7 ms·

The Ellen Pao Trial and Silicon Valley

41 points by bko 12y ago

fweespeech 12y ago
> That said, a Kleiner victory is well within the realm of the possible. Many women in the tech industry are concerned that Pao’s case is weak and that her accusations might exacerbate bias in the workplace. "I worry that it will make a lot more men feel that—being nice to and mentoring and trying to be a good person toward women colleagues—they, too, will be hauled before a jury," says Melinda Riechert, managing partner in the Silicon Valley office of law firm Morgan Lewis. For example, a key allegation in the case is that a Kleiner partner, Randy Komisar, behaved inappropriately when he gave Pao a volume of Leonard Cohen’s poems and drawings (entitled Book of Longing) on Valentine’s Day and asked her out to dinner on a night when his wife was out of town. Komisar says it was completely friendly and that his wife bought the book for Pao. Will men now retreat from cordial gestures toward female colleagues? Does anyone else not see the immediate disconnect here? I agree that Pao's case is weak but: It juxtaposes that with a woman saying something about "being nice and mentoring" while pointing out at the same time a married man is handing out gifts on Valentine's Day. I mean, come on. Does anyone seriously think that was anything other than hitting on Pao? Any other day of the year it would have been fine. That specific day out of the 365 options was picked solely for that implication. It just feels weird to me that they'd compose things that way in the article. "Being nice" - Doing nice things for a woman on days other than those dedicated to romance. "Hitting on a woman" - Doing nice things and inviting her to be alone with you on a day dedicated to romance. How is this not a clear line?
- Shivetya 12y ago
  well she did have an affair with a married coworker, so how are other men supposed to judge her? You make that kind of serious mistake in a professional environment and people are right to judge your competence. They did try/fire the guy involved over her objection. As for handing out valentine gifts, hell my entire work place would be in trouble for gifts, cards, and the like. We celebrate a lot different events, though you learn real quick whom to avoid as some people look to take offense; not saying she did. The can subpoena the gift giver's wife to see if that side of his story holds up. As for asking her out, she already demonstrated that marriage was no barrier. Let's be honest. We only get a picture, one tinted by personal views and time. It will be interesting what the court digs up and how the final determination comes about.
  - fweespeech 12y ago
    > As for handing out valentine gifts, hell my entire work place would be in trouble for gifts, cards, and the like. Oddly enough, where I work, the accepted standard is you simply don't hand out stuff to coworkers on Valentines. I mean it is one f'n day of the year, how hard is it to avoid that unless your sole goal is to entice someone? > We celebrate a lot different events I think you are making my point for me. Any event except Valentines/romance related, the behavior would have been appropriate. Specifically doing it on Valentines with the unspoken implication of he'd be alone with her and his wife would be out of town....? :/ > Let's be honest. We only get a picture, one tinted by personal views and time. It will be interesting what the court digs up and how the final determination comes about. Of course. However, it disgusts me that the article seems to imply that "hitting on a woman" and "being nice/mentoring" is the same behavior as the positioning of that quote implied.
  - rimunroe 12y ago
    Having an affair with one married coworker doesn't give other coworkers license to hit on you. The argument you're using is basically, "She slept with someone else, so why should other people not expect to be able to get to have privileged relationships with her too?" And even if you ignore that, you obviously shouldn't be hitting on people at work.
    - jquery 12y ago
      > Having an affair with one married coworker doesn't give other coworkers license to hit on you. Coworkers don't need a license, because it's not illegal to make a pass at a coworker. > you obviously shouldn't be hitting on people at work. "Hitting on" is a crude way to describe buying a gift. Is love now banned at work?
      - jsmthrowaway 12y ago
        I don't even make friendships at work anymore, given the ugly fallout that can result from something negative in the friendship impacting a professional relationship. It is wise to completely disconnect your professional life and private one in this climate, as this Pao case demonstrates in some ways. Drinks with the team? Sure, but I leave after one. Gifts to a coworker and an invitation to dinner? Not a chance. It's just too unpredictable no matter what you mean by it. I respect my coworkers enough not to force them into ambiguity with me as a person. Personal relationships have so many opportunities to go south. Why would I complicate my workplace? Is that unfair? Maybe. I'm not there to make friends. Silicon Valley is pretty bad at this in general. The last thing I want to do on a weekend anyway is see the same people I see all week and do something social, and have to pretend that business stays at the office. You should try it. I haven't been burnt out for years, like I was when I left work only to go socialize with the same people. It was like living in Groundhog Day. The startups that force this culture on its employees are part of the problem. I do not devote my life to a company. I'm sorry.
- lisa_henderson 12y ago
