I dunno. Consider that when Google found that a sexual harassment claim against Andy Rubin was valid, and so Google asked him to leave, they also paid him 90 mi

I dunno. Consider that when Google found that a sexual harassment claim against Andy Rubin was valid, and so Google asked him to leave, they also paid him 90 million bucks when they didn’t have to. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2018/10/25/technology/google-sexual-harassment-andy-rubin.amp.html https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2018/10/25/tech... “ Google could have fired Mr. Rubin and paid him little to nothing on the way out. Instead, the company handed him a $90 million exit package, paid in installments of about $2 million a month for four years, said two people with knowledge of the terms.” Let’s assume that’s true. What is worse behavior? Obviously his. Yet he gets paid. It’s not an apples to apples comparison but if google was to say to anyone, “goodbye and don’t let the door hit you on the way out”, shouldn’t it be this guy and the other dudes mentioned in the article? And IMHO the fact that they didn’t is a great example of systemic sexism in action. So it’s not unreasonable to wonder if similar forces played a role in this situation. It’s not surprising that companies function like this but that doesn’t make it right, and, it doesn’t mean that (even though change is slow) it isn’t possible to change norms. We don’t know the full details; Googles firing of her may be valid. But to be as dismissive of her being a representative of marginalized groups, and facing prejudice (conscious or unconscious) herself, is wrong. IMHO.