11 ms·
Is it preposterous? We don't have enough information on the actual exchange, or the context from this article. "a colleague told them that their skin was much
by wombatmobile 6y ago
Is it preposterous?
We don't have enough information on the actual exchange, or the context from this article.
"a colleague told them that their skin was much darker than she expected."
That might be benign, or hostile, or just candid and clumsy. It's hard to tell.
It's also not clear whether Google was asked to put forward a defence to the accusations made in the article.
"Google said in a statement that the company is committed to supporting employees who raise concerns about workplace treatment."
Again, the article doesn't provide enough context for us to know. Was the statement in response to a request to answer the allegations in the article, or was it a generic statement made without the context of these specific allegations?
- psychiatrist24 6y agoYes it is.
- ALittleLight 6y agoOf course it might be any of those things. Any comment, even one that sounds completely innocuous, may have subtle malicious connotations that people without context cannot infer. As the Google HR person suggested though, we should assume good motives where we don't have evidence to the contrary. You can't effectively work with other people if you're always assuming what they say is a veiled insult. If there is context that makes this clearly malicious then the article should provide it. It's not reasonable to assume that context exists though. While it is reasonable to acknowledge it might exist - there's no evidence of it. Perhaps a teapot is in space orbiting the sun by itself.