  Agree strongly with this: "Does anyone seriously think that was anything other than hitting on Pao?" Any man who is beyond college age, and who sincerely does not realize the meaning of handing out gifts and asking women out to dinner, is an idiot and should be removed from any position of authority. Emphasis on "sincerely" -- Randy Komisar is not that stupid, and his denials are hardly sincere. The line "his wife bought the gift for her" has become something of a cliche which married couples use when the husband has been caught flirting but the wife is not yet ready to end the marriage. Gifts given in public, for work well done, are always welcome, but a pattern of private gifts and requests for dinner are universally understood to be requests to initiate a sexual relationship. One last word about "sincerely" -- there are some men who sincerely are that stupid. I have known at least 2. They somehow reach middle age and it does not occur to them that the gifts they are giving to an attractive young woman are being interpreted as sexual overtures. As Schiller said, "Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain." There is no cure for such men, but they need to be kept out of positions of power.
  - StopWhining 12y ago
    Most of my company are women. I'm a male. Tell me how I'm supposed to talk to them, oh super sensitive sage of all gender interactions in all contexts forever. How machine-like and sterile should I be? How many of their emotions should I deny in the pursuit of professionalism? Should I consult with a lawyer with every photon they reflect? It's obvious you've never lead a single human being in your life. You just give them orders like they were some bot, and then pat yourself on the back for practicing equality. You're simply too stupid to understand the alchemy of human relations.
    - fweespeech 12y ago
      I'd say it is pretty easy to avoid buying them gifts on Valentine's day and inviting them to private dinners with your SO out of town. If you can't help but spontaneously give gifts to attractive women on Valentine's day...I'm at a loss, I'll admit.
      - 12y ago
- rhino369 12y ago
  Hitting on a woman isn't even illegal unless there is a threat of coercion or it is so frequent/severe that it creates a hostile work environment. I'm sure Pao's attorneys are arguing it is a part of a larger hostile work environment. But itself isn't sexual harassment.
  - fweespeech 12y ago
    It was in reference to the quote and the implication that the two were equivalent and equal. Mentoring and being nice to a woman is very, very different than flirting with her. Implying they are the same is gross.
    - rhino369 12y ago
      Ah, I should have seen that. I agree.
      - fweespeech 12y ago
        No worries, written communication isn't perfect.
- anaximander 12y ago
  I think the author of this article made it (perhaps deliberately) ambiguous as to when these events took place. he gave Pao a volume of Leonard Cohen’s poems and drawings (entitled Book of Longing) on Valentine’s Day and asked her out to dinner on a night when his wife was out of town These could very well be two completely separate occasions. I suspect the author created this juxtaposition to elicit your precise reaction.
  - fweespeech 12y ago
    Why do you think that? There are plenty of articles that agree the gift was given on Valentine's Day?
    - adevine 12y ago
      I think he is saying the dinner wasn't on Valentine's Day.
      - fweespeech 12y ago
        The timing of the dinner request isn't relevant. The problem is the choice of gift on Valentines and the fact the author of the article basically equated buying erotic poetry with being "nice and mentoring".
        anaximander 12y ago
        I agree that the gift was inappropriate. I was responding to your comment: "Hitting on a woman" - Doing nice things and inviting her to be alone with you on a day dedicated to romance. The invitation to have dinner may have happened anytime.
  - adevine 12y ago
    This is why I feel it's just better to refrain from any sort of judgment on this case based on what you read in the news. You're right - as it's written, it looks like "Duh, he's hitting on her." But did he give a gift to everyone on Valentine's Day? When he "asked her out to dinner on a night when his wife was out of town", was it a date or a "Let's talk about a potential investment at a popular VC haunt"? I have no idea which is true, and I don't think I'm going to be able to find out based on summaries in the news.
- kzhahou 12y ago
  I don't find the dinner invitation to be damning in the slightest. Have you all not been around VCs? They're always having dinner, having multiple dinners in one night, flitting from one company to another, to some new prospect, whatever. On this night, he has no plans, his wife is out, so he invites a coworker to grab food after work. So what? Things will get steamy at University Cafe?
malvosenior 12y ago
I don't think this trial has much to do with larger women in tech issues. There's a lot of politics at play for ALL employees of VC firms and this doesn't sound any different. If you've been following all of the coverage of this case, Pao isn't coming off well. She states that it was discriminatory that she didn't get her review on time. Unprofessional to have a delayed review? Yes. Gender harassment? No. Instead of doing her review, they just gave her a bonus of $150,000 and a $40,000 raise (that she claims not to remember). http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/03/ellen-pao-was-resentful-and-dismissive-kleiner-perkins-lawyers-say/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/03/ellen-pao-was-res... From this article: > Pao has also raised an incident in which one of the firm’s senior partners, former Hewlett-Packard Chairman Ray Lane, asked her and a second female colleague to takes notes at a partners' meeting. "I just froze, I wasn’t sure what to do," Pao testified on the stand. I'm a man in a managerial position. I've been asked to take notes many times in meetings. Sometimes I do, sometimes I have to talk a lot and so someone else has to. > Kleiner waited too long to fire a male partner who seemed to be treating the firm as his own private dating website. Pao and Nazre were dating and both married at the time. There's a ton of he said she said, but to put it all on Nazre isn't fair. [EDIT] I was incorrect about this. See Anechoic's comment below. Pao has stated that she took the Reddit CEO role because she couldn't get a job as an investor. Honestly, Reddit CEO sounds like a much better job than all but the most senior of investment positions. There's a lot to this story, and it's getting legs because gender issues in tech are a HOT topic right now. I don't see any of this case having larger implications though. [EDIT] Please don't just downvote me. If you disagree, leave a reply.
