Slashdot Mirror


With Her Blog Post About Toxic Bro-Culture at Uber, Susan Fowler Proved That One Person Can Make a Difference (recode.net)

Kara Swisher, writing for Recode: It was Lao Tzu who said that "the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step." In the case of complete and utter change reeling through Uber right now -- culminating in the resignation of its once untouchable CEO Travis Kalanick -- it turns out that it began with one of the most epic blog posts to be written about what happens when a hot company becomes hostage to its increasingly dysfunctional and toxic behaviors. It was clear from the moment you read the 3,000-word post by former engineer Susan Fowler about her time at the car-hailing company that nothing was going to be the same. Titled simply, "Reflecting on one very, very strange year at Uber," the essay deftly and surgically laid out the map that the media and others would use to prove to its out-to-lunch board and waffling investors that Uber CEO Travis Kalanick had to go. In her account, Fowler was neither mean nor self-righteous, although in reading the story that she laid out about her horrible time there, it would have been completely fair for her to have taken that tone.

347 comments

  1. butterfly erection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In retrospect, it is interesting to see that a reflective blog post from an engineer ended up in the casualties of CEO, most of the senior leadership and a few board members. Maybe the cracks were already there but nevertheless it has been surreal seeing this unfold in the space of 5 months. It is almost like watching the butterfly effect in action.

    1. Re:butterfly erection by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In retrospect, it is interesting to see that a reflective blog post from an engineer ended up in the casualties of CEO, most of the senior leadership and a few board members. Maybe the cracks were already there but nevertheless it has been surreal seeing this unfold in the space of 5 months. It is almost like watching the butterfly effect in action.

      NOw...let's see if anyone will hire her now, after all of this....

      She brought down a 'toxic' CEO, ok....but now, is she a bit 'toxic' too?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:butterfly erection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      She sounds mature and reasonable in her attitude and communication. I'd hire her.

    3. Re:butterfly erection by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      People do get forgotten over time.
      While the effect of her actions may have long lasting effect. Her name will probably will not last long. So when looking for a job, chances are the background checks are not checking for activist fame, but criminal and job skills. Most companies even if they don't want to hire someone like her. May do so especially if she doesn't start ranting during the interview.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re:butterfly erection by 110010001000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He wasn't fired due to the blog post. The VCs wanted him out for a long time. There is a long history of "articles" about it on the web. It is possible the VCs wanted to get rid of him because of the culture though.

    5. Re:butterfly erection by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Nah, I think they wanted to get rid of him because he didn't want to test an IPO, the VCs bought in at a stupid-high valuation, and Uber is burning their cash at a rate of $63 per second, 60 seconds a minute, 60 minutes an hour, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    6. Re:butterfly erection by 110010001000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, it is definitely related to the IPO for sure. The VCs hinted that they wanted a more "mature" CEO before they did an IPO.

    7. Re:butterfly erection by Kierthos · · Score: 2

      No, but it's hard to argue the point that the blog post got a lot of people, who wouldn't otherwise be interested in the matter, looking at the corporate culture at Uber.

      If it hadn't been for her blog post, would the CEO still be there? Maybe, maybe not. With as toxic as the culture was there (and probably still is to an extent... that shit doesn't change quickly), it probably wouldn't have been long before he was given the heave-ho. He might have lasted through the end of the year.

      --
      Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
    8. Re:butterfly erection by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      NOw...let's see if anyone will hire her now, after all of this....

      According to her blog post that she wrote in February, she left Uber in December and started work at Stripe in January. When a push came to a shove at Uber, "I had a new job offer in my hands less than a week later."

      She brought down a 'toxic' CEO, ok....but now, is she a bit 'toxic' too?

      The men who work at Uber should probably be viewed as "toxic" by future employers, as the bad boy mentality drives out good people.

    9. Re:butterfly erection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you read the her blog, she comes off as exceptionally reasonable and well articulated in what she said. Doubt the industry would penalize her.

    10. Re:butterfly erection by 110010001000 · · Score: 2

      I don't think the current CEO was going to make the IPO. The VCs have hinted at that for over a year.

    11. Re:butterfly erection by Kierthos · · Score: 2

      I'm not saying that the CEO being a toxic dude-bro was the sole reason that he got ousted. I'm not even saying it was the main reason. But the VCs almost certainly considered it along with all the other reasons that they already had.

      Yes, the fact that he wasn't pushing for an IPO was probably a big reason. But when a company has that bad of a public image problem, it doesn't help attracting investors for an IPO.

      --
      Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
    12. Re:butterfly erection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I would hire her. I like people willing to stand up for all our rights and hold people in power accountable. We need more of this in industry.

      In general it would be better if the harassed person had a chat with the offender and said something directly rather than go directly to HR. Saying "Uhh I'm just here to work and not into any relationship stuff - good luck with your own sex life" he would have got the message, she'd still have the job and everything would be cool. It would have given him a way to save face "oh i'm sorry it seemed that way, i value you as a coworker and will not say that stuff to you again directly."

      But instead it sounds like she immediately went on the warpath and got the company to fight itself, which is the underlying reason why some might NOT hire her.

      Not excusing harassment, but going the HR route is the worst way to handle what should be an adult-adult situation. Now if she said the above and he *still* kept coming-on to her, then HR might be the best option.

    13. Re:butterfly erection by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not excusing harassment, but going the HR route is the worst way to handle what should be an adult-adult situation.

      You're assuming that the other person is an adult. It might surprise you that not everyone who grows up is an adult. I've met more than a few children in the workplace. HR can either send them away or babysit them. If HR decides to babysit them, it's time to find a new job elsewhere.

    14. Re:butterfly erection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In retrospect, it is interesting to see that a reflective blog post from an engineer ended up in the casualties of CEO, most of the senior leadership and a few board members. Maybe the cracks were already there but nevertheless it has been surreal seeing this unfold in the space of 5 months. It is almost like watching the butterfly effect in action.

      NOw...let's see if anyone will hire her now, after all of this....

      She brought down a 'toxic' CEO, ok....but now, is she a bit 'toxic' too?

      Not in a million years. She's positively radioactive. The rest of her career is going to be on SJWelfare, which is why we're hearing talk about the "toxic bro culture," which is a dog whistle to the SJW Feminist types.

    15. Re:butterfly erection by gweihir · · Score: 2

      Unfortunately, there is no way to be sure from the outside whether this was the right thing to happen or not. Public opinion is rarely in sync with actual facts.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    16. Re:butterfly erection by gweihir · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Actually, she is. Going public with something like that is not acceptable, except if all other venues are exhausted and there is solid proof. That does not seem to be the case here. In actual fact, she has a duty to be loyal to her employer in this regard even after not working there anymore.

      The only ones that are going to hire her now are those that want her as a poster-girl. Anybody else will not touch her with a 10-foot pole. It does not even matter whether her claims are true or not for that.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    17. Re:butterfly erection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Including men. Not all men are into "bro culture", in fact I am quite surprised that computer people, who are likely to have suffered from it when they were boys, later seem to embrace it somehow. It's really a part of masculinity that I'd like to see disappear.

    18. Re:butterfly erection by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If she has the skills and can do the job, then I'd hire her. If she 'whistleblows' on sexist practices, so what? I don't want that kind of stuff at my company. She would make the place better.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    19. Re:butterfly erection by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

      Why would she be "toxic" for reporting illegal activities that took place?

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    20. Re:butterfly erection by ausekilis · · Score: 1

      There's a sad truth to human memory. We don't always remember why we recognize a name or a face. The boss may not remember that you screwed up royally, but he remembers you... that often turns into raises and promotions when your name crosses his/her desk alongside the other hundred names.

    21. Re:butterfly erection by mjwx · · Score: 1

      NOw...let's see if anyone will hire her now, after all of this....

      She brought down a 'toxic' CEO, ok....but now, is she a bit 'toxic' too?

      Depends, if a company with integrity is looking for an honest worker or a company then she'll have no trouble. If its a shoddy company with a corrupt culture, she should look elsewhere.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    22. Re:butterfly erection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The men who work at Uber should probably be viewed as "toxic"

      Just the men? Now that position is really sexist.

    23. Re:butterfly erection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NOw...let's see if anyone will hire her now, after all of this....

      According to her blog post that she wrote in February, she left Uber in December and started work at Stripe in January.

      Right, she posted the Blog post in question in February -- that is, she got her current job *before* "all of this" happened.

      The question of "if anyone will hire her now, after all of this" is still open, and her continued employment at Stripe doesn't change that. (Getting fired for writing a muck-raking blog post is very different from simply having your resume passed over during the hiring process because of it.)

    24. Re:butterfly erection by David_Hart · · Score: 2

      I'm not saying that the CEO being a toxic dude-bro was the sole reason that he got ousted. I'm not even saying it was the main reason. But the VCs almost certainly considered it along with all the other reasons that they already had.

      Yes, the fact that he wasn't pushing for an IPO was probably a big reason. But when a company has that bad of a public image problem, it doesn't help attracting investors for an IPO.

      It's always fun to equate the downfall of a large fish to the actions of a little fish, especially when you are one (I'm one too). The problem is that the big fish don't even notice the little fishes and couldn't care less about their ranting and ravings unless there is something to be gained.

      In my opinion, the VCs wanted him out to go forward with an IPO. He was dead set against it The fact that the Uber culture was exposed had no bearing on him leaving. They would have gotten rid of him anyway. In my opinion, any attribution to Uber culture issues is just a smokescreen.

      http://fortune.com/2016/06/09/...

    25. Re: butterfly erection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's see that stupid company go down in flames. I'll do my best to help making it happen, that's for sure.

    26. Re:butterfly erection by kelanos · · Score: 1

      It's surreal seeing so many people buy this bullshit and take stock in gossip when the editors of this site clearly have a bribery-fueled vendetta against Uber, posting propaganda against it nearly every single day. It's almost like seeing the left-wing media cartel's penchant for conspiracy in action.

      WHOOPS actually there isn't a 100% chance that Hillary will win. Actually it was more like 10%

      And the drones still buy anything they hear as long as it appeals to their twisted emotions and stunted intellect.

    27. Re:butterfly erection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are the exact reason why slander and libel are illegal. The presumption that disparaging anecdotes and allegations are true. Eventually, you will likely be the victim of one or both and your attitude will change. Until then, airing the dirty laundry of a former employer in the court of public opinion is never an acceptable way to treat a former customer of your brand. Professionals settle their disputes discretely through negotiation and/or lawsuits. Bringing the attention of the media circus into the mix is the most heinous sin one can possibly commit. You're better off stealing from an employer or sexually harassing a subordinate than disparaging the brand in public.

    28. Re:butterfly erection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is totally fair. If the CEO was turning a profit it would be a different story, but he isn't.

    29. Re:butterfly erection by Aighearach · · Score: 0

      Why would she be "toxic" for reporting illegal activities that took place?

      Don't blame him, it the neckbeard talking. Everybody knows that once a neckbeard attaches to the central nervous system it cannot be removed from the host without killing them both. They're symbiotes now.

      The good news is, neckbeards are biologically compatible with ewoks. So there is some hope for a semi-normal life.

    30. Re:butterfly erection by computational+super · · Score: 1

      I can't imagine that a man who did the same would ever find employment again.

