3 ms·

That doesn't make any sense. Under your reasoning a women can't be criticized, or it's assumed to be based on sexism. The video is just a clear example of a pam

by yucky 4y ago

That doesn't make any sense. Under your reasoning a women can't be criticized, or it's assumed to be based on sexism. The video is just a clear example of a pampered employee doing fuck all at her high paying "tech" job. It's not relevant she's a woman, it's relevant to show that Twitter had a lot of dead weight.

joshstrange 4y ago
> The video is just a clear example of a pampered employee doing fuck all at her high paying "tech" job. It’s quite literally not. She is showing off the perks as she does her job, we don’t see the parts of her doing her job other than he briefly touching on when she is in meetings and the like. You are assuming she isn’t doing work but nothing in the video proves it. Also the perks are literally there to entice people to work for Twitter and/or come into the offices. How does using the perks make her immediately a slacker? I’m not saying that women can’t be criticized at all, I’m saying that video proves nothing yet the person who posted it on HN and the person who posted it Twitter (assuming they aren’t the same person) are both trying to use it a smoking gun for why women were let go (disproportionately). The context on Twitter (and the replies) show this for the dog whistle it is, you can choose to ignore the signs but that doesn’t make them go away.
- yucky 4y ago
  > She is showing off the perks as she does her job, we don’t see the parts of her doing her job other than he briefly touching on when she is in meetings and the like. You are assuming she isn’t doing work but nothing in the video proves it. Maybe, but the assumption is based on the video her own video. It's not based on her being a woman. Any dude that posts this kind of video would meet the same criticism. And since Twitter laid off a huge chunk of what appears to be dead weight, it's going to get attention. You're reading too much into it trying to ascribe sexism where it doesn't exist. Women can be criticized just like men can, that's equality.

by yucky 4y ago

joshstrange 4y ago

> The video is just a clear example of a pampered employee doing fuck all at her high paying "tech" job. It’s quite literally not. She is showing off the perks as she does her job, we don’t see the parts of her doing her job other than he briefly touching on when she is in meetings and the like. You are assuming she isn’t doing work but nothing in the video proves it. Also the perks are literally there to entice people to work for Twitter and/or come into the offices. How does using the perks make her immediately a slacker? I’m not saying that women can’t be criticized at all, I’m saying that video proves nothing yet the person who posted it on HN and the person who posted it Twitter (assuming they aren’t the same person) are both trying to use it a smoking gun for why women were let go (disproportionately). The context on Twitter (and the replies) show this for the dog whistle it is, you can choose to ignore the signs but that doesn’t make them go away.

yucky 4y ago
> She is showing off the perks as she does her job, we don’t see the parts of her doing her job other than he briefly touching on when she is in meetings and the like. You are assuming she isn’t doing work but nothing in the video proves it. Maybe, but the assumption is based on the video her own video. It's not based on her being a woman. Any dude that posts this kind of video would meet the same criticism. And since Twitter laid off a huge chunk of what appears to be dead weight, it's going to get attention. You're reading too much into it trying to ascribe sexism where it doesn't exist. Women can be criticized just like men can, that's equality.