are the least tolerant and acceptant of other beliefs.
    • jmeyer2k 8y ago
      That's an interesting point, however I disagree it's tolerance of one group that makes someone intolerant of another group. In other words, I don't think being tolerant of black people means I must be intolerant of white people. Karl Popper wrote about this idea called the paradox of tolerance [0] asking if you should be tolerant of intolerance. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
      • kronin 8y ago
        "tolerant of intolerance"... Interesting concept. Who defines the intolerance?
      • badrabbit 8y ago
        Intolerance of anti-black people makes you intolerant,not tolerance of black people. That intolerance would be fine(I certainly don't tolerate anti-black people in my personal life) but I would want to make every effort to be professional and respectful towards a skinhead at work.
• xupybd 8y ago
  I love discussing politics with co-workers that don't agree with me. You have to be careful to respect the person and not make it personal but it's really fun to explore complex ideas. I think we just need to learn how to disagree in a friendly and constructive way. But also learn when to drop something and just get on with work.
• aluren 8y ago
  I don't mean any offense, but it has been my experience that people who can afford to "put politics aside", so to speak, are people from demographics who didn't have politics "happen" to them. When you are gay or trans and a significant chunk of people find your mere existence revolting, when you are black and a significant chunk of people believe you are innately less intelligent and more prone to violence, when you are a woman and a significant chunk of people believe you have no business starting a career or working in tech or people don't believe you when you claim to have been sexually assaulted, it's hard to treat "politics" as an abstract debate where free-thinking intellectuals joust in the marketplace of ideas. In these contexts, you actually live "politics" - every day, from the moment you wake up to the moment you sleep. You can't opt out of it. I am taking these examples because they resonate best with what are considered "political" subjects in the West, but in more gruesome contexts, such as the situation of Syria, "politics" is whether you are pro-Assad, pro-rebel, which rebel group you are part of, etc. You can see how silly (at best) or insulting (at worst) it can be to try and dismiss politics when they are actually a matter of life or death. Whenever there is a struggle, whenever there is an imbalance of power perceived by some to be unfair, there is politics. If you do not perceive that imbalance, it means you are on the better end of it, and your lack of stand is simply apathy for the status quo. I don't seek to judge you for that, but hopefully you may understand that some people are unhappy with the status quo and wish that it change, and that's why they're getting political.
  • majos 8y ago
    To add to some good points, people from various minority groups may be particularly keen on getting formal institutional buy-in (e.g. mandatory diversity meetings) because they have not been well-served by informally letting stuff play out in the past. There is a line somewhere here, but it's not unreasonable for affected parties to pursue bureaucratic solutions.
    • Kalium 8y ago
      Imagine a white man lecturing a room that's mostly people of color or women about the importance of including all people as equal peers in discussions. Toss in a few incredibly loaded questions with Very Obvious Right Answers to round it out. It's obviously just me, but I have a difficult time imagining anyone being well-served by that particular "bureaucratic solution". Which, caricature though it might be, is also an accurate representation of a lived experience.
• nostromo 8y ago
  In general I agree with you, but neither pride nor tolerance training is political. Pride is like St. Paddy's Day or Chinese New Year: it's neither left or right. Tolerance training isn't political either. If an employer wants their employees to be comfortable at work, it's within their right to train employees to be tolerant of each other. It has nothing to do with politics. It's strange how gay people just being gay is often seen as a political act -- but that's never the case for straight people.
  • xupybd 8y ago
    How you define and express both is political. How you require people to act around these issues is political. Does the state require you to hire a quota of LGBT workers? Does the state punish bad behaviour towards LGBT workers? How do you handle people who hold beliefs that conflict with LGBT life styles? Should you mandate the use of language around these topics? Is there speech that can cause harm people and should it be protected as free speech? Are these not all political issues.
  • badrabbit 8y ago
    I will not respect or tolerate a person because they are gay. I will respect and/or tolerate them because they are human and a colleague. Tolerance training is political because the employer wants employess of a certain belief,affiliation or private association to feel welcome. For example,tolerance training for vegetarians would also be political. Pride also is supporting a political movement much like supporting 'alt-right'. It's not gay people being just gay,but a company telling workers personal sexual lives of their colleagues is a basis for tolerance or intolerance and that the company favors tolerance in that particular case. By that same right,they can hold gay intolerance training.