      --
      Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
    31. Re:butterfly erection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, I'm pretty sure, the CEO himself and Investor pressure brought him down.

      Sometimes the truth is ugly. I'm certainly not going to 'shoot the messenger here'. Are you?

      If you've never worked in an environment that can be toxic, count yourself lucky. It really can be detrimental to your health.

      Or, since statistics become relevant, perhaps you're in that pool which wouldn't recognize such an environment in the first place? It isn't unheard of.,

    32. Re:butterfly erection by Altus · · Score: 1

      Thats not what dog whistle refers to.... its not a dog whistle to call something what it is... thats a descriptor.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    33. Re:butterfly erection by Altus · · Score: 1

      Bullshit... people badmouth old employers all the time, how do you think places end up with bad reputations?

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    34. Re:butterfly erection by St.Creed · · Score: 1, Insightful

      So... you're in a new job, relatively inexperienced, and on day one your manager asks you to have sex with him. Do you really think sitting down for a chat is an option at that point? This is so totally out of whack, you really need to involve HR pronto. If it starts from here, where will it end?

       

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    35. Re:butterfly erection by Altus · · Score: 2

      I suspect that if you looked a bit more closely at the editors posting patters it is based on posting shit that gets the local neckbeard crowd rilled up. Accusations of sexual harassment and other brogrammer stuff tends to bring out a lot of people bitching about how it isn't real and how there is not enough evidence and so on and so forth, this results in a very large number of page views for the site.

      Want it to stop, maybe stop commenting on them.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    36. Re:butterfly erection by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      You really didn't read the post, did you? She responded pretty cool to all forms of shit inside that company. She got stellar performance reviews, her manager actively sabotaged her reviews to stop her from transferring out... I mean, the things she describes have now been verified by loads of other witnesses, and clearly describe a company with huge problems. She's not the one with the problem, but if any manager from Uber would be interviewing with me, I'd be having a very long and tough discussion with them.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    37. Re:butterfly erection by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      Are you a Catholic priest? You sound like one, trying to silence his victims by telling them they shouldn't disparage the Church.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    38. Re:butterfly erection by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "In actual fact, she has a duty to be loyal to her employer in this regard even after not working there anymore."

      When you show me no reasonable loyalty or respect, expect none in return.

      Her post was RESTRAINED, way more than I'd have been. That's about the level of 'loyalty' she owed as a PROFESSIONAL.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    39. Re:butterfly erection by kelanos · · Score: 1

      Have you read any of the comments?

      Have you seen how all the comments such as you describe are modded down constantly?

      You're talking pure bullshit

    40. Re:butterfly erection by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Sure she can get hired. If you're at a big company you'll never bump into a CEO except by accident anyway. Startups are very dfiferent because there are so few employees that you have to interact with the CEO. If that CEO at a small company is being an asshole in front of overworked and underpaid workers then any one should expect payback.

    41. Re:butterfly erection by gweihir · · Score: 1

      And how do you think people end up unemployable? Sure, if you badmouth an old employer in a fashion that cannot easily be traced back to you, that works, but everything else is career-suicide.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    42. Re:butterfly erection by gweihir · · Score: 0

      You seem to be unaware of what "professional" means. It does include not washing dirty laundry in public. The only exception may be if you have enough for a successful lawsuit, because then any prospective future employer can at least be reasonably sure you did not lie. May still kill your career though.

      The quid-pro-quo you describe is what can be expected of an "ordinary" person, standards for "professionals" are higher.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    43. Re:butterfly erection by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      I've seen this trend in online games, like MMOs. Ie, some of the same nerds who got picked on in school turn to an stereotypical jock attitude when online, Nice and polite in person, lack of all civilized behavior behind the keyboard. Especially in competitive parts of the games, whereas the real jocks would have had coaches teaching at least some sportsmanship, the nerd turned competitive player has had no such training and thinks teabagging is perfectly normal.

    44. Re:butterfly erection by swillden · · Score: 1

      Not excusing harassment, but going the HR route is the worst way to handle what should be an adult-adult situation.

      You're assuming that the other person is an adult. It might surprise you that not everyone who grows up is an adult. I've met more than a few children in the workplace. HR can either send them away or babysit them. If HR decides to babysit them, it's time to find a new job elsewhere.

      If the CEO is one of them, run screaming.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    45. Re:butterfly erection by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Going the HR route is the only way to do this. Seriously, that is what employees are trained to do, either explicitly by the management or indirectly because face-to-face interactions fail so badly. HR can help defuse the situations before there starts being a dominance struggle.

      If someone is already harrassing people for their gender, then you can never have an adult-adult conversation anyway, the most you can get is adult-child.

      The fact that you even think going to HR is being childish or a cop out says volumes about your own attitudes I think.

    46. Re:butterfly erection by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Shhh, you're spoiling the bro mythology!

    47. Re:butterfly erection by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Loyalty? Why be loyal to a company that's treating you badly? Loyalty is earned. The company will give zero loyalty to the employee so none is expected in return. This "duty" does not exist.

    48. Re: butterfly erection by koomba · · Score: 1

      Have you actually read her blog post? If so, you seem to have missed the part where she spent a year "going through the right channels," attempting to handle it the right way. She was beyond reasonable, and tried several times to address what she saw and her grievances within the company, without airing it all in public. And the guy who propositioned her to be his swinging partner on her *first* day of work was actively protected by managers and HR because he was a "high performer." So she absolutely did try, repeatedly, to handle it like an adult. And in return, she was basically ignored and told to brush it off, despite the fact that there were other people reporting the same guy for the exact same behavior.

    49. Re:butterfly erection by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "You seem to be unaware of what "professional" means."

      Professional means telling the truth without spewing vitriol. Even a basic fucking waiter/server knows this one. Have you ever truly worked a public-facing job, before?

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    50. Re:butterfly erection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She brought down a 'toxic' CEO, ok....but now, is she a bit 'toxic' too?

      I wouldn't hire her, that's for damn sure.

    51. Re:butterfly erection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's say 'hypothetically', that what she said happen did happen, but she was unable to provide 'solid proof' to your standard - in that case do you still believe she has a 'duty' to be loyal to her former employer?

    52. Re: butterfly erection by Brockmire · · Score: 2

      Wtf? You're creepy. Adult is age, not maturity.

    53. Re:butterfly erection by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      NOw...let's see if anyone will hire her now, after all of this....

      She brought down a 'toxic' CEO, ok....but now, is she a bit 'toxic' too?

      Depends, if a company with integrity is looking for an honest worker or a company then she'll have no trouble. If its a shoddy company with a corrupt culture, she should look elsewhere.

      You make it sound like those are the only two options - the third type of company is far more numerous: a company that doesn't want problem employees. Most companies would rather have the victim resign and work elsewhere. A victim who fights back doesn't get employed at most companies.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    54. Re:butterfly erection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      - She has a duty to be loyal to her employer ... even after not working there any more.

      That's a peculiar attitude. Especially in this day and age when employers have and exhibit no loyalty to employees.

      I would argue that she has a duty, if not an actual obligation to bring such behaviour to light, all the more so if it's illegal.

    55. Re:butterfly erection by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      She brought down a 'toxic' CEO, ok....but now, is she a bit 'toxic' too?

      Snitches get stitches? Does an adult know you're using the computer?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    56. Re:butterfly erection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I understand. But HR's role as a mediator or reporting desk has one merit: for shy or spineless people.
      You may tell an offending coworker to stop it, but some folks really don't want conflict so they enroll the help of a third-party that's trained to do so. Plus there's a paper trail which can often reign in the offender's attitude pretty quick.

      That being said, yeah just tell them to cool it can work.

    57. Re: butterfly erection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > ...that not everyone who grows up is an adult. I've met more than a few children in the workplace.
      It's a figure of speech Brockmire. That you recognize it as creepy is telling in itself.

      Nevertheless, of course 'adult' is 'an assigned lawful age'. But Creimer is saying what we all have seen: 18+ year aged adults that ACT like spoiled babies or reactionary teenagers who dominate staff & processes and can't be reigned in to work well with the team.

      So despite you reading this like there are actual minors in the office, it's a euphemism for adults that act like children.
      Spoiled-brats who throw tempertantrums and make the entire office uneasy for years.

    58. Re:butterfly erection by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Well, good luck with that. And yes, I do actually know what I am talking about.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    59. Re:butterfly erection by gweihir · · Score: 1

      And if any prospective future employer knows that you think that, they will be a former prospective future employer. I am not saying this is how it should be, I am saying this is how it is and putting your head in the sand about it is not a good idea.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    60. Re:butterfly erection by gweihir · · Score: 1

      You mistake what I am saying. I am not saying this is how it should be, I am saying this is how it is. That solid proof would also serve to protect _her_ against a lawsuit for breach of contract, as all employment contract for such roles have confidentiality clauses that do not end after end of employment. In this case, the company probably would lose more if they sued her, but they will have very seriously considered that.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    61. Re:butterfly erection by gweihir · · Score: 1

      I am not saying this is how it should be, I am saying this is how it is in actual reality. Embarrassing a former employer is career-suicide.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    62. Re:butterfly erection by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Naw, the C level people who mistakenly assume there is loyalty rarely get involved in hiring decisions. The hiring managers already know about nobody-owes-loyalty thing and most likely thinks the same way anyway.

    63. Re:butterfly erection by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Good luck with that if googling your name brings up something like this.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  2. Obligatory Dalai Lama quote by Kergan · · Score: 4, Funny

    "If you think you're too small to make a difference, try sleeping with a mosquito."

    1. Re:Obligatory Dalai Lama quote by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Don't mosquitoes freeze to death in Tibet at night?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:Obligatory Dalai Lama quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I get it.

      "Too small to make a difference, too big to sleep with a mosquito."

    3. Re:Obligatory Dalai Lama quote by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

      No, they hide at places that are warm, they also have special anti freezing in the body/blood.
      And finally: human inhabitated areas hardly freeze in summer at night.
      In Lhasa it is 23:00 right now and about 16 C / 60 F.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    4. Re:Obligatory Dalai Lama quote by war4peace · · Score: 0

      I tried but my dick didn't fit the mosquito's ass.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    5. Re:Obligatory Dalai Lama quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, dat. Source: a mosquito once hid in my asshole.

    6. Re:Obligatory Dalai Lama quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The version I use is, "If you think you're too small to make a difference, try sleeping when there's a g-d cricket somewhere in the house."

  3. Uber Gets High Kalanick by FrankHaynes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Film at 11.

    It's doubtful that Travis was the only problem child at Uber. He probably hired like-minded pals who remain in power there, so this won't be the last we hear of problems at Uber.

    But this isn't "bro culture" or "toxic masculinity", he's just an everyday, run-of-the-mill, common asshole. Plenty more where he came from.

    --
    slashdot: A failed experiment.
    1. Re:Uber Gets High Kalanick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So "bros" or "like-minded pals" are not allowed to find employment? The company has achieved amazing results and achievements, the item raised here is hardly a problem for many.

    2. Re:Uber Gets High Kalanick by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Informative

      So "bros" or "like-minded pals" are not allowed to find employment?

      Here's hoping.

      The company has achieved amazing results and achievements

      Uber lost $2 billion last year (billion with a "b"). I guess you're right, that's amazing.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:Uber Gets High Kalanick by GameboyRMH · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But this isn't "bro culture" or "toxic masculinity", he's just an everyday, run-of-the-mill, common asshole.

