4 ms·

Here's the problem. Not one of these tips is "work hard and try be a the best at what you do." Instead, she leads with tips on how to be a proactive bridge-bu

Here's the problem. Not one of these tips is "work hard and try be a the best at what you do." Instead, she leads with tips on how to be a proactive bridge-burner. Death threats, discrimination, etc. are obviously insane, but a lot of this frustration is self-induced. > Call out bad behavior you see or hear about, even when it’s uncomfortable. > Help to report offenders. > Give credit to and call out great work you see from the women you work with. > Offer to share your compensation packages to help your women-in-tech peers know their worth. > Advocate in your own teams for debiasing the interview/promotion process. > Advocate for events you're attending or organizing to include a more diverse set of voices and refer underrepresented experts you know for opportunities. > Don't rely on marginalized groups to educate you. > Listen to and believe women.

lochlainn 5y ago
This feels like a non-solution; implying that working harder solves mistreatment simply glosses over the work that women do, and could implicitly associate harassment with "poor performance".
mc32 5y ago
The issue here is it's asking women to be activists. Few companies want activists. Most companies want to achieve fairness and equal opportunity, but they also do not like agitators (because one can never have control over agitators, you never can know their next target, so to be safe, most companies tend to not want them around). It's the same conundrum with double agents. You agree with them helping your intelligence org, but you can never fully trust them. You cannot control their motivations (unless you hold their family hostage like they did in the USSR, etc.) From that standpoint, this is not good advice. Leadership is key. You have to schmooze leadership and convince them it's the right thing, but not via these activist methods.
- mthoms 5y ago
  Substitute race for gender and this argument totally falls apart. If you see a black colleague being treated unfairly and do nothing because you don't want to be seen as an "agitator" or "activist" then you are part of the problem. Full stop. The same goes for women.
  - mc32 5y ago
    There is an interesting face to this coin though, the "don't be a snitch". You're saying "be a snitch". Yes, being a snitch would probably improve the lives of people in lots of places, and yet it does not happen often because it can be destabilizing (despite people not liking the people they could snitch on). Companies do not like this "unknown". They do want to do the right thing, just not via activism/snitching. Because just as other groups of people who see the downsides of snitching, companies see the same. This is asking too much from other women. Sure it’s a good thing for the group to pint out bad behavior, but it comes at a price for the individual doing the reporting.
    - Blizz-Blizz 5y ago
      Sticking up for someone being harassed or treated unfairly isn't "being a snitch"
      - mc32 5y ago
        I'm explaining why this isn't the best path toward equal treatment. Companies may agree with your specifics but not the method. Snitching on the neighborhood bully would be a good thing. Snitching on a company cooking the books, etc. But people also can't trust the snitch. Companies can't trust activists (whatever their persuasion). Some other expressions of this are seen as “men clam up” in front of me. Basically they now don’t want something to be misinterpreted. It’s to be expected.
        mthoms 5y ago
        >Snitching on the neighborhood bully would be a good thing. But people also can't trust the snitch. You're projecting. Maybe you wouldn't trust the "snitch". Most educated people would see him/her as a victim and show sympathy. This isn't prison for crying out loud.
    - mthoms 5y ago
      I would never use the word "snitching" to describe sticking up for marginalized/mistreated people. Nor would I ever work for a company that sees it as such. For me, no amount of money is worth compromising basic human decency but YMMV.
- lkrubner 5y ago
  I hire teams and I absolutely encourage everyone to snitch if they see bad behavior. I will not tolerate abuse on a team I manage. Anyone who works for me is well aware they should snitch if they see bad behavior. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

lochlainn 5y ago

This feels like a non-solution; implying that working harder solves mistreatment simply glosses over the work that women do, and could implicitly associate harassment with "poor performance".

mc32 5y ago

The issue here is it's asking women to be activists. Few companies want activists. Most companies want to achieve fairness and equal opportunity, but they also do not like agitators (because one can never have control over agitators, you never can know their next target, so to be safe, most companies tend to not want them around). It's the same conundrum with double agents. You agree with them helping your intelligence org, but you can never fully trust them. You cannot control their motivations (unless you hold their family hostage like they did in the USSR, etc.) From that standpoint, this is not good advice. Leadership is key. You have to schmooze leadership and convince them it's the right thing, but not via these activist methods.

mthoms 5y ago
Substitute race for gender and this argument totally falls apart. If you see a black colleague being treated unfairly and do nothing because you don't want to be seen as an "agitator" or "activist" then you are part of the problem. Full stop. The same goes for women.
- mc32 5y ago
  There is an interesting face to this coin though, the "don't be a snitch". You're saying "be a snitch". Yes, being a snitch would probably improve the lives of people in lots of places, and yet it does not happen often because it can be destabilizing (despite people not liking the people they could snitch on). Companies do not like this "unknown". They do want to do the right thing, just not via activism/snitching. Because just as other groups of people who see the downsides of snitching, companies see the same. This is asking too much from other women. Sure it’s a good thing for the group to pint out bad behavior, but it comes at a price for the individual doing the reporting.
  - Blizz-Blizz 5y ago
    Sticking up for someone being harassed or treated unfairly isn't "being a snitch"
    - mc32 5y ago
      I'm explaining why this isn't the best path toward equal treatment. Companies may agree with your specifics but not the method. Snitching on the neighborhood bully would be a good thing. Snitching on a company cooking the books, etc. But people also can't trust the snitch. Companies can't trust activists (whatever their persuasion). Some other expressions of this are seen as “men clam up” in front of me. Basically they now don’t want something to be misinterpreted. It’s to be expected.
      - mthoms 5y ago
        >Snitching on the neighborhood bully would be a good thing. But people also can't trust the snitch. You're projecting. Maybe you wouldn't trust the "snitch". Most educated people would see him/her as a victim and show sympathy. This isn't prison for crying out loud.
  - mthoms 5y ago
    I would never use the word "snitching" to describe sticking up for marginalized/mistreated people. Nor would I ever work for a company that sees it as such. For me, no amount of money is worth compromising basic human decency but YMMV.
lkrubner 5y ago
I hire teams and I absolutely encourage everyone to snitch if they see bad behavior. I will not tolerate abuse on a team I manage. Anyone who works for me is well aware they should snitch if they see bad behavior. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.