- ditonal 12y ago
  I don't see how you could possibly not see how it has larger implications. For years we've been told that the reason there's no women in tech is because of all us sexist brogrammers, despite the typical programmer being the opposite of a 'bro', while the VCs very much resemble them, and somehow VCs being 96% male with most top firms having NO women as partners slips by unnoticed. VCs intentionally create frat house cultures at the tech companies they invest in because they assume it saves them money to hire misfit programmers who need a workplace to provide a social life rather than act like processionals and demand professional compensation, and that frat house culture is also antagonistic to people who aren't young males. Finally, I don't see how you could read a case where a VC firm made mis-step after mis-step, and a highly qualified woman suggested they invest in winners like Twitter only to be ignored, and brushed off for invites to the Democrats the VCs are in bed with like Al Gore, and not see how she clearly as an extremely strong case of gender discrimination against a rich and powerful sect of elite VCs who have hidden their sickening behavior in the shadows for far too long.
DownvoteMeToWin 12y ago
Leave it to programmers to assume human nature must exist within a binary modality of "apathetic amoral workhorse" and "messy emotional beast of terror" Naturally, this assumption causes any violation to throw a LegalException, which is caught by the GovernmentSingleton anti-pattern whose separation of concern juggles between legislating, in scientifically precise terms, how genders must interact based entirely upon the rotation of the earth... and managing nuclear weapons launches. > [EDIT] Please don't just downvote me. If you disagree, leave a reply. Just look at that plea for reason. And this community implicitly claims a monopoly on rationality while deriding others as emotionally savage worthy of mob vengeance and professional stoning. Can we get rid of the facade of reason on HN and just spam "IF YOU'RE NOT WITH US, YOU'RE AGAINST US" until #hilary2016 is over?
StopWhining 12y ago
Leave it to programmers to assume human nature must exist within a binary modality of "apathetic amoral workhorse" and "messy emotional beast of terror" Naturally, this assumption causes any violation to throw a LegalException, which is caught by the GovernmentSingleton anti-pattern whose separation of concern juggles between instantiating policies that rigidly define how genders must interact based entirely upon the rotation of the earth... and managing nuclear weapons launches. > [EDIT] Please don't just downvote me. If you disagree, leave a reply. Just look at that plea for reason. And this community implicitly claims a monopoly on rationality while deriding others as emotionally savage worthy of mob vengeance and professional stoning. Can we get rid of the facade of reason on HN and just spam "IF YOU'RE NOT WITH US, YOU'RE AGAINST US" until #hilary2016 is over?
sockshirt 12y ago
Stories like this make me feel ambivalent. Gender inequality being brought to the forefront fairly commonly has definitely forced me to evaluate my own actions and words. It sounds silly (and it is because it's mostly beneficial), but I certainly treat female colleagues differently: I'm much more thoughtful about what I say and do, and try to be as explicit as possible if I think there's any way that my words/actions could be misconstrued. Thoughtful in a way that I'm absolutely not around male colleagues. And maybe that's totally fine: I really doubt I'll ever regret being more thoughtful. I certainly do this to some extent with people from other cultural backgrounds, so applying it to people from other gender backgrounds (so-to-speak) is probably appropriate. But it does absolutely setup this "othering" in my mind - I don't see Jennifer as just my coworker, she's my coworker and she's also a woman and I need to be cognizant of how I act and talk around her. I'm careful to think about my words and actions before they materialize, whereas with men I'm much more likely to just act/talk and explain later if necessary. "Asking permission" vs. "Seeking forgiveness". I don't envy being John Doerr - unless Pao was an absolutely clear frontrunner for becoming a senior partner, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.
AndrewWright 12y ago
It's a PR victory for KP that the media generally refers to this as the "Ellen Pao Trial" rather than the "Kleiner Perkins Trial"
jusben1369 12y ago
"Tracy DiNunzio, chief executive officer of Tradesy, an online fashion site in which Kleiner Perkins has invested, says she was recently told by a male chief executive officer that he doesn’t know how to talk to female colleagues any more and that it’s become too easy to say the wrong thing. The case "may make it harder for men to feel free to give women the kinds of constructive criticism that men receive regularly and that they benefit from," she says." I found this paragraph to be the most interesting. We're clearly moving from a sexist world to a less sexist world. The transition involves moving norms of what's acceptable and that's creating a lot of angst for both men and women. The above paragraph (and the one before it in the article) represent one common response "Why can't it just be like it was before?" but there's no going backward. Eventually we'll settle at a new equilibrium but Sandy's book and this trial and some other events will be viewed as pivotal moments when they write the textbooks in 20 to 30 years.

