5 ms·

It's difficult to differentiate, though. How do you know what relationship is coercive or isn't? Were you there at the time? There are always power differences

It's difficult to differentiate, though. How do you know what relationship is coercive or isn't? Were you there at the time? There are always power differences between males and females, and in the past, dating a superior was often the only way a female could transcend the class they were born into. Hypergamy is a real, observed social phenomenon, and it bothers me that people are hand wringing over a problem that may not even exist in the first place. Hypocrisy runs deep in this country, especially for the self-appointed moral police.

tptacek 8y ago
My read of "hypergamy is a real observed phenomenon" is that it is mostly a way of dismissing concerns when they pertain to women employees.
- myWindoonn 8y ago
  Here, have some empirical evidence. [0] The Atlantic [1] spends some time with this study, and here are some takeaways. Attractiveness is measured from 0 to 1. * The headline: People are "hypergamous" (what a terrible word), aiming about 0.25 above their own position * Women are most attractive (0.62) when young, with sharp falloff; men are most attractive (0.53) in mid-life, with middling falloff * "Men experience slightly lower reply rates when they write more positively worded messages." * Different metropolitan areas have different dating patterns Humans are weird. [0] http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/8/eaap9815 http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/8/eaap9815 [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/08/online-dating-out-of-your-league/567083/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/08/online-d...
  - tptacek 8y ago
    I wasn't actually asking for more evidence. I was criticizing the invocation of "hypergamy" as something relevant to the story we're commenting on.
- camelite 8y ago
  The guy who used it was discussing the difficulty of ascertaining whether or not power-imbalances between people in a relationship implies coercion. Women's general preference towards dating up is obviously a factor, so to ascribe a dismissive attitude to anybody who mentions it is uncharitable to say the least.
fiter 8y ago
If the situation is avoided, then there's no need to differentiate. That's the best part about the "don't" policy. There are plenty of people out there. Also, hypergamy doesn't require that the two parties work at the same company, so it doesn't seem relevant to this discussion.
- 0x8BADF00D 8y ago
  > If the situation is avoided, then there's no need to differentiate. That's the best part about the "don't" policy. There are plenty of people out there. It’s not my company's business as to who I am allowed to date or engage in a consensual relationship with. It literally has nothing to do with them.
  - fiter 8y ago
    It's not the company making the decision; it's oneself. Of course, you're free to make your own decisions, but I personally use the "don't" policy.
  - sib 8y ago
    Sorry, but that is a very simplistic way of seeing it. For example: If you date someone who works for you, and you have multiple subordinates (as most managers do), and you rate / evaluate those subordinates (as most managers do), and you rate your partner higher than another subordinate, you are opening the company up to legal action that you discriminated against the other subordinate due to your relationship. That costs the company money to defend and more more if they lose, so they have every "business" to tell you not to. There are many more examples.
    - noobermin 8y ago
      Alright, so in the first place, this is attacking the problems in American work (and work the world over) from the wrong vantage point. What if you merely like one of your workers more than the others and you rate them higher than the others? That should be just as insidious but because it doesn't involve sex, somehow that's not as bad, it's just "life". Almost everyone in HN has experienced this sort of toxic manager at some point in our careers and we've for some reason normalized it just like the rampant sexual harassment. If I could have my way, we'd ask ourselves why do managers have so much sway and power over our lives in the first place, that their bad moods and habits can literally kill us? If people cannot be trusted to be managers when normal human emotions and interactions occur, then why are they managers in the first place and why do they have so much power over us?

tptacek 8y ago

My read of "hypergamy is a real observed phenomenon" is that it is mostly a way of dismissing concerns when they pertain to women employees.

myWindoonn 8y ago
Here, have some empirical evidence. [0] The Atlantic [1] spends some time with this study, and here are some takeaways. Attractiveness is measured from 0 to 1. * The headline: People are "hypergamous" (what a terrible word), aiming about 0.25 above their own position * Women are most attractive (0.62) when young, with sharp falloff; men are most attractive (0.53) in mid-life, with middling falloff * "Men experience slightly lower reply rates when they write more positively worded messages." * Different metropolitan areas have different dating patterns Humans are weird. [0] http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/8/eaap9815 http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/8/eaap9815 [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/08/online-dating-out-of-your-league/567083/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/08/online-d...
- tptacek 8y ago
  I wasn't actually asking for more evidence. I was criticizing the invocation of "hypergamy" as something relevant to the story we're commenting on.
camelite 8y ago
The guy who used it was discussing the difficulty of ascertaining whether or not power-imbalances between people in a relationship implies coercion. Women's general preference towards dating up is obviously a factor, so to ascribe a dismissive attitude to anybody who mentions it is uncharitable to say the least.

fiter 8y ago

If the situation is avoided, then there's no need to differentiate. That's the best part about the "don't" policy. There are plenty of people out there. Also, hypergamy doesn't require that the two parties work at the same company, so it doesn't seem relevant to this discussion.

0x8BADF00D 8y ago
> If the situation is avoided, then there's no need to differentiate. That's the best part about the "don't" policy. There are plenty of people out there. It’s not my company's business as to who I am allowed to date or engage in a consensual relationship with. It literally has nothing to do with them.
- fiter 8y ago
  It's not the company making the decision; it's oneself. Of course, you're free to make your own decisions, but I personally use the "don't" policy.
- sib 8y ago
  Sorry, but that is a very simplistic way of seeing it. For example: If you date someone who works for you, and you have multiple subordinates (as most managers do), and you rate / evaluate those subordinates (as most managers do), and you rate your partner higher than another subordinate, you are opening the company up to legal action that you discriminated against the other subordinate due to your relationship. That costs the company money to defend and more more if they lose, so they have every "business" to tell you not to. There are many more examples.
  - noobermin 8y ago
    Alright, so in the first place, this is attacking the problems in American work (and work the world over) from the wrong vantage point. What if you merely like one of your workers more than the others and you rate them higher than the others? That should be just as insidious but because it doesn't involve sex, somehow that's not as bad, it's just "life". Almost everyone in HN has experienced this sort of toxic manager at some point in our careers and we've for some reason normalized it just like the rampant sexual harassment. If I could have my way, we'd ask ourselves why do managers have so much sway and power over our lives in the first place, that their bad moods and habits can literally kill us? If people cannot be trusted to be managers when normal human emotions and interactions occur, then why are they managers in the first place and why do they have so much power over us?