    • nostromo 8y ago
      > I will respect and/or tolerate them because they are human and a colleague. Congrats, you just passed every tolerance course ever, and all without bringing politics into it. While you may be high minded and professional, not all workplaces are, and it's fine for the company owners to ask that employees keep a professional environment around everyone -- including people that may make some feel uncomfortable. > a company telling workers personal sexual lives of their colleagues is a basis for tolerance or intolerance It's weird that you jump right to sex. Being gay is about a lot more than sex. If a woman tells me she went skiing with her husband last weekend, my mind doesn't rush to thinking, "gee, why is she talking about her personal sex life at work?"
• spookthesunset 8y ago
  > When at work respect your colleagues,not because of their politics and beliefs but because 1) they're human 2) you would want to be respected if you were in their shoes 3) out of respect for your own self You cannot escape politics no matter the environment. Your personal political views are a reflection of your core values, ethics and morals. I'd much rather have companies take a stand than try to appease everybody. If anything, it would let me know which businesses should get my money and which I should avoid (as well as which I'd work for and which I'd avoid). > Imagine not being able to work in tech because how you vote,pray or who you associate with becomes inconvenient to the industry. That is a slippery slope. Certain political viewpoints should be shunned and outcast from polite society...
  • edanm 8y ago
    > Your personal political views are a reflection of your core values, ethics and morals. That's a pretty bad way to view politics, IMO. It not might be what you mean (in which case, sorry!), but the phrasing you used makes it seem like anyone who disagrees with your politics has different morals (or values/ethics). That might sometimes be true, but you're leaving no room for differences of opinion that have nothing to do with morality! When Galileo said the Earth goes around the Sun, he wasn't saying it because he had different morals/values, he was saying it because he had a different belief about the world. When the left and right disagree (in America), it's sometimes about morals/values, but it's also sometimes an honest disagreement about how the world works!
• RickJWagner 8y ago
  +1
• panarky 8y ago
  > the very idea that a company would display or promote politics in the work place If only we could seal off the workplace from the rest of the world and keep it unsullied by politics. The trouble is that if your work is meaningful, it's making changes in the world. Making changes in the world is a political act. Online platforms make billions of decisions every day and they need a point of view to guide their decisions. Having a point of view is necessarily and inevitably political. Pretending your choices aren't political is itself a political act. It's inescapable.
• askafriend 8y ago
  Your mistake is in thinking that you can separate out politics from "work" or any other concept. What you fail to realize is that everything is political. Everything. Politics isn't some concrete, easily identifiable thing you can point at. You can't separate out things into a "Politics" bucket and a "Not Politics" bucket. No, politics pervades every single human interaction. Politics is in everything and everything is inherently political.
  • jeffmcmahan 8y ago
    "[E]verything is inherently political." My preference for the scent of lavender over cinnamon -- political. I'm against the designated hitter rule. Political too. I think my dog should not get into the trash. It's all politics.
    • pas 8y ago
      Cyinism is political too. Of course not directly, but even the tinyiest things can and do become political. Hand gestures, clothing, music, choice of cars, choice of food, choice of words.
      • jeffmcmahan 8y ago
        How is it cynical to demonstrate that a specific claim -- put across with unreasonable certitude -- is in fact flatly false? Let me ask you: is De Morgan's theorem political? Directly? Indirectly?
        • pas 8y ago
          Would it benefit some group more than the other? Then it has political consequences. Logic seems fairly apolitical, but logicians rarely. Thus it's pretty reasonable to think of circumstances where simply stating a fact turns out to be political.