41 points by bko 12y ago

> That said, a Kleiner victory is well within the realm of the possible. Many women in the tech industry are concerned that Pao’s case is weak and that her accusations might exacerbate bias in the workplace. "I worry that it will make a lot more men feel that—being nice to and mentoring and trying to be a good person toward women colleagues—they, too, will be hauled before a jury," says Melinda Riechert, managing partner in the Silicon Valley office of law firm Morgan Lewis. For example, a key allegation in the case is that a Kleiner partner, Randy Komisar, behaved inappropriately when he gave Pao a volume of Leonard Cohen’s poems and drawings (entitled Book of Longing) on Valentine’s Day and asked her out to dinner on a night when his wife was out of town. Komisar says it was completely friendly and that his wife bought the book for Pao. Will men now retreat from cordial gestures toward female colleagues? Does anyone else not see the immediate disconnect here? I agree that Pao's case is weak but: It juxtaposes that with a woman saying something about "being nice and mentoring" while pointing out at the same time a married man is handing out gifts on Valentine's Day. I mean, come on. Does anyone seriously think that was anything other than hitting on Pao? Any other day of the year it would have been fine. That specific day out of the 365 options was picked solely for that implication. It just feels weird to me that they'd compose things that way in the article. "Being nice" - Doing nice things for a woman on days other than those dedicated to romance. "Hitting on a woman" - Doing nice things and inviting her to be alone with you on a day dedicated to romance. How is this not a clear line?

