3 ms·

"Try to think about what you'd do if you were in the room with a team member who made a comment like that. I know what I'd do, and I don't think it is an indust

by larrys 15y ago

"Try to think about what you'd do if you were in the room with a team member who made a comment like that. I know what I'd do, and I don't think it is an industry norm yet." I don't think things like this are clear cut like you are saying. What if you were unemployed for 2 years and then got a new job? And for an entrepreneur? Say for some reason your company isn't doing well. You go and pitch a big account that could be "the big break" (that digs you out of a hole). The decision maker says something offensive. How willing will you be to stand up at that time when you have something big to loose? Of course this is all a matter of degree obviously. Some people will definitely shy away from doing the right thing in almost all cases while others will go to their death defending what they believe. Even if it makes them homeless. I remember being in a situation years ago at a company in Silicon Valley where the head of marketing (who is very well known and respected and teaches now believe me you've heard of him) was very offensive, parental, basically a dick. And of course nobody said anything at the time to challenge him. He was a primadonna and even his superiors didn't challenge him.

chernevik 15y ago
First, you're discussing edge cases. If people step to the easy stuff a great deal of the problem goes away. Second, these responses needn't be binary, you can signal a lot of antipathy with body language and conversational subtext. When the commenter is just clueless -- and a lot of these people are just that -- the hint that they're out of line is often all it takes. I'm not saying settle for subtle when confrontational is called for. But subtle and quiet are frequently all that's needed.
- cookiecaper 15y ago
  I doubt that "conversational subtext" was the "industry norm" that tptacek intended to advocate, though I do believe that it's not always appropriate to lay the smack down the second you think you hear something offensive.
tptacek 15y ago
"Fire the guy instantly" is not what I would do; not, at least, for the "low cut dress" remark. Expecting women to bring him coffee, or demanding that they also serve as PAs? That I'd have to think about. I'd like to think I'd refuse business from (or resign from a team that failed to refuse business from) anyone who exposed themselves to a job candidate. It's fair to point out that the question has never seriously been posed to me. I've drawn lines in other business situations, but haven't had to for sexism.

by larrys 15y ago

chernevik 15y ago

First, you're discussing edge cases. If people step to the easy stuff a great deal of the problem goes away. Second, these responses needn't be binary, you can signal a lot of antipathy with body language and conversational subtext. When the commenter is just clueless -- and a lot of these people are just that -- the hint that they're out of line is often all it takes. I'm not saying settle for subtle when confrontational is called for. But subtle and quiet are frequently all that's needed.

cookiecaper 15y ago
I doubt that "conversational subtext" was the "industry norm" that tptacek intended to advocate, though I do believe that it's not always appropriate to lay the smack down the second you think you hear something offensive.

tptacek 15y ago

"Fire the guy instantly" is not what I would do; not, at least, for the "low cut dress" remark. Expecting women to bring him coffee, or demanding that they also serve as PAs? That I'd have to think about. I'd like to think I'd refuse business from (or resign from a team that failed to refuse business from) anyone who exposed themselves to a job candidate. It's fair to point out that the question has never seriously been posed to me. I've drawn lines in other business situations, but haven't had to for sexism.