      "Bro-culture" and "toxic masculinity" are just side-effects of being a common asshole while having a penis.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    4. Re:Uber Gets High Kalanick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Toxic femininity is just side-effect of being a common asshole while having a vagina.

    5. Re:Uber Gets High Kalanick by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 0

      As you note, we're not talking just a single individual - we're talking about a culture established and nurtured by that individual. It seems to me that a company culture led by assholes of this particular variety is so like "bro culture" and "toxic masculinity" as to be indistinguishable.

    6. Re:Uber Gets High Kalanick by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Permission for bad behaviour tends to flow down the chain of command, and at the very least he failed to do anything meaningful about it.

      If you want to label it then this is an example of rape culture. Not that anyone was literally raped as far as we know (at least not in the office, uber's customers were not so lucky), that's not what it means. It describes the kind of place that Uber is, where getting your female subordinates to sleep with you is just a matter of asking them often enough because secretly when women say "no" they really want it.

      It's like at the end of Temple of Doom where the female lead storms off, having told Jones in no uncertain terms that she is fed up with nearly being killed or fed monkey brains or worse, so he just uses his whip to grab her around the waist and reel her back in like a fish. Then she smiles and goes to kiss him, because she secretly wanted it all along and her mouth was just lying because that's what women do. Most of us probably chuckled at the time, but it's actually pretty fucked up when you think about it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:Uber Gets High Kalanick by clonehappy · · Score: 0

      Here's hoping.

      Another liberal taking the high road, I see.

    8. Re: Uber Gets High Kalanick by Bartles · · Score: 1, Insightful

      What are you even talking about? I think what you are describing only exists in sjw fantasy land.

    9. Re:Uber Gets High Kalanick by PopeRatzo · · Score: 0

      Another liberal taking the high road, I see.

      An actual "So much for the tolerant left!" post found in the wild.

      And by the way, it's 2017 and there is no "high road".

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    10. Re:Uber Gets High Kalanick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you want to label it then this is an example of rape culture.

      If

      I think the one who wants most to label things, generalize, and stereotype is you. You know, kinda like how certain people would just label you as an example of SJW and push on stereotypes on you, insisting you believe in things you don't actually believe in.

      The ironing is delicious.

      Not that anyone was literally raped as far as we know

      Sure, and you're not literally fighting for social justice, nor are you literally a warrior. Doesn't mean SJW isn't an apt description of you and what you do!

      It's like at the end of Temple of Doom

      Sure, the Hollywood industry - which largely leans left - is highly sexist and racist. That's what many conservatives and libertarians and other groups have said all along. It's the left, not the right, who is the side full of sexists and racists.

      it's actually pretty fucked up when you think about it.

      Yes, if you actually think about it, you'll realize you've been batting for the wrong team, AmiMojo.

    11. Re:Uber Gets High Kalanick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OH SHIT! look out everyone, it's the current year! I'd completely forgotten.

    12. Re: Uber Gets High Kalanick by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 0

      http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/06... You don't commission an outside investigation, then fire 20 employees and have your CEO step back from the business for something that doesn't actually exist.

    13. Re:Uber Gets High Kalanick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I feel like my browser was raped after reading this.

      Stop oppressing me.

    14. Re: Uber Gets High Kalanick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Muslims raping women in the streets and the laws punishing the women, that's rape culture.

      Your little SJW buzzword bullshit is designed by toxic feminism, because why face the truth when you can write your own narrative and cast yourself as the victim and the hero.

      How Progressive of you!

    15. Re: Uber Gets High Kalanick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some women liked to be chased a bit, and some enjoy being tied up.

      I guess even some men like being a doormat, not me, but you sure do seem to enjoy it.

    16. Re:Uber Gets High Kalanick by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      toxic shit comes in different colors but it all smells bad.

    17. Re:Uber Gets High Kalanick by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      natural male masculinity?

      What the heck is that, even? Is that:
      (a) grabbing women by the pussy because you have money and will get away with it?
      (b) drugging women and raping them, because you are famous and will get away with it?
      (c) killing your ex-wife and her lover because they made you look stupid, because you are famous and will get away with it?
      (d) trying to force a new hire into sex on day 1, because you are the manager and can fire them?
      (e) all of the above?

      Just curious about which one it is for you.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    18. Re: Uber Gets High Kalanick by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      Do you wear tinfoil on your head, or all over? Just curious.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    19. Re:Uber Gets High Kalanick by Khyber · · Score: 2

      Toxic *blank* is just a side-effect of being a common asshole while having *specific trait.*

      Makes for a great mad-lib. Might even work out for a two-card question for Cards Against Humanity!

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    20. Re: Uber Gets High Kalanick by Khyber · · Score: 2

      Never heard of the Cult of Personality, eh?

      People in power tend to attract and keep the company of those like themselves.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    21. Re: Uber Gets High Kalanick by Bartles · · Score: 1

      Of course I have. It's one of the factors that leads to left wing dictatorships.

    22. Re: Uber Gets High Kalanick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you stopped beating your wife yet?

    23. Re:Uber Gets High Kalanick by swillden · · Score: 1

      We're supposed to tolerate sodomites, freaks of nature, satanists, transvestites, criminals, pedophiles, anyone who wants to see the human race burn and celebrate it like it's normal.

      Yes, yes, yes, yes, no, no, and no, respectively.

      But natural male masculinity?

      Natural male masculinity is great, as long as it doesn't abuse or belittle anyone. But that's not a problem because abuse and belittlement is what weak assholes do, not strong, confident men. Or strong, confident women, for that matter.

      You're welcome, glad I could clear that up for you.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    24. Re:Uber Gets High Kalanick by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      You shouldn't look to drunken college fratboys as your examples of natural male masculinity.

    25. Re:Uber Gets High Kalanick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's just sad when people suggest that toxic shit only comes from some GROUP of people, rather than individuals.

    26. Re:Uber Gets High Kalanick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your behaviour is pretty fucked up when I think about it, but you're free tar people with your brush. That's life I guess.

  4. Sooo you're saying she's privileged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Since, you know, they investigated and found no actual evidence of her claims.

    1. Re:Sooo you're saying she's privileged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ... found no actual evidence of her claims.

      Citation needed.

    2. Re:Sooo you're saying she's privileged by Khyber · · Score: 1

      http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/06...

      Do what? You just fire a bunch of people when you investigate them without proof?

      Uber had the ability to track just about anyone using their service, including their own employees (which prolly got free rides on Uber's wallet.) They could correlate times of claims with location data of both victim and accused in the cases of stalking, after-delivery following, etc.

      You might want to open your ears a bit more and use some common sense, assuming you have any.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  5. Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by Kohath · · Score: 1, Insightful

    We see 30 articles like this but nothing on the AMD Epyc chip announcement this week.

    I think we can safely conclude that Slashdot editors don't care about Technology.

    1. Re: Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i find myself visiting this site less and less. Slashsot has become Reddit with less articles. Sad.

    2. Re: Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      between the SJW editorials and old granpa pc technicians there is little reason to come here except to point and laugh at the linux jackasses from time to time.

    3. Re: Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by thegreatbob · · Score: 1

      It's where we keep the AC vitriol bottled up, lest it leak onto the greater internet. It's a community service.

      --
      There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
    4. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by Kierthos · · Score: 2

      Look one article up from this one.

      --
      Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
    5. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      We see 30 articles like this but nothing on the AMD Epyc chip announcement this week.

      It's the very next story in my RSS feed, dummy.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    6. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

      If you know about interesting articles regarding AMD and their chiso, why don't you post them on /. instead of complaining about the lack their of?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    7. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by Kohath · · Score: 0

      It only took them 30 minutes to post. I imagine it went something like this:

      "Oh, yeah, Technology. I remember that stuff. People still care about that? I guess if you cared about Technology, this AMD news would rate a mention. I'll write something up. (The CEO is a woman, so we can even check one of the boxes that really matter.)"

    8. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by Kohath · · Score: 1

      So we should stop coming here and just write our own web sites if we want Technology news?

    9. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welcome to the new media. Politics has co-opted every concept under the sun mixed with a culture of shaming and fear mongering to push illegitimate agendas. So now even groups that were once focused strictly on science and technology have turned into SJW wet noodles. MIT is using their media arm to push social agendas with the flimsiest tangents of logic that can be considered science, TED is a total trainwreck, Harvard Business Review concerns themselves more with feel good policies over hard economics and PhysOrg is becoming a shadow of itself.
       
      The polarization of the population and the whole "Resist!" movement has turned legitimate research reporting entities into jokes. You have to retreat to very specialized science outlets to even hope to get a serious technical article anymore. There's nothing of value from outlets that use to promote wide swaths of science reporting.

    10. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by Kierthos · · Score: 1

      No, fool. He's saying submit the story to Slashdot. You know, how most of the stories end up on Slashdot to begin with? User submission....

      --
      Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
    11. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by Kohath · · Score: 0

      It's one of the top 5 tech stories this week (and it's only Thursday morning). It's my fault Slashdot editors aren't interested?

    12. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by Kohath · · Score: 1

      It's not like anyone has to be a hyper-political douchebag. Why do so many people decide to go that way? It obviously doesn't make them happy.

    13. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by Altus · · Score: 0

      30 minutes is super fucking fast for a site that is best known as "THE place to go to see what was on ARS Technica yesterday"

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    14. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is a community site.
      Everyone, even ACs can post articles.

      Sure, you can 'write your own site' and then you still complain that certain news is not posted in time ... so what is your point?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    15. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be the change you want to see in the world.

    16. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one blamed you, all they said was you could do something to fix the issue by submitting one of the stories. Thats how ALL of the stories are supposed to get here, user submissions.

      The "editors" are a computer script that loads the user submitted story onto the front page.

      Did you really think that ANYONE that works for slashdot actually goes and gets stories for it? HAH

    17. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by Kohath · · Score: 1

      What if the change I want is for people to stop obsessing about the latest media storytelling and the unspeakable tragedy of imperfect emotions-optimization and focus on real world concerns instead?

    18. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looking at your comment history, I'd consider this a more real world concern than what you normally opine on.

    19. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      There are two options here, I think:

      A: *everyone else* is moving left very hard. Possible, but very unlikely in the current political climate.
      B: *You* are moving very fast to the right.

      B sounds like the most plausible option to me. If it's everyone else, it's probably you.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    20. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "It only took them 30 minutes to post."

      Blame the Firehose and the voting system.

      Used to be actual technology-involved nerds ran the site.

      Now it's investor-firms masquerading as tech geeks.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    21. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "instead of complaining about the lack their of?"

      Because most intelligent people that know it's "thereof" have probably left this site.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    22. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Actually I typed thereof. But as the spelling correction/error checking on my iPhone is broken, it was not red underlined. So I tabbed on it and it offered "there of" as correction.

      Funnily I saw a post an hour later where one wrote "thereof", so I guessed my original spelling was correct.

      Because most intelligent people that know it's "thereof" have probably left this site.
      Knowledge and intelligence are two different things. Hence we have the discussion about weak and strong AI ... expert systems know a lot, but are not intelligent.

      I for my part don't care how stuff is spelled. As my eyes or "eye to thought coordination" never notice the mistakes (of others or myself).