Shivetya 12y ago
well she did have an affair with a married coworker, so how are other men supposed to judge her? You make that kind of serious mistake in a professional environment and people are right to judge your competence. They did try/fire the guy involved over her objection. As for handing out valentine gifts, hell my entire work place would be in trouble for gifts, cards, and the like. We celebrate a lot different events, though you learn real quick whom to avoid as some people look to take offense; not saying she did. The can subpoena the gift giver's wife to see if that side of his story holds up. As for asking her out, she already demonstrated that marriage was no barrier. Let's be honest. We only get a picture, one tinted by personal views and time. It will be interesting what the court digs up and how the final determination comes about.
- fweespeech 12y ago
  > As for handing out valentine gifts, hell my entire work place would be in trouble for gifts, cards, and the like. Oddly enough, where I work, the accepted standard is you simply don't hand out stuff to coworkers on Valentines. I mean it is one f'n day of the year, how hard is it to avoid that unless your sole goal is to entice someone? > We celebrate a lot different events I think you are making my point for me. Any event except Valentines/romance related, the behavior would have been appropriate. Specifically doing it on Valentines with the unspoken implication of he'd be alone with her and his wife would be out of town....? :/ > Let's be honest. We only get a picture, one tinted by personal views and time. It will be interesting what the court digs up and how the final determination comes about. Of course. However, it disgusts me that the article seems to imply that "hitting on a woman" and "being nice/mentoring" is the same behavior as the positioning of that quote implied.
- rimunroe 12y ago
  Having an affair with one married coworker doesn't give other coworkers license to hit on you. The argument you're using is basically, "She slept with someone else, so why should other people not expect to be able to get to have privileged relationships with her too?" And even if you ignore that, you obviously shouldn't be hitting on people at work.
  - jquery 12y ago
    > Having an affair with one married coworker doesn't give other coworkers license to hit on you. Coworkers don't need a license, because it's not illegal to make a pass at a coworker. > you obviously shouldn't be hitting on people at work. "Hitting on" is a crude way to describe buying a gift. Is love now banned at work?
    - jsmthrowaway 12y ago
      I don't even make friendships at work anymore, given the ugly fallout that can result from something negative in the friendship impacting a professional relationship. It is wise to completely disconnect your professional life and private one in this climate, as this Pao case demonstrates in some ways. Drinks with the team? Sure, but I leave after one. Gifts to a coworker and an invitation to dinner? Not a chance. It's just too unpredictable no matter what you mean by it. I respect my coworkers enough not to force them into ambiguity with me as a person. Personal relationships have so many opportunities to go south. Why would I complicate my workplace? Is that unfair? Maybe. I'm not there to make friends. Silicon Valley is pretty bad at this in general. The last thing I want to do on a weekend anyway is see the same people I see all week and do something social, and have to pretend that business stays at the office. You should try it. I haven't been burnt out for years, like I was when I left work only to go socialize with the same people. It was like living in Groundhog Day. The startups that force this culture on its employees are part of the problem. I do not devote my life to a company. I'm sorry.
lisa_henderson 12y ago
Agree strongly with this: "Does anyone seriously think that was anything other than hitting on Pao?" Any man who is beyond college age, and who sincerely does not realize the meaning of handing out gifts and asking women out to dinner, is an idiot and should be removed from any position of authority. Emphasis on "sincerely" -- Randy Komisar is not that stupid, and his denials are hardly sincere. The line "his wife bought the gift for her" has become something of a cliche which married couples use when the husband has been caught flirting but the wife is not yet ready to end the marriage. Gifts given in public, for work well done, are always welcome, but a pattern of private gifts and requests for dinner are universally understood to be requests to initiate a sexual relationship. One last word about "sincerely" -- there are some men who sincerely are that stupid. I have known at least 2. They somehow reach middle age and it does not occur to them that the gifts they are giving to an attractive young woman are being interpreted as sexual overtures. As Schiller said, "Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain." There is no cure for such men, but they need to be kept out of positions of power.
- StopWhining 12y ago
  Most of my company are women. I'm a male. Tell me how I'm supposed to talk to them, oh super sensitive sage of all gender interactions in all contexts forever. How machine-like and sterile should I be? How many of their emotions should I deny in the pursuit of professionalism? Should I consult with a lawyer with every photon they reflect? It's obvious you've never lead a single human being in your life. You just give them orders like they were some bot, and then pat yourself on the back for practicing equality. You're simply too stupid to understand the alchemy of human relations.
  - fweespeech 12y ago
    I'd say it is pretty easy to avoid buying them gifts on Valentine's day and inviting them to private dinners with your SO out of town. If you can't help but spontaneously give gifts to attractive women on Valentine's day...I'm at a loss, I'll admit.
    - 12y ago
rhino369 12y ago
Hitting on a woman isn't even illegal unless there is a threat of coercion or it is so frequent/severe that it creates a hostile work environment. I'm sure Pao's attorneys are arguing it is a part of a larger hostile work environment. But itself isn't sexual harassment.
- fweespeech 12y ago
  It was in reference to the quote and the implication that the two were equivalent and equal. Mentoring and being nice to a woman is very, very different than flirting with her. Implying they are the same is gross.
  - rhino369 12y ago
    Ah, I should have seen that. I agree.
    - fweespeech 12y ago
      No worries, written communication isn't perfect.
anaximander 12y ago
I think the author of this article made it (perhaps deliberately) ambiguous as to when these events took place. he gave Pao a volume of Leonard Cohen’s poems and drawings (entitled Book of Longing) on Valentine’s Day and asked her out to dinner on a night when his wife was out of town These could very well be two completely separate occasions. I suspect the author created this juxtaposition to elicit your precise reaction.
- fweespeech 12y ago
  Why do you think that? There are plenty of articles that agree the gift was given on Valentine's Day?
  - adevine 12y ago
    I think he is saying the dinner wasn't on Valentine's Day.
    - fweespeech 12y ago
      The timing of the dinner request isn't relevant. The problem is the choice of gift on Valentines and the fact the author of the article basically equated buying erotic poetry with being "nice and mentoring".
      - anaximander 12y ago
        I agree that the gift was inappropriate. I was responding to your comment: "Hitting on a woman" - Doing nice things and inviting her to be alone with you on a day dedicated to romance. The invitation to have dinner may have happened anytime.
- adevine 12y ago
  This is why I feel it's just better to refrain from any sort of judgment on this case based on what you read in the news. You're right - as it's written, it looks like "Duh, he's hitting on her." But did he give a gift to everyone on Valentine's Day? When he "asked her out to dinner on a night when his wife was out of town", was it a date or a "Let's talk about a potential investment at a popular VC haunt"? I have no idea which is true, and I don't think I'm going to be able to find out based on summaries in the news.
kzhahou 12y ago
I don't find the dinner invitation to be damning in the slightest. Have you all not been around VCs? They're always having dinner, having multiple dinners in one night, flitting from one company to another, to some new prospect, whatever. On this night, he has no plans, his wife is out, so he invites a coworker to grab food after work. So what? Things will get steamy at University Cafe?