          • jeffmcmahan 8y ago
• threatofrain 8y ago
  Part of American conservatism is the moderate but solid consensus that homosexuality is morally wicked. Some people want to stay true to their convictions, rather than ignore the moral deviancy of the world. Some people truly believe that homosexuality is a danger to children and the spiritual health of society. Sometimes they feel like they can't speak out against homosexuality just because they work at a liberal workplace. Another part of American conservatism is the dignity of the white race and the heritage of whiteness. That includes proud narratives of true heroic sacrifices against the brutish north, and a discussion of how blacks and other minorities play the victim card to create an emotionally hostile atmosphere for white youths. An unjust atmosphere where blacks, asians, and latinos are promoted at the cost of white children. On a front page Reddit post on the top comment with regards to NYT's hiring of an asian intern who suggested that white people had biological deficiencies due to sunburning vulnerability, was a discussion of the extinction of the white race, and how white reproductive rates have been going down. As well as a discussion how blacks, asians, and latinos cheat their way into college through blind liberal favoritism, an ideology which seems to dangerously ignore that race is the fundamental way human relations work, and that the suggestion that we should all hold hands and put aside our racial differences is an unrealistic Disney vision. And of course there is a discussion on the biology of sex, and whether liberals are being blind in thinking that women need active promotion in the workplace. That's of direct workplace concern. And do black and Latino people need active intervention in tech, like women? Americans need to resolve their issues beyond rolling up their sleeves and going to work. There are decade-long wounds coming. Voting is not political negotiation with your peers. It's just an up-or-down bullet. A lot of Americans also think it's their prerogative to form a religious business, especially a Christian-oriented business. On the flip side, is it okay to have a Muslim-oriented Google? Or a Christian oriented Chick-fil-A which donates to ban gay marriage?
  • ams6110 8y ago
    Your understanding of conservatism is profoundly stereotypical and incorrect.
    • threatofrain 8y ago
      Does this understanding of American conservatism not describe effective points for voter galvanization? In other words, it's an operational definition in tune with American voter behavior. One might point to the rallying cry for a US Constitutional ban to gay marriage, during the Bush presidential candidacy. Did that not serve to rally the American conservative base? Is Alex Jones not representative of effective (meaning the kind that wins elections) conservatism? Isn't Alex Jones, perhaps the #1 most popular media personality of today, being censored part of the reason why people are concerned?
• siruncledrew 8y ago
  Honestly, having to worry about politics and beliefs at work only makes work more stressful. I just want to go to work so I can do a good job then go home. Stuff can still be accomplished and people can still be treated with respect without having to dive into their personal lives to judge them first.
  • kenward 8y ago
    I think that is ultimately everyone's goal. I doubt many people go into work wanting to deal with politics and beliefs. Unfortunately, the reality for many groups that these social/tolerance programs target is they cannot escape politics in the workplace due to being a woman/lgbtq/etc.
• methodover 8y ago
  You might not realize this, but you come off a little bit anti-gay in your post. > Why are companies promoting "pride"? First of all, you don't need to put pride in safety quotes. Second of all, gay rights are human rights. Companies promote them because it's the right thing to do, and because they want all the good things that come along with doing the right thing. I don't think it's all that complicated. Edit: If you're gonna downvote, at least say why you're downvoting.
  • ThomPete 8y ago
    The right thing to do is not letting any one special cause dominate. My guess is that you arent tolerant of everyone either. Gays are humans they have human rights not gay rights its this idea thats gays are somehow more worthy of our support than say a conservative at a liberal workplace thats the crux of the problem. I dont care what people are, who they sleep with, what they believe, as long as i am not asked to offer them special considertations i wouldnt extend to others. Thats the right thing to do, not forcing conpanies to take up social caused for a small privileged group of vocal people.
    • methodover 8y ago
      1. No one's saying that companies ought to only advocate for gay rights and leave behind every other issue. 2. I am tolerant towards everyone. It's actually not that difficult. 3. You seem to be a little confused on what gay rights are. Here's a summary: Gay people want to be treated fairly. We want our partner/spouse to be treated equally. We want our children to be treated equally. We want to not be fired for being gay. We don't want to be called names for being gay. We don't want people to hate us for being gay. These things are not special considerations. These things are basic rights. 4. The right thing to do is to be in favor of gay rights.
      • ThomPete 8y ago
        1. No but you will have to prioritize which is exactly what is happening right now. That's a problem. 2. I agree so why question the Parents motives? 3. Not confused at all. Those are not gay rights they are human rights. You can replace the word gay with more or less anything and you will have the same. (Try read headed, try white, try black, try Swedish, try freckled, try fat). If you are a human you should have those rights no matter what you are and what you look like and what you believe. 4. The right thing to do is to be in favor of human rights. I see no reason why I should prioritize one thing over another. That's the very discrimination you seem to be advocating against.