      In some circles my way of pattern matching reading is considered "high intelligent". Many people cant read as fast as I do ... on the other hand, sometimes I make mistakes and misunderstand something ... because of to fast reading.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    23. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "Knowledge and intelligence are two different things."

      Whoooo boy that's so wrong, no wonder you're using Apple products.

      Intelligence is the application of knowledge.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    24. Re:Slashdot editors don't care about Tech by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Intelligence is the application of knowledge.
      No it is not, or people who don't know a lot would never be intelligent.
      There are plenty of situations where people that know a lot do stupid decisions because they prefer to follow the book (of what they know). E.g. a computer program as an expert system knows a lot, but is not intelligent. Wikipedia is just a conglomerate of facts, just like a priest who can cite the whole bible, he is not necessarily intelligent, with all his knowledge.

      Your comment about Apple products makes no sense. Mac OS only runs legally on Apple products, so does iOS.
      If you believe Windows or Linux are better because they run on cheaper hardware: then you are not very intelligent.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  6. Re:Sounds like ... by gremlinuk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And it's attitudes like this that bring the entire male species into disrepute.

  7. Re:Sounds like ... by avandesande · · Score: 3, Funny

    lol when did we have a good reputation?

    --
    love is just extroverted narcissism
  8. Re:she made a biased blogpost excusing her firing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    uber changed the world, lyft can kiss my mother fucker ass. fuck a "fast follower".

    show me on the doll where the uber ceo touched you

  9. Re:Sounds like ... by aicrules · · Score: 0

    Jokes on you, that AC is a woman.

  10. BAH! Everybody hates Uber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It was an easy target. Let's see her try that with a real company with real money, not some damn unicorn that barely exists at all. This story is one about the triumph of political correctness, not civil rights.

    1. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by hackertourist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This wasn't about political correctness, it was about common decency, and Uber's lack thereof.

    2. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Oh, fuck you. She was propositioned for sex on her first day at work by her immediate supervisor. If you think that's "chivalry" or "romance" or that having a problem with that is "political correctness", then frankly, you're a piece of shit.

    3. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by chispito · · Score: 1

      It was an easy target. Let's see her try that with a real company with real money, not some damn unicorn that barely exists at all.

      Uber's profitability is not yet real and may never be. Their impact, however, is seismic.

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    4. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by zbobet2012 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Being sexually propositioned on your first day by an immediate superior and then punished when you turned them down is not and never will be okay. And that has nothing to do with political correctness. These facts have been more or less confirmed by Uber themselves. If she "tried" this at a "real" company, her boss would have been fired on the spot.

      I had the pleasure of meeting Susan at a conference before this all started and it saddens me that someone obviously so bright had to deal with that kind of bullshit.

    5. Re: BAH! Everybody hates Uber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NOPE! go away troll

    6. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by hackertourist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Now, every pat on the butt or peck on the cheek is 'harassment'.

      no, it's harassment, without scare quotes. The chivalrous thing to do is to keep your hands off your coworkers until you're invited.

    7. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The whole idea about political correctness, which was created by the right wing, is to discredit the legitimate civil rights movement. Now, every pat on the butt or peck on the cheek is 'harassment'.

      I would posit, that the overuse of harassment or discrimination by those on the left, women and minorities have been what has rendered the terms less useful, and overused and abused.

      Sure, there are plenty of real occurrences of these abuses, however when so many folks found out they could make $$$ by crying 'wolf' and suing....well, the legitimate cases got lost in the mass of fake ones, and now....everyone is scared at the places of employment.

      Its getting harder and harder to fire someone that is incompetent due to them being afraid of the fired employee crying discrimination or verbal sexual assault.

      And that really isn't "political correctness"...that is mostly from the left screaming racism/sexism at anyone that either disagrees with them, OR may have actual studies that may show there actually are differences between the sexes, or races or racial cultures that are either pro/con when compared to other races/cultures or the opposite sex.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    8. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would posit, that the overuse of harassment or discrimination by those on the left, women and minorities have been what has rendered the terms less useful, and overused and abused.

      I would rebut, that the denial of harassment and discrimination, by those who don't want to admit it is a problem, mainly those on the right, existed back when they were dismissing such complaints out of hand, without even the pretense of consideration.

      Sure, there are plenty of real occurrences of these abuses, however when so many folks found out they could make $$$ by crying 'wolf' and suing....well, the legitimate cases got lost in the mass of fake ones, and now....everyone is scared at the places of employment.

      If only. The people who are scared are the ones who have legitimate grievances, but will be immediately be meet with cries of making it up, and otherwise being dismissed and ignored. The harassers, however, feel comfort in the defense they can easily arise.

      Its getting harder and harder to fire someone that is incompetent due to them being afraid of the fired employee crying discrimination or verbal sexual assault.

      But is it getting harder to discriminate unlawfully, or mistreat workers?

      And that really isn't "political correctness"...that is mostly from the left screaming racism/sexism at anyone that either disagrees with them,

      Actually, you are repeating a political dogma of the right, that they adopt the practice of screaming and throwing their hands up over the left disagreeing with them, and doing nothing about any of the criticism they receive, whether or not it has anything to do with racism or sexism.

      I would say, that for the right, it is "politically correct" to espouse the views you present, that they play that card with a repetitive refrain.

      OR may have actual studies that may show there actually are differences between the sexes, or races or racial cultures that are either pro/con when compared to other races/cultures or the opposite sex.

      Sorry but, you know people were citing "studies" back when it came to justifying slavery, Antisemitism, and sexism, therefore, your problem is that your alleged "researchers" are often discredited, as they fail to make a robust effort to defend their results, instead resorting to crying wolf over those mean liberals harassing them.

      Especially since the right is not at all hesitant to protest the studies that do not agree with them at all.

    9. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by Headw1nd · · Score: 1

      Violating labor laws, which the type of retaliation she is talking about is clearly an example of, is not "Political Correctness." "Real companies with real money" know this. Did you ever bother to read what she wrote, or are you just making up a version of it in your mind?

    10. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by mjwx · · Score: 1

      This wasn't about political correctness, it was about common decency, and Uber's lack thereof.

      You see, this is about political correctness.

      Back in my day, being politically correct was simply called not being a jerk.

      The problem is people have confused the fact that it isn't illegal to be a complete arsehole with the imaginary right to be a complete arsehole. We've enshrined those who are pointlessly offensive, but demonised those who rightfully call them a cunt and tell them to jog off.

      I have a vast collection of racist and sexist jokes, they're good fun because they're just jokes. However I wouldn't use them with people I don't know, this includes loudly in public amongst friends (because shouting lewd jokes out in public places isn't rude or anything... maybe I'm just too old fashioned). Your humour needs to be tailored to your audience, you cant expect an audience to tailor itself to your humour. Offensiveness has its place, used correctly it is very effective but not all people know when and how to use it correctly so they end up with the choice of not being offensive... or just being a complete tit.

      However I digress, political correctness simply means "You've said something I disagree with. I cant rationally rebut it but II still want to act offended". So when you understand the definition of Political Correctness, this is 100% about political correctness.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    11. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The whole idea about political correctness, which was created by the right wing, is to discredit the legitimate civil rights movement.

      Incorrect. Political correctness was actually a term coined by Mao Zedong in his "Little Red Book". So it was actually created by the left. That's not to say that the right wing in the West has never adopted PC ideas though.

    12. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by BradleyUffner · · Score: 2

      no, it's harassment, without scare quotes. The chivalrous thing to do is to keep your hands off your coworkers until you're invited.

      That's a double standard. It sounds like you are saying that only the woman should be allowed to "make the first move" by inviting the man, and that the man is never allowed to initiate anything (since he has to wait to be invited).

      Even if we remove gender from this, under your theory, no could ever initiate anything, since they would have to wait for an invitation, but the invitation its self would be initiating, which can't be done until the other person invites you, and round and round we go.

    13. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by hackertourist · · Score: 1

      I'm not advocating a double standard.
      Let me rephrase: the chivalrous thing to do is to keep your hands off your coworkers until there's clear agreement you both want more.

      Intimate relationships should start with talking, not with one party grabbing the other's ass.

    14. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh please! You people are a bunch of ice cold freaks! The workplace is hostile enough without you getting all triggered and shit when somebody shows a bit of affection.

    15. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The biggest problem is she didn't name the person, that person is just going on to do the same thing elsewhere.

    16. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      She wasn't the only one that happened to, there are several other witnesses. Either they're all lying, or bro-man was an asshole. Since he got fired later, all while being a "stellar performer", I'm going to bet the guy was an asshole.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    17. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      Troll. Don't feed it.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    18. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "It was an easy target. Let's see her try that with a real company with real money"

      They've been PISSING 50 bucks plus every second 24/7/365 for the past year or so. If that's not real money, you must be the richest fuckwit on the planet.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    19. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by Khyber · · Score: 1

      She said VERY PROFESSIONALLY unlike other dumb bitches we've caught making false accusations with some ramshackle story, and the investors themselves had an investigation and fired more than a dozen people over the findings.

      Yea, come back when you've got a lick of common fucking sense.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    20. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Chivalry (gallantry) is stepping in to stop the one inappropriately touching the other when it is not wanted, regardless of gender and sexual orientation and other factors.

      Chivalry isn't dead, you assholes have just failed to evolve to be able to uphold the proper meaning of the word for this century.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    21. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      It's called "civilization". That's where you learn to control base animal emotions in order to improve your living standards and the living standards of the species as a whole.

    22. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      It is possible to ask a woman out on a date before asking for sex. This Uber supervisor was not fired for merely asking for a date.

    23. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Are you sure? That troll is humping my leg as a show of affection, and I think I can get it to stop by throwing down some strips of bacon.

    24. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      A good point. I've said in the past that we're already hiring the smartest women; but since we hire so many dumb men at the same time we're really not going to have equality until we hire dumb women at the same rate.

    25. Re:BAH! Everybody hates Uber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fine, go practice your 'civilization' out in the battlefield and in your prisons where it's needed. Leave the office people alone. They're just having a bit of fun, you silly bitch. You're turning the workplace into a prison camp, or worse, a Catholic elementary school!

  11. Re:Snowflake kills company... by Duhavid · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I would argue she was an asset to the company.

    It is now in the process of growing up a bit.  It may not make it to grown up, but this was a needed kick in the slats.

    --
    emt 377 emt 4
  12. Re: Snowflake kills company... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    People are supposed to be ASSETS for their companies, not liabilities.

    That's the reason their CEO was worthless.

  13. amazing what it takes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So with all the secret monitoring, law breaking, deal breaking, poor treatment of drivers, driver pay scandals, and a few other scandals made public that I'm forgetting and nothing happens...
    1 sexual harassment case though and its like a total nightmare and the ceo steps down... WTF?!

    So basically you can lie cheat and steal all you want, just dont have a "bro culture" and its all good!

    1. Re:amazing what it takes by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      Actually, I think the straw that broke the camel's back was the attention for the post, and then VC's reading gems like this one:

      The ramifications of these political games were significant: projects were abandoned left and right, OKRs were changed multiple times each quarter, nobody knew what our organizational priorities would be one day to the next, and very little ever got done. We all lived under fear that our teams would be dissolved, there would be another re-org, and we'd have to start on yet another new project with an impossible deadline. It was an organization in complete, unrelenting chaos.