malvosenior 12y ago

I don't think this trial has much to do with larger women in tech issues. There's a lot of politics at play for ALL employees of VC firms and this doesn't sound any different. If you've been following all of the coverage of this case, Pao isn't coming off well. She states that it was discriminatory that she didn't get her review on time. Unprofessional to have a delayed review? Yes. Gender harassment? No. Instead of doing her review, they just gave her a bonus of $150,000 and a $40,000 raise (that she claims not to remember). http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/03/ellen-pao-was-resentful-and-dismissive-kleiner-perkins-lawyers-say/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/03/ellen-pao-was-res... From this article: > Pao has also raised an incident in which one of the firm’s senior partners, former Hewlett-Packard Chairman Ray Lane, asked her and a second female colleague to takes notes at a partners' meeting. "I just froze, I wasn’t sure what to do," Pao testified on the stand. I'm a man in a managerial position. I've been asked to take notes many times in meetings. Sometimes I do, sometimes I have to talk a lot and so someone else has to. > Kleiner waited too long to fire a male partner who seemed to be treating the firm as his own private dating website. Pao and Nazre were dating and both married at the time. There's a ton of he said she said, but to put it all on Nazre isn't fair. [EDIT] I was incorrect about this. See Anechoic's comment below. Pao has stated that she took the Reddit CEO role because she couldn't get a job as an investor. Honestly, Reddit CEO sounds like a much better job than all but the most senior of investment positions. There's a lot to this story, and it's getting legs because gender issues in tech are a HOT topic right now. I don't see any of this case having larger implications though. [EDIT] Please don't just downvote me. If you disagree, leave a reply.

ditonal 12y ago
I don't see how you could possibly not see how it has larger implications. For years we've been told that the reason there's no women in tech is because of all us sexist brogrammers, despite the typical programmer being the opposite of a 'bro', while the VCs very much resemble them, and somehow VCs being 96% male with most top firms having NO women as partners slips by unnoticed. VCs intentionally create frat house cultures at the tech companies they invest in because they assume it saves them money to hire misfit programmers who need a workplace to provide a social life rather than act like processionals and demand professional compensation, and that frat house culture is also antagonistic to people who aren't young males. Finally, I don't see how you could read a case where a VC firm made mis-step after mis-step, and a highly qualified woman suggested they invest in winners like Twitter only to be ignored, and brushed off for invites to the Democrats the VCs are in bed with like Al Gore, and not see how she clearly as an extremely strong case of gender discrimination against a rich and powerful sect of elite VCs who have hidden their sickening behavior in the shadows for far too long.