• ur-whale 8y ago
  a.k.a. : "dont defecate where you eat"
• partycoder 8y ago
  By saying "if you are my coworker, I respect you as a colleague and a human being" you are already expressing some personal views. Some people will take 1 second to decide they don't like you because of stereotypes and there's nothing you can do about it.
• jaredklewis 8y ago
  If politics were "playing basketball" or "solving crosswords," I would agree. The problem is that reality and politics share the same space. Alex Jones is a liar and manipulator. He goes on the air and presents theories for which there is not even superficial evidence as news and established fact. I'm not trying to be political, those are just the facts as I see them. Just because I show up at work doesn't mean I become some sort of mechanical money making machine. If I was a TV executive at a company running that show, I would want to the show canceled, no matter the ratings or revenue. I suppose many would say I was bringing "politics" into the work place, and maybe I would be, but what's the alternative? And sorry if upsets someone's political viewpoint, but there is scientific consensus for global warming, and in America we should probably cut back our energy consumption a bit. So, if I advocate that dress codes be relaxed in the summer so the thermostat can go up a degree, I guess it's political, but I'm not advocating it to piss off conservative people. It's just how I see the world. I think the internal memo linked in the report makes the ever valid point to argue and attack ideas, not people. But honestly, that issue seems to be pervasive in our culture, so it does not seem specific to workspace behavior. I think most people are just fighting for the world they want to live in. Why should that only be to do that outside of work, when we spend half our waking time at work?
  • deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
• smsm42 8y ago
  > But the very idea that a company would display or promote politics in the work place. This is indeed not a good development, but I think it already happens literally everywhere. It happens in hi-tech, it happens in restaurants, it happens in entertainment (massively), it happens in payment processing, it happens in travel... Literally every industry I interact with had done some political action lately. > If you are my coworker,I respect you as a colleague and a human being. Your private life and beliefs are not mine to police or encourage in anyway. That is a nice sentiment, with which I agree. But imagine proponents of some ideology - say, people that are opposed to wearing hats - do not subscribe to that. To the point they'd refuse to hire anyone who have ever worn a hat (either overtly, or by subtle sabotage if they can't do it legally in the open), would stage a public spectacle if they notice their coworker wears a hat, would sponsor company hat-burning parties (or call for a boycott of the company if the company refuses to sponsor one), adorn their workplace with anti-hat posters and loudly discuss how people who wear hats are just lowlife scum. Would you wear a hat in such a workplace if you think wearing a hat is OK? Would you feel comfortable even mentioning you know someone who might wear one from time to time? Nope. So, some of the people would feel happy and supported in their private beliefs in the work place, and actively sharing and promoting them, while others would secretly terrified that someone would discover their instagram account and find out they wore a hat once. Not a good position to be in. So, how you keep your right to your private beliefs and not bringing politics to work if the politics is already there? I don't know the right answer.
• RandomInteger4 8y ago
  Human resources deal with humans. Humans are not always so keen to leave their feelings at home, despite how capable you are of such things. Considering that there are a lot of opinionated people that exhibit displays of disgust and actions motivated by said disgust toward the LGBT community, then, in order to maintain a safe work place, human resources needs to address the issues of treating your LGBT coworkers with respect, much in the same way as they've had to do with minorities and female coworkers entering the work place back in the day (which sadly they still must address, because small minded bigots persist). You may be perfectly fine, but one of your more conservative coworkers might be a talented bigot hiding their bigotry in the closet until such time that it might present itself, and human resources has to get ahead of that before it becomes an issue. This isn't bringing politics into the work place. This is making sure hostile politics (i.e. bigotry) doesn't affect the workplace.
• grappler 8y ago
  If, as seems to be increasingly the case these days, someone's sincerely held belief is that some particular group of people should be marginalized, punished, deported, left to abusers, or even killed... is that all simply “politics”?
• rmc 8y ago
  > Why are companies ... telling workers to attend 'lgbt tolerance' meetings Often, companies requires employees to undertake training in this area because the company is legally required to provide a workplace that is free from anti-LGBT discrimination (likewise, anti-racism, sexual harassment, etc)