3 ms·

> There is zero upside to what she just did both legally and professionally. For her personally, yes. As for the rest of society, there is a lot of up-side lon

> There is zero upside to what she just did both legally and professionally. For her personally, yes. As for the rest of society, there is a lot of up-side longer term. This is typically how it works in civil rights movements. Some people have to step up and pay the price. Those that denigrate their efforts are part of the problem.

bsder 13y ago
> For her personally, yes. As for the rest of society, there is a lot of up-side longer term. Is there up-side? What's a realistic victory condition? Firing all the executive staff? Making her CEO? She just spent a lot of political capital on a fight that has no real victory condition. At best, one person gets fired and some "sensitivity training" get instituted. Was that worth the political capital she just expended? If she is really that dynamic an individual, I would rather she expend the energy making a company that shares her values rather than fighting one that does not. That's a real victory and real up-side.
- arrrg 13y ago
  Huh? If more people are brave enough to speak out about harassment I wouldn’t argue that it’s inconceivable for harassers to be more careful. I’m speaking in the abstract here. If harassers know that ex-employees might be willing to speak out against them they might be less likely to do it in the future. It’s pretty simple. That’s pretty much how societal change works. That’s also why one person doing it is not enough.
  - bsder 13y ago
    > If more people are brave enough to speak out about harassment I wouldn’t argue that it’s inconceivable for harassers to be more careful. Sure, but there are shades here. Overtly sexual stuff needs to be wiped out. But what about promotions and support? Jeri Ellsworth had a problem at Valve, but it didn't seem to be related to her gender. It was that she was outside the entrenched power structure which is a problem for both men and women at Valve. However, there is collateral damage. If this kind of problem can sink your company and you have to be too careful, you can avoid the problem by not hiring women. Oops ... unintended consequence.
  - bsder 13y ago
    > If more people are brave enough to speak out about harassment I wouldn’t argue that it’s inconceivable for harassers to be more careful. Why can't you see that this doesn't fix the problem? Laws and social approbation can stop someone from grabbing your ass. However, they can't make someone respect you as a colleague.
    - arrrg 13y ago
      At some point those people will go into retirement and die. I never said this is a fast process, ok? Stuff like that takes generations.
      - jayvanguard 13y ago
        For sure. In the case of the African-American civil rights movement it took many generations. But whenever someone minimizes an individual effort, finds excuses why they shouldn't have fought back, questions whether they really deserved it or not, or nit-picks their stories they are setting things back and slowing things down. Often the most rational people are the worst. They love to ignore context, pose what-ifs, and explore every edge case. But really they are just biased.

bsder 13y ago

> For her personally, yes. As for the rest of society, there is a lot of up-side longer term. Is there up-side? What's a realistic victory condition? Firing all the executive staff? Making her CEO? She just spent a lot of political capital on a fight that has no real victory condition. At best, one person gets fired and some "sensitivity training" get instituted. Was that worth the political capital she just expended? If she is really that dynamic an individual, I would rather she expend the energy making a company that shares her values rather than fighting one that does not. That's a real victory and real up-side.

arrrg 13y ago
Huh? If more people are brave enough to speak out about harassment I wouldn’t argue that it’s inconceivable for harassers to be more careful. I’m speaking in the abstract here. If harassers know that ex-employees might be willing to speak out against them they might be less likely to do it in the future. It’s pretty simple. That’s pretty much how societal change works. That’s also why one person doing it is not enough.
- bsder 13y ago
  > If more people are brave enough to speak out about harassment I wouldn’t argue that it’s inconceivable for harassers to be more careful. Sure, but there are shades here. Overtly sexual stuff needs to be wiped out. But what about promotions and support? Jeri Ellsworth had a problem at Valve, but it didn't seem to be related to her gender. It was that she was outside the entrenched power structure which is a problem for both men and women at Valve. However, there is collateral damage. If this kind of problem can sink your company and you have to be too careful, you can avoid the problem by not hiring women. Oops ... unintended consequence.
- bsder 13y ago
  > If more people are brave enough to speak out about harassment I wouldn’t argue that it’s inconceivable for harassers to be more careful. Why can't you see that this doesn't fix the problem? Laws and social approbation can stop someone from grabbing your ass. However, they can't make someone respect you as a colleague.
  - arrrg 13y ago
    At some point those people will go into retirement and die. I never said this is a fast process, ok? Stuff like that takes generations.
    - jayvanguard 13y ago
      For sure. In the case of the African-American civil rights movement it took many generations. But whenever someone minimizes an individual effort, finds excuses why they shouldn't have fought back, questions whether they really deserved it or not, or nit-picks their stories they are setting things back and slowing things down. Often the most rational people are the worst. They love to ignore context, pose what-ifs, and explore every edge case. But really they are just biased.