DownvoteMeToWin 12y ago

Leave it to programmers to assume human nature must exist within a binary modality of "apathetic amoral workhorse" and "messy emotional beast of terror" Naturally, this assumption causes any violation to throw a LegalException, which is caught by the GovernmentSingleton anti-pattern whose separation of concern juggles between legislating, in scientifically precise terms, how genders must interact based entirely upon the rotation of the earth... and managing nuclear weapons launches. > [EDIT] Please don't just downvote me. If you disagree, leave a reply. Just look at that plea for reason. And this community implicitly claims a monopoly on rationality while deriding others as emotionally savage worthy of mob vengeance and professional stoning. Can we get rid of the facade of reason on HN and just spam "IF YOU'RE NOT WITH US, YOU'RE AGAINST US" until #hilary2016 is over?

StopWhining 12y ago

Leave it to programmers to assume human nature must exist within a binary modality of "apathetic amoral workhorse" and "messy emotional beast of terror" Naturally, this assumption causes any violation to throw a LegalException, which is caught by the GovernmentSingleton anti-pattern whose separation of concern juggles between instantiating policies that rigidly define how genders must interact based entirely upon the rotation of the earth... and managing nuclear weapons launches. > [EDIT] Please don't just downvote me. If you disagree, leave a reply. Just look at that plea for reason. And this community implicitly claims a monopoly on rationality while deriding others as emotionally savage worthy of mob vengeance and professional stoning. Can we get rid of the facade of reason on HN and just spam "IF YOU'RE NOT WITH US, YOU'RE AGAINST US" until #hilary2016 is over?

sockshirt 12y ago

Stories like this make me feel ambivalent. Gender inequality being brought to the forefront fairly commonly has definitely forced me to evaluate my own actions and words. It sounds silly (and it is because it's mostly beneficial), but I certainly treat female colleagues differently: I'm much more thoughtful about what I say and do, and try to be as explicit as possible if I think there's any way that my words/actions could be misconstrued. Thoughtful in a way that I'm absolutely not around male colleagues. And maybe that's totally fine: I really doubt I'll ever regret being more thoughtful. I certainly do this to some extent with people from other cultural backgrounds, so applying it to people from other gender backgrounds (so-to-speak) is probably appropriate. But it does absolutely setup this "othering" in my mind - I don't see Jennifer as just my coworker, she's my coworker and she's also a woman and I need to be cognizant of how I act and talk around her. I'm careful to think about my words and actions before they materialize, whereas with men I'm much more likely to just act/talk and explain later if necessary. "Asking permission" vs. "Seeking forgiveness". I don't envy being John Doerr - unless Pao was an absolutely clear frontrunner for becoming a senior partner, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.

AndrewWright 12y ago

It's a PR victory for KP that the media generally refers to this as the "Ellen Pao Trial" rather than the "Kleiner Perkins Trial"

jusben1369 12y ago

"Tracy DiNunzio, chief executive officer of Tradesy, an online fashion site in which Kleiner Perkins has invested, says she was recently told by a male chief executive officer that he doesn’t know how to talk to female colleagues any more and that it’s become too easy to say the wrong thing. The case "may make it harder for men to feel free to give women the kinds of constructive criticism that men receive regularly and that they benefit from," she says." I found this paragraph to be the most interesting. We're clearly moving from a sexist world to a less sexist world. The transition involves moving norms of what's acceptable and that's creating a lot of angst for both men and women. The above paragraph (and the one before it in the article) represent one common response "Why can't it just be like it was before?" but there's no going backward. Eventually we'll settle at a new equilibrium but Sandy's book and this trial and some other events will be viewed as pivotal moments when they write the textbooks in 20 to 30 years.