      If I had invested a few hundred million dollar in Uber, and seeing that money was spent at alarming rates, signals like this would trigger Defcon 1.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
  14. Re:Sounds like ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also, when did we become a species?

  15. Re:Sounds like ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Although I agree with you that it was an inappropriate comment, I have to wonder if Susan Fowler would have gotten as much attention if she was not a young attractive female? If she was instead older, over weight, with stringy hair and grassy mole on her face, would people have rallied around her, or would just write her off as a stereotypical angry man hating lesbian?

    captcha: displays

  16. Transparent bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    She writes how everyone was gunning for their bosses jobs, and so what does she do? she decides to gun for her bosses job by getting them fired for excessive broness.

  17. And this is news because? by houghi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If Lao Tzu wrote about it, we hardly call this news. We have had many examples of people who made a difference. Even if you do not pay any attention at history, you will know about sports or technics where there are people who made a difference.
    Are we supposed to be in awe, because she was a woman, or what?
    Yes, sometimes 1 person makes a difference. Most of the time they don't.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    1. Re:And this is news because? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      I've been trying to make a difference for 4 years and all I've found is I'm drowned out by children. People talk about the plight of the poor and start attacking the rich instead of proposing solutions--as if they don't care about the poor at all, but rather about attacking someone they hate.

      It's surprisingly-hard to sell a 0.9% marginal reduction of payroll taxes, a 2.5% marginal reduction of corporate income taxes, and a fat boost in individual and household discretionary spending. People find all kinds of ridiculous arguments and generally take you down by volume; I've started to change tack in an attempt to get past this.

      There are plenty of crazy people ranting at pigeons, and nobody pays attention to them. The guy standing in the park telling you how to solve world hunger? It doesn't matter if he's right; nobody's likely to pay attention to him, either. People make bigger promises--FDR, Barack Obama--and they get a cult of personality, along with the reins to go ahead and actually change the world.

      It isn't easy. I think it has a lot to do with luck. You have to be an opportunistic predator, ready to jump at the first chance to make a difference, and equipped with the fangs to take it down before it passes.

    2. Re:And this is news because? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It might have been true for all time that it takes a woman to fix social problems. It took an article by the EA spouse (also a woman) to stop EA abusing the rights of their workers and working them to death.

      When you create a toxic island of bro culture you create an environment that is hostile to everyone. Corporate culture is a strong force which shapes human behavior - to defy it is to be fired and then homeless living on the street. If you can't challenge that behavior then everyone conforms to this toxic behavior and it self validates.

      Bro culture affects both men and women negatively, it's just that we tolerate the exploitation of men more than we tolerate the exploitation of women. Appealing to the feminist platform is a good way to draw positive attention toward yourself - the feminist platform is wealthy, vocal and has center stage. Creating a media feeding frenzy around this is a great way for a few people to make a buck...Susan included.

    3. Re:And this is news because? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Exactly how is reducing corporate taxes going to help the poor champ?

      Record profits have shown that companies wont increase wages or hire more people. So how is increasing those profits going to help anyone.

      Protip: IT WONT. They hire the people they need at the minimum they can get away with paying, and that WILL NOT CHANGE. Claiming otherwise, especially after the fail of trickle down, is confirmation bias.

      Income taxes and corporate taxes should be raised to offset the fact that the taxpayers are having to subsidize the workers with benefits for low income workers. You want me to agree to lowering taxes on businesses? Pay a living wage, when the number of people on the dole decreases we can decrease the tax rate.

    4. Re:And this is news because? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      People talk about the plight of the poor and start attacking the rich instead of proposing solutions--as if they don't care about the poor at all,

      Yeah they don't care about poor people. Ask them when was the last time they complained about homeless people? Someone should fix those problems, but it's not going to be me!

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re:And this is news because? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      It's not that so much as the dialogue. "Look at how much poverty we have! The rich need to pay their fair share!" "How will that help?" "They have too much money!" .... what?

      I'm looking hard at the politics now as I seriously consider addressing the problem.

    6. Re:And this is news because? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I think I would change the outline of your page to something like this:

      1) How this will benefit me (roughly, since every reader is a different 'me')
      2) What problem in particular creates a need for this solution (for society in general, for particular unfortunate individuals etc)
      3) How much it will cost me
      4) Details on how to pay for it

      You don't need to make a separate heading for each one of those, but if you pay attention to the structure, I think it will be a lot more readable.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    7. Re:And this is news because? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Maybe. I'm not sure. You have to realize most of the readership in a political campaign have short attention spans and existing bias. What you describe works for people who are looking to educate themselves; for people who need their emotional basis or their beliefs changed, you need something different.

      Persuasion when you need to spread an idea generally requires short, powerful arguments. You can't just sit down and start describing something in a technical sense, or explaining all the reasons why something is good; it will take forever, and you can't open up with why a thing is good for a particular person. You need to open up with something that generates interest, and you need to close concerns in ways which have already shoved this new information down someone's throat before they can open their mouth and protest that they think it won't work for $reasons.

      The welfare troll problem is one I'm trying to work out ATM. I could write a small dissertation about poverty families and the aid they receive. Welfare trolls will like to point out that welfare households receive like $35,000 or $58,000 in aid and you propose some ~$8k (i.e. not enough); and then you get to spend 40 minutes making a long, boring argument nobody cares about, describing how much of that aid is State-level services, how the majority of that aid is for education and medical care that you don't touch, how the childcare component is provided for low-income families separate from the proposed Social Security plan, how the replaced Federal aid is almost exactly the same size as the proposed Social Security, and how approximately nobody actually receives all that aid anyway. You need facts and figures to back this up. Drawing the tables out, explaining it, and reasoning through it... you're dealing with an opponent who wants to be right, not someone who wants to self-educate.

      You need to open that argument yourself, and you need to do it with a single statement that slams all of that information straight into their faces. This is why graphical representations are so powerful, and why they come first.

      When you're giving a speech, you use less information, frequently. You use more words, you reiterate (tell them what you're going to tell them; tell them; tell them what you told them), and you try to control it to meet the attention span of your listeners. They only need to passively listen, so it's easier, and more-tolerable; active reading of some pages and pages of text is a nightmare. Besides being a different venue, speeches generally don't have pictures. When they do, we call them "presentations", and load up more technical data.

      The interesting thing about this universal social security is it benefits everyone due to a reduction in effective tax rate everywhere. It solves many problems in our welfare system. It provides a stabilizing force that holds up people of all classes through recessions (one coming up around the beginning of 2018!) and other adverse financial events (losing your job would be bad, mmkay?). Everyone is somehow conditioned to think it's got to cost someone something; nobody wants to sit down and think about the entire frigging government budget, tax systems, and the like. People don't leave high school with economics and finance degrees.

      So for an informative piece for people who have already become interested, the outline you provide might be useful. For people who aren't willing to devote significant time to reading, thinking, and responding to long and complicated explanations, you answer these questions by displaying the system in ways that make such things self-evident. Notice the graphics all display a reduction in effective taxes, answering #1 and #3. The graphics on individual, payroll, and corporate profit taxes answer #4. #2 is more-difficult, and also less-relevant: by the time you've gotten through the other things, the reader is now interested, and has the attention span to read about why--about all the benefits of such a plan, be

    8. Re:And this is news because? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Maybe. I'm not sure. You have to realize most of the readership in a political campaign have short attention spans and existing bias. What you describe works for people who are looking to educate themselves; for people who need their emotional basis or their beliefs changed, you need something different.

      If you want to make an emotional impact, start with How will this benefit me. Really. Your page is hard to understand because of the organization difficulties. Your writing (in general) is hard to understand because you don't use "topic sentence" and "supporting sentence" method of organization.

      And of course a small group of motivated people can change the world: indeed, it's the only thing that ever has!

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    9. Re:And this is news because? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      True, the paragraph-level writing structure needs some work. I'm thinking more in terms of the strategic structure. A 250,000-page essay is going to be failure no matter how well-organized.

  18. Same story... by SharpFang · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    On my first official day rotating on the team, my new manager sent me a string of messages over company chat. He was in an open relationship, he said, and his girlfriend was having an easy time finding new partners but he wasn't. He was trying to stay out of trouble at work, he said, but he couldn't help getting in trouble, because he was looking for women to have sex with. It was clear that he was trying to get me to have sex with him, and it was so clearly out of line that I immediately took screenshots of these chat messages and reported him to HR.

    No, simple "not interested" was insufficient.

    Uber was a pretty good-sized company at that time, and I had pretty standard expectations of how they would handle situations like this. I expected that I would report him to HR, they would handle the situation appropriately, and then life would go on

    In other words: "I expected they would fire him and promote me to his position."

    But he was a "stellar performer", bringing a lot of money in, and she was a noob on first day in the team, fresh out of training. So that didn't happen.

    And it just couldn't stand. After all, a corporation can't prioritize efficient employees and profit over entitled employees and their peace of mind...

    So the shitstorm began, and... now HR will think twice before employing a female engineer.

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    1. Re:Same story... by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 1

      No, simple "not interested" was insufficient.

      That's usually how it works, with guys like that. The world would be a much better place if "bros" didn't take the word No to mean "your penis is tiny".

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    2. Re:Same story... by DogDude · · Score: 1

      No, simple "not interested" was insufficient.

      Sweet Jesus, you wouldn't work for our company *ever*. What kind of shithole employs you? Anybody?

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    3. Re:Same story... by Kierthos · · Score: 1

      I'd like to think that after this (the CEO ouster, etc.) they'd think twice about retaining employees who sexual harass co-workers.

      --
      Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
    4. Re:Same story... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      That manager simply should reconsider if having 'an open relationship' is the right thing for him.
      And using company chat, that isprobably recorded, to hook up is a bit embarassing anyway.
      I definitely would not like it if a coworker is sitting with me at my place and sees 'dirty chat' in my messanger 'by accident'.
      On the other hand again: We europeans don't get why america is so prude that approaching one you like at work is considered harmful. In Germany abiut 30% of the married couples meet at work ... if we had laws/rulings like in the US, they never had married,

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    5. Re:Same story... by SharpFang · · Score: 1

      Well, probably. If I had to walk on egg shells about what and how I say, I definitely wouldn't want to work at your company. The one I work at - there are no power games, no backstabbing, no snitching, no underhanded tactics, if you screw up you'll get an earful, but if the customer fucked up, you may feel safe the boss won't try to throw you under the bus to retain the business relationship. And if you tell a rude joke, nobody gets offended because we don't hire whiny assholes.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    6. Re:Same story... by EndlessNameless · · Score: 1

      No, simple "not interested" was insufficient.

      A manager should not be hitting on his subordinates in a professional setting. That applies even more on the first day when the people don't even know each other.

      And then there's the unwarranted details about his sex life, which can earn disciplinary action regardless of supervisor/subordinate status.

      In most places, that's an automatic trip to HR. Where I work, it's likely an immediate termination unless his manager wants to fight for him.

      In other words: "I expected they would fire him and promote me to his position."

      I see you saying that. I don't see her or anyone else saying it.

      The standard expectation is that the offender will be educated by HR on what constitutes appropriate behavior.

      Repeated or egregious violations may result in termination, but only the strictest employers will terminate on the first offense. Mine probably would, but I expect most places would just make him knock it off.

      So the shitstorm began, and... now HR will think twice before employing a female engineer.

      Nope. Not at all.

      I doubt this incident will change many minds. The places that want to be clean-cut and professional will remain so, and the places that accept locker room behavior or "bar talk" will continue to do.

      The places that break the law and allow illegal sexual harassment will simply stop doing that.

      --

      ---
      According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
    7. Re:Same story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There certainly is a Puritanical attitude to relationships that still exists in the US.

      However, I think in this case even Europeans would classify this as harassment. She should only have had to say "no" once. My expectation is that most Europeans (or anyone with a shred of decency, really) would maturely accept "no" as an answer and drop it.

    8. Re:Same story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, simple "not interested" was insufficient.

      Christ, it's hardly inviting someone to join the office 5-a-side football group!

    9. Re:Same story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you think not talking to a new person on their first day about your open marriage and how you can't stop yourself from chasing women at work is "walking on eggshells"?

      You sound a treat.

    10. Re:Same story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The issue is that it was her manager, so, you know, power differential and the ability to massively impact the trajectory of her time at the office.

      It also indicated that he viewed the women he works with as targets of sexual conquest rather than people deserving of respect.

      It also indicated that he had phenomenally bad judgement.

      Maybe you europeans don't care about things like the potential for coercion, treating one another with respect, or exercising good judgement, but that seems kind of weird.

      There is a world of difference between approaching people respectfully and appropriately and being an absolute shitheel; this manager was the latter, and you're probably thinking of the former.

    11. Re:Same story... by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      I work in The Netherlands and German culture is about the same, in respectable companies. That manager would have been in quite serious trouble in almost any company I have ever worked for, and as consultant I worked at quite a few.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
  19. Re:Snowflake kills company... by jellomizer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    In terms of accounting employees are both. Calling someone who is suffering from an injustice a snowflake is just ignoring the problem. The gender equality in tech is a big problem. These companies are scaring off 50% of the potential workforce due to a bad environment.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  20. Yeah... you can make a "difference"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... if you say the politically correct things, that is. Which means no change whatsoever from the current agenda by the "powers that be", to be sufficiently cryptic as to stand the slightest chance of getting one upvote or however the hell these scores are calculated.

  21. She's out on her own. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It looks as though she's not going to be applying for jobs anytime soon.

    I'm represented by Verve and InkWell. And it looks like she's doing the public speaking circuit.

    But, I have to agree with the GP, she's not going be hired by anyone ever. The HR software used these days will catch it and her application would be deleted. If she actually got a response, it'd be the lame "You don't have the skills." excuse.

    1. Re:She's out on her own. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm represented by Verve and InkWell. [susanjfowler.com] And it looks like she's doing the public speaking circuit.

      She's an author. I know this is shocking for some people on Slashdot, but she has a personal brand that exists independently of her tech job.

      But, I have to agree with the GP, she's not going be hired by anyone ever.

      According to her blog post, she left Uber and works at Stripe.

      The HR software used these days will catch it and her application would be deleted.

      I was out of work for two years, underemployed for six months, and filed for chapter seven bankruptcy in 2011. During that time I was told repeatedly by recruiters that I was "unemployable." The day after my bankruptcy got finalized, I had a new full-time job. The opinions of recruiters and HR software are overrated.

    2. Re: She's out on her own. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2

      As an aging fat white male, you have no power, so they can fire your ass easily if you misbehave.

      I'm more likely get someone else fired for misbehaving because I document everything. Documentation is powerful.

    3. Re:She's out on her own. by Killall+-9+Bash · · Score: 0, Troll

      She's fucking toxic. Read her blog post: TL;DR-- Aside from one instance of mild sexual harassment (and I call it "mild" because things were implied instead of said, and there weren't any threats, no touching, etc.), she's complaining about standard workplace bullshit.

      Calling this "Bro" culture is asinine feminazi bullshit. I suspect she sucks at programming, but I don't feel like buying her book to find out. I know the UBER app AND website are a barely functioning SHITSHOW.

      --
      "Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
    4. Re:She's out on her own. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She's an author. I know this is shocking for some people on Slashdot, but she has a personal brand that exists independently of her tech job.

      What's funny is, her "personal brand" as an author is all about microservices - which is exactly what her engineering job involves, so no, her personal brand does not "exist independently of her tech job." The stuff she writes about is absolutely related to her tech job.

      You, and your pathetic "ebooks" (read: juvenile sex & power fantasies) are not in the same league as Susan Fowler, creimer. You're not even in the same ballpark. You're not even in the same CITY. You're not even in the same fucking GALAXY. Please don't try to ride her coattails by drawing parallels between what you THINK you know about her, and yourself.

      Given that, it's understandable that you'd try to distance your "author" and "tech drone" brands, as each could only serve to weaken and undermine the other. Your rantings on a tech site as a "infosec" guy make you look like a buffoon, and display a shocking lack of writing ability. Your writing that you try to sell for money also makes you look like a buffoon, and display a shocking lack of writing ability, as well, and anybody who knows that your actual job is "tech support dispatcher" would laugh themselves into unconsciousness to find themselves plunged into an immature neckbeard's fantasy world.

      From my (admittedly brief) dealings with her, I wouldn't have any qualms about hiring her, or giving the thumbs up on hiring her at any company I work for. Having met and talked to her in person in a professional capacity, as well as read her books & some of her blog writing, she's also whip-smart and a terrifically capable engineer. From my altogether too frequent dealings with you, I would quit any company that considered hiring you because it's doomed, and I would advise anybody anywhere to steer clear of you as well. You are a buffoon, and a fraudulent blow-hard, who could not engineer his way out of a wet paper bag, even armed with a skill knife and a pair of scissors.

    5. Re:She's out on her own. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are a buffoon, and a fraudulent blow-hard, who could not engineer his way out of a wet paper bag, even armed with a skill knife and a pair of scissors.

      Not sure why everyone keeps mistaking me for an engineer. Not everyone in IT is in engineering or management.

    6. Re:She's out on her own. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know if he's THAT bad. He's obviously suffered tremendously in his childhood, and he's had to create many survival mental processes to get just where he is today. These mechanisms were useful once, but some aspects of them are dysfunctional now.

      He wildly over-reacts to the slightest criticism because he has zero self-esteem.

    7. Re:She's out on her own. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      engineer: (verb) "design and build (a machine or structure)."

      I didn't say you were "an engineer," I said you couldn't "engineer your way out of a wet paper bag."

      Now go fraudulently bill more hours to your employer for doing janitorial work.

    8. Re:She's out on her own. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is engineering, software development (if considered separate from engineering), management, and IT monkey-drones.

      You are a monkey-drone who acts like he is something far bigger and better than he really is. We can all see through that.

      I am a different AC. I just wanted to drop a line too.

    9. Re:She's out on her own. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2

      Now go fraudulently bill more hours to your employer for doing janitorial work.

      Someone has to clean up after the engineers. I once spent a week at Google taking out the trash after the network engineers got finished building out a data center.

    10. Re:She's out on her own. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      He wildly over-reacts to the slightest criticism because he has zero self-esteem.

      ROFL

    11. Re:She's out on her own. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      You are a monkey-drone who acts like he is something far bigger and better than he really is.

      That's a problem because...?

    12. Re:She's out on her own. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It"s not a troll if it's true. -1: True

    13. Re:She's out on her own. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone has to clean up after the engineers. I once spent a week at Google taking out the trash after the network engineers got finished building out a data center.

      Yes, those people are called "janitorial staff." And if they work really hard, they can someday aspire to be desktop monkey dispatchers.

    14. Re:She's out on her own. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Yes, those people are called "janitorial staff."

      The janitorial staff are the people who pick up the cardboard boxes, garbage bags and waste baskets left out in the hallway. They don't do port mapping, pulling decommissioned servers or removing 100' network cables from the overhead tray because 10' cables weren't available.

    15. Re:She's out on her own. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you said you are "taking out the trash after the network engineers". What does that have to do with "port mapping", for example?

      Just another example of your difficult-to-follow logic.

      You say A, someone replies to A, then you reply something completely off-the-wall.

      Why do you do that? I understand that maybe as a kid that served to deflect your parent's anger, but you're 47 now.

    16. Re:She's out on her own. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Why do you do that?

      You want to insult me? Fine. I reserve the right to drive you nuts — or ignore you.

    17. Re:She's out on her own. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I reserve the right to drive you nuts"

      Isn't that abuse? And a violation of this site's TOS? As well as a violation of your own "personal brand"?

    18. Re:She's out on her own. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2

      Isn't that abuse? And a violation of this site's TOS?

      Complain to management.

      As well as a violation of your own "personal brand"?

      In what way?

    19. Re:She's out on her own. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, your personal brand includes the fact that you abuse other users of sites you frequent?

    20. Re:She's out on her own. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      So, your personal brand includes the fact that you abuse other users of sites you frequent?

      That you think Slashdot matters in the real world is cute.

    21. Re:She's out on her own. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It seemed to matter enough to complain to the FBI about some imaginary revenge? And for making imaginary ad revenue?

    22. Re:She's out on her own. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      It seemed to matter enough to complain to the FBI about some imaginary revenge?

      I explained this yesterday. I'm not going to explain it again.

      And for making imaginary ad revenue?

      All the way to the bank.

    23. Re:She's out on her own. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I explained this yesterday. I'm not going to explain it again.

      When & where did you "explain it"? What I heard was a bunch of trumped-up horseshit from you yesterday:

      "Oh because somebody posted my name next to a picture of two fat gay dudes getting it on, I'm a victim of revenge porn."

      No, you're not.

      "Oh, because somebody put a picture of two fat gay dudes getting it on that look somewhat like me on the internet, they're violating my copyrights."

      No, they're not.

      NEITHER of the complaints you claim you sent to the FBI would stand up for a second in court, and I expect by now they've deleted your message as an unsophisticated troll, after passing the report around the office so everybody could get a look at the latest funny message from a professional "victim."

      All the way to the bank.

      Creimer, I'll make you a deal: I'm going to go write a couple short stories and post them on Amazon. I'll let you know when I post them, and then I'll let you know when I've sold more than $1000 worth of stories. If I reach that goal within 6 months of starting to sell my stories, will you agree to cancel your Slashdot account and NEVER come back?

    24. Re: She's out on her own. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right on

  22. Yes, assuming she was right of course by sciengin · · Score: 2, Informative

    Because if it turns out that what she said was not truthful, that would only be another example of SJW-witchhunts of which we have had way too many in the past decade.

    No, I am not a friend of Uber at all. While they may shake up (positively) the encrusted taxi market in some countries, in others they have shown that they are unable to play by the rules while still making money. Like in Germany.

    1. Re:Yes, assuming she was right of course by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, the board of the company certainly thinks she was being truthful, as did the independent investigation that they commissioned.

    2. Re:Yes, assuming she was right of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah more SIW (Social Injustice Warrior) ranting. Beauty.

    3. Re:Yes, assuming she was right of course by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Why would she lie about it? Even if she wins, many people will be reluctant to hire her now. The legal challenge is a huge financial risk, especially if she doesn't have really concrete evidence.

      Unless you actually believe in those mythical raving SJWs, and from her writings she doesn't seem to be that way at all, failing to use common feminist terminology that is normally associated with those mythical beings, it doesn't make sense to do this on anything other than solid principal. That's why all the other women she says told her it was normal didn't speak up - maybe they couldn't afford to lose a job, maybe they couldn't risk being unemployable or losing a large and expensive lawsuit.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:Yes, assuming she was right of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which injustice, exactly?

    5. Re:Yes, assuming she was right of course by avandesande · · Score: 1

      While I am all for equal rights for men and women it boggles me that there are those in denial that believe that there aren't (a minority) of men out there that behave this way. Trying to protect this kind of thing is counterproductive for the decent majority.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
  23. To be replaced by TOXIC SJW culture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And round it goes...

    1. Re:To be replaced by TOXIC SJW culture. by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Really? Are you okay with a management person hitting on and otherwise making uncomfortable one of your coworkers with whom you might actually depend on and have a good working relationship?

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
  24. Re:Snowflake kills company... by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2, Insightful

    She already works at Stripe and would be happily hired by any company that isn't run by a bunch of sexual predators! Suck it, regressives! Hahahahaha!

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  25. What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 0, Troll

    It was clear from the moment you read the 3,000-word post by former engineer Susan Fowler about her time at the car-hailing company that nothing was going to be the same.

    Mostly what it made clear to me was that I wouldn't want to be in the same company as her, let alone in the same room.

    1. Re:What it made clear to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry if you can't be bothered to be a decent human being... actually not sorry

    2. Re:What it made clear to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't want to be in the same company as her, let alone in the same room.
      Because???

      She stood for herself?

      She pointed out problems?

      Or just because she was a she?

    3. Re:What it made clear to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As opposed to being a white guy born without a penis? A born eunuch?

    4. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      Why? Simple: because I don't want to run the risk that she accuses me of sexual harassment. Evidently, the burden of proof is very low, and there is no recourse for the accused.

    5. Re:What it made clear to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because he wouldn't be able to utilize his large catalog of "That's what she said" jokes.

    6. Re: What it made clear to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh my. Well, I've learned to live with the disapproval of young heterosexual males like you long ago.

    7. Re: What it made clear to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's pretty clear that in this case, her accusations were true. Why does that scare you?

    8. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      So because the people of Salem executed a bunch of witches, there must have been witches in Salem? Sorry, I have no basis on which to judge the truth of her allegations.

      And it doesn't matter anyway. I consider the professional response to a bad working environment to quit, not to file lawsuits or write revenge posts. Even if her allegations are true, she is not the kind of person I would want to work with.

    9. Re: What it made clear to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, I have no basis on which to judge the truth of her allegations.

      Based on your earlier assumption that she would accuse you of sexual harassment, it's obvious that you think she's lying.

      And apparently in your worldview, calmly writing about things that happened is called 'revenge'. Sad.

    10. Re: What it made clear to me by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Well if you're running the risk of a harassment complaint then you're pulling the kind of shit like proposition female subordinates on day 1. I dare say then she wouldn't want to work with you either.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    11. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      Based on your earlier assumption that she would accuse you of sexual harassment, it's obvious that you think she's lying.

      Given concepts like microaggressions and white male privilege, she may well think she is telling the truth even though she isn't. I really don't care.

      She has the power to destroy men simply with a word, making her more dangerous than someone pointing a loaded gun at me. And she is bound to despise me for my political views. Hence, I consider her unsafe to be around.

      She wanted power? She got it. Now she has to deal with the consequences.

      And apparently in your worldview, calmly writing about things that happened is called 'revenge'. Sad.

      Yes, in my worldview, it is called that. I also call it profoundly stupid, because many men will not want to work with her for the same reason I don't.

    12. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      Well if you're running the risk of a harassment complaint then you're pulling the kind of shit like proposition female subordinates on day 1

      Not bloody likely, since she lacks a functioning penis, testicles, and a beard, attributes I consider essential for any sort of proposition. Nor would I proposition a Hillary voter or a progressive, two attributes she likely has and that I find quite ugly.

      I dare say then she wouldn't want to work with you either.

      Yet, instead of quietly leaving "toxic bro companies" like the rest of us do, she apparently insists that every company under the sun conforms to her preferences

    13. Re: What it made clear to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sheesh - how many assumptions can you make about one person that you don't know? And it looks like most of your assumptions are based on that fact the she is a she.

      You should have picked that option up near the top of the thread - would've saved some time.

    14. Re:What it made clear to me by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      And she thanks you for that.

    15. Re: What it made clear to me by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      You're comparing Uber to the Puritans? That's a new view of the story, I must say.

    16. Re: What it made clear to me by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Not bloody likely, since she lacks a functioning penis,

      You see where I said "shit like hitting on female subordinates on day 1", well guess what bucko, hitting on male subordinates on day 1 is very much shit like hitting on female ones. The fact that you don't really seem to understand what is poor behaviour means that maybe you're right: you would risk complaints from co-workers at any reasonable company.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    17. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      You're comparing Uber to the Puritans? That's a new view of the story, I must say.

      No, I'm comparing social justice warriors to the Puritans.

    18. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      The fact that you don't really seem to understand what is poor behaviour

      Well, we probably have wildly different ideas of what constitutes "poor behavior". The point is everybody at times believes that someone "behaved poorly" towards them. If you write tell-all blog posts about it, you have to accept that people will avoid you. Ditto if you start lawsuits. No amount of self-righteous indignation is going to change that.

      You see where I said "shit like hitting on female subordinates on day 1", well guess what bucko, hitting on male subordinates on day 1 is very much shit like hitting on female ones.

      I'm sorry you seem to be a little unfamiliar with gay reality. Gay men learn from childhood on to expect getting fired and getting physically abused if we "hit on" anybody outside a few safe environments. For gay men, "hitting on people at work" is not just "poor behavior", it's dangerous, so we are conditioned from childhood on not to do it. Given the ratio of straight to gay men, it's also pretty pointless. Glad I could clear that up for you.

    19. Re:What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      And she thanks you for that.

      See, that's the spirit: let people work for the kinds of companies they feel comfortable in and with the kinds of people they feel comfortable with.

      If only that view became more widespread among social justice activists.

    20. Re: What it made clear to me by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      She claimed, apparently with evidence, that her boss hit on her over company chat on her first day. If you don't trust yourself to avoid doing things like that, get therapy.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    21. Re: What it made clear to me by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      The point is everybody at times believes that someone "behaved poorly" towards them. If you write tell-all blog posts about it, you have to accept that people will avoid you.

      Some people, sure. But it transpires that the people doing the avoiding are precisely the ones that many people would want doing the avoiding. Given she is gainfully employed and became so very rapidly means that the opinions of the pearl-clutching snowflakes really doesn't seem to impact much in the real world.

      I'm sorry you seem to be a little unfamiliar with gay reality. Gay men learn from childhood on to expect getting fired and getting physically abused if we "hit on" anybody outside a few safe environments.

      So what's your point then, apart from simply trying to sound clever and failing? Would you or would you not hit on subordinates on day 1? If not, they you're making a wretched fuss about nothing because you're not doing that kind of thing at any rate which gets people reported to HR.

      Look it's simple: do skeezy shit, get reported. If you can steer clear then you're fine. If you read the list of behaviours she wrote about and worry you might get reported then congratulations, you're doing skeezy shit and deserve to be reported. If you're not then you're being way, way oversensitive.

      Glad I could clear that up for you.

      The only thing you made clear is that you're trying to avoid the point I made by picking nits that don't exist.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    22. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      She claimed, apparently with evidence, that her boss hit on her over company chat on her first day.

      Yes, and she obviously was unable to handle the situation professionally. It's toxic, immature, millennial femininity running smack into toxic, immature, millennial masculinity. It's what San Francisco, Berkeley, and companies like Uber are all about. Hand me the popcorn.

    23. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      Look it's simple: do skeezy shit, get reported.

      Yes, that's quite simple... if you're an immature millennial who thinks that professional life still works like high school. Obviously, both Fowler and her bosses are those kinds of people.

      But it transpires that the people doing the avoiding are precisely the ones that many people would want doing the avoiding.

      True: adult professionals avoid places like Uber, and immature kids who work at places like Uber and Stripe wouldn't cut it in a professional, adult environment.

    24. Re: What it made clear to me by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Yes, that's quite simple... if you're an immature millennial who thinks that professional life still works like high school. Obviously, both Fowler and her bosses are those kinds of people.

      So what you are saying is that professional life does work in the sort of way you claim high school works, but I'm an immature millennial for not ignoring that? Whut.

      True: adult professionals avoid places like Uber, and immature kids who work at places like Uber and Stripe wouldn't cut it in a professional, adult environment.

      Quite: they'd get their asses fired much quicker for that sort of harrassy behaviour. So yeah, if you're worried about complaints then pretty much your only choice is to work somewhere immature like Uber that routinely ignores them.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    25. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      So yeah, if you're worried about complaints then pretty much your only choice is to work somewhere immature like Uber that routinely ignores them.

      Well, and Uber is where Fowler chose to work, QED.

    26. Re: What it made clear to me by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      You do have the most incredible double standards. You say "QED" as if she knew what she was getting into, but on the other hand refuse to believe anything any woman says ever that things might be bad.

      So which is it? Are the women telling the truth so Fowler knew, or are women all liars and so Fowler didn't know?

      Can't have it both ways :)

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    27. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      You say "QED" as if she knew what she was getting into

      How could she not know? Uber had been repeatedly accused of, and even sued for, sexual harassment before she started working there.

      but on the other hand refuse to believe anything any woman says ever that things might be bad

      Of course I believe the women: men made unwanted sexual advances towards them and the women reacted to it in typically female ways. And then white knight heterosexual males like you ride in defense of the women. It's all so predictable, hormone driven, and immature. You all need to grow up.

    28. Re: What it made clear to me by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Right so your point is that (a) the women are telling the truth and (b) you're afraid they'll acccuse you. You are literally copping to being a harasser.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    29. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      Right so your point is that (a) the women are telling the truth and (b) you're afraid they'll acccuse you. You are literally copping to being a harasser.

      No, what I am afraid of people will lob around suspicions of me being a harasser with zero evidence, merely based on differing political views and disapproval of the behavior of the women. Just like you are doing.

      Thanks for demonstrating so nicely what we are talking about. That is why people with your kinds of political views are best avoided, whether you have a dick or not.

    30. Re: What it made clear to me by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      No, what I am afraid of people will lob around suspicions of me being a harasser with zero evidence, merely based on differing political views and disapproval of the behavior of the women. Just like you are doing.

      Except there's plenty of evidence for Fowler's accusations. And you're here on a story about a claim with tons of evidence clutching your pearls over the idea that you too might have accusations made against you and lose your job.

      So either your post is utterly nonsensical and you've just picked a random topic to rant on or you're in the same ituation about uber and worried you might have to face the consequences.

      So sure, if you concede that your point has nothing to do with the story, then I'll retract my accusation.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    31. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      Except there's plenty of evidence for Fowler's accusations. ... So either your post is utterly nonsensical

      You reason as if there were a bad bunch of men and if you only punish and ostracize them enough then things will be alright for women. It won't, any more than affordable housing programs in Silicon Valley make housing affordable, or high taxes in San Francisco reduce income inequality, or inner city gun control reduces homicide rates, or Planned Parenthood reduces single parenthood.

      that you too might have accusations made against you and lose your job.

      Like anybody with skills, I don't worry about losing my job. I worry about wasting my time and effort on a company that spirals down the social justice drain because the men can't keep it in their pants and the women form their mean girl cliques.

    32. Re: What it made clear to me by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      You reason as if ...

      I see you've reached the "inventing shit" stage of the argument. Interesting that you adopted this tactic across the board. So, no, I'm not arguing about that. No I don't think it will fix those unrelated problems. But giving up in a huff because you can't solve all problems at once is silly.

      I worry about wasting my time and effort on a company that spirals down the social justice drain because the men can't keep it in their pants and the women form their mean girl cliques.

      So basically, this woman made some now pretty substantiated complaints about Uber but now you're complaining about her on her because according to you, she's formed a mean girl clique. Bro, I gotta say it, you seem to have a real problem with women.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    33. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      So basically, this woman made some now pretty substantiated complaints about Uber but now you're complaining about her on her because according to you, she's formed a mean girl clique

      There is no "now" about it: I have been clear that I find complaining about your prior employer in a public blog unprofessional.

      Bro, I gotta say it, you seem to have a real problem with women.

      It has nothing to do with gender. I find you as unprofessional as Fowler since you take the same stupid political positions.

    34. Re: What it made clear to me by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      There is no "now" about it: I have been clear that I find complaining about your prior employer in a public blog unprofessional.

      But your main complaint is that you don't want to be on the recieving end. And you're saying this complaint where the complaint has good evidence backing it up.

      The implication is very much that you're worried about people making justified complaints about you because you won't concede that your point is more or less irrelevant.

      It has nothing to do with gender.

      So you claim.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    35. Re: What it made clear to me by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      It would appear that the toxic, immature, masculinity came first. I haven't seen toxic and immature femininity established yet, although I could have overlooked it. Claiming about sexual harassment that actually exists is mature and professional. The professional way to handle that situation is to go to HR, and externally if that fails.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    36. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      But your main complaint is that you don't want to be on the recieving end. And you're saying this complaint where the complaint has good evidence backing it up.

      No, my main point is that I don't want to work with these people, men or women, because they are behaving like immature children, have poor judgment, and are unable to handle conflict maturely. And there is indeed good evidence to back that up.

    37. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      It would appear that the toxic, immature, masculinity came first. I haven't seen toxic and immature femininity established yet

      Neither came first, they simply are part of mammalian biology. Furthermore, the progressive approach seems to be to take biologically female behaviors (like cooperation, risk avoidance, conflict avoidance, negotiation) as the norm and force men to conform, which simply isn't going to work.

    38. Re: What it made clear to me by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Cooperation, conflict avoidance, and negotiation have been part of common culture essentially forever, at least within the band. (We seem to have been evolved to function in groups of roughly 150, and the members have to work together harmoniously.) That's neither male nor female.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    39. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      Cooperation, conflict avoidance, and negotiation have been part of common culture essentially forever, at least within the band.

      Yes, part of. But aggression, hierarchy, and conflict have also been part of common culture essentially forever. They are both necessary. Societies primarily based on cooperation, conflict avoidance, and negotiation can't survive, any more than societies primarily based on aggression, hierarchy, and conflict.

      That's neither male nor female.

      Obviously, individuals of either sex are usually capable of all these behaviors. Nevertheless, some of these behaviors are typically male, others typically female, and that's rooted in biology.

    40. Re: What it made clear to me by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure about aggression, hierarchy, and conflict for people in relatively isolated groups of 150 or fewer. Such a group would have real problems with bullies or too much conflict. Aggression will happen between such groups, if they collide, and it happens when groupings exceed 150 by enough.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    41. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure about aggression, hierarchy, and conflict for people in relatively isolated groups of 150 or fewer. Such a group would have real problems with bullies or too much conflict.

      Using aggression, hierarchy, and conflict doesn't mean physical violence or bullying, it means that people form stable hierarchies and resolve problems quickly and efficiently. Mechanisms like cooperation, negotiation, and conflict-avoidance seem positive, but can be very harmful when they are turned towards undermining the group goals in search of individual gain, which is often how they are used.

      The confusion you exhibit between aggression/conflict and violence/bullying is really indicative of the root of the problem. Rather than channeling male traits like aggression and conflict-seeking towards something positive, these days, we are just trying to suppress them. I think the dominance of the educational system by women is partly responsible. In any case, it's just not going to work.

      Male aggressiveness, conflict-seeking, dominance hierarchies, and sexuality are an essential part of human nature, just like their female counterparts, and trying to repress or eliminate them is simply not going to work. And that also means that typical men and typical women are not just interchangeable cogs in a social machine, it means that there will be male dominated parts of society and female dominated parts of society.

    42. Re: What it made clear to me by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I'm not at all convinced that we had stable hierarchies in small bands, and such bands did resolve problems sufficiently quickly (or they died; there's really not that much room for major mistakes in a band that size). I need to do more reading on it. Hierarchies do form with larger groups. Stable hierarchies can be good or bad, and can be better or worse at rapid efficient problem-solving than a looser organization. The more successful modern armies, which are poster children for stable hierarchies, emphasize decision-making and problem-solving at low levels in the hierarchy.

      I was responding to your claims that behaviors have been suppressed. I haven't seen where aggression and conflict and hierarchies are suppressed, other than their more physical forms. I have worked primarily in smaller businesses, where people aggressively pursue goals, there's conflicts that are necessary for efficiency and managed to not get destructive, and hierarchies. Currently, I have four or five direct superiors, depending on how a new leadership position shakes out.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    43. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      I'm not at all convinced that we had stable hierarchies in small bands,

      And I didn't say that we had permanent stable hierarchies in small bands.

      I have worked primarily in smaller businesses, where people aggressively pursue goals, there's conflicts that are necessary for efficiency and managed to not get destructive, and hierarchies.

      You have veered from interaction styles and behaviors to ways of pursuing goals. In any case, it's likely that you work in a male-dominated business, don't you?

      I was responding to your claims that behaviors have been suppressed.

      I didn't say that they "have been suppressed", I am saying that feminists and progressives are complaining that they are not being suppressed more and are arguing for organizing business, politics, and society more on cooperative, non-aggressive, non-hierarchical interactions.

      Coming back to the origin of this thread, if a VC were to ask me for a blowjob in return for funding (I should be so lucky), I might laugh, I might take him up on his offer, or I might slap him in the face and walk out. Six months later, I would barely remember or care no matter which choice I made. That's typically male behavior.

      I wouldn't gang up on him with a bunch of other "victims" months or years later and turn this into a public shaming; that's a typically female behavior (cooperation, conflict-avoidance, non-aggression), and it's ineffective in changing male behavior, in addition to being unprofessional and harmful to the business.

      Which is why, as I said, I wouldn't want to work with either the men or the women involved in these incidents.

    44. Re: What it made clear to me by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      You're claiming that certain things are inherent to people, and I'm pointing out that, for most of our evolutionary life, we didn't do those things much if at all.

      Coming back to the origin of this thread, if a VC were to ask me for a blowjob in return for funding (I should be so lucky), I might laugh, I might take him up on his offer, or I might slap him in the face and walk out. Six months later, I would barely remember or care no matter which choice I made. That's typically male behavior.

      You would remember if the VC denied funding specifically because you didn't blow him. I'd guess that most straight men would be unhappy about feeling forced into giving a blow job, and so if you're part of the majority you would remember and resent the blow job. It's never happened to me, and I've never observed it, despite working in a male-dominated profession all my life. I've had the occasional "suck my dick" response in private life, but that was obviously never even intended as an invitation, just ordinary rudeness.

      I wouldn't gang up on him with a bunch of other "victims" months or years later and turn this into a public shaming; that's a typically female behavior (cooperation, conflict-avoidance, non-aggression), and it's ineffective in changing male behavior, in addition to being unprofessional and harmful to the business.

      What else are they to do? One entrepeneur saying things about one venture capitalist is going to be scoffed at at best. It is necessary to amass other witnesses. That's cooperation in reaching a goal, forcing conflict at the right time, and aggression, and that's standard practice in an army. Armies are not organized and trained on the lines of typical female behavior that isn't also typical male behavior.

      A venture capitalist is entrusted with a lot of other people's money to invest, and so asking for any special personal treatment before handing out money is unprofessional to begin with. It's also difficult to find VCs who do that without complaints from the people getting the inappropriate requests, and the business environment tends to suppress complaints. Unfortunately, I don't know of any more professional way to deal with this unprofessional behavior. Harmful to what business? If the VC business is investing in companies for reasons other than that they look like good prospects, that's harmful to the VC business, and it's good to get it stopped. Push hard enough at such unprofessional behavior, and it will have an effect. MADD made drunk driving a lot less socially acceptable, to give an example.

      I'm just fine working with women who will turn on me if I ask for sex from a position of power, because I'm not going to do that.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    45. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      I'd guess that most straight men would be unhappy about feeling forced into giving a blow job

      Nobody is "forced" to do anything. If a VC asks me to give him a blowjob, he is telling me first and foremost "your proposal is so mediocre/bad that I don't care risking losing it".

      A venture capitalist is entrusted with a lot of other people's money to invest,

      And it's those "other people" that are harmed and can figure out how to deal with it.

      If the VC business is investing in companies for reasons other than that they look like good prospects, that's harmful to the VC business, and it's good to get it stopped.

      And, what do you know, that's what free markets accomplish: they separate bad investors from their money. Your concern trolling isn't needed.

      Push hard enough at such unprofessional behavior, and it will have an effect.

      Sure, the effect being mostly that men walk on eggshells around women and give them favorable treatment just so that they can't possibly be accused of any wrongdoing.

      I'm just fine working with [feminists]

      And you very much deserve each other.

    46. Re: What it made clear to me by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      You seem awfully unconcerned that somebody is handing over other people's money in large quantities in exchange for sexual favors. The VC firm is well served by having that behavior reported with strong evidence ASAP. Investors have to put a certain amount of trust into the firm they're investing in, and should not have to be responsible for guarding against quiet corruption.

      You are probably correct in that, if your application was answered by a request for a blow job, the VC would be dismissing you. This isn't nearly as certain for a female applicant.

      Nor are we talking about any great care with women here. In this case, it was a matter of someone in a position of power over the woman asking for sexual favors. If nobody had done that, we wouldn't have had the story here on Slashdot. We have a case of gross misconduct that took quite a few women working together to bring up. If people had acted halfway decently (even if not all the way decently) there would have been no story.

      If you can't get that through your head, then it's best that you treat women with caution. Personally, I get along very well with feminists, I don't walk on my tiptoes around women, and I don't get any complaints. There's real advantages to doing things my way.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    47. Re: What it made clear to me by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      You seem awfully unconcerned that somebody is handing over other people's money in large quantities in exchange for sexual favors.

      Not only am I unconcerned, I welcome it: if billionaires foolishly hire harassers to do their investing for them they deserve to lose their money. That's how markets sort out bad investors from good ones. For some unfathomable reason, you want to protect wealthy investors and harassers (and, if you favor non-discrimination laws, wealthy sexists, homophobes, racists, etc.) from the consequences of their own choices by forcing them make better choices.

      In this case, it was a matter of someone in a position of power over the woman asking for sexual favors.

      When I go to a car dealer and offer money for a car, there is no position of power because one valuable item is being exchanged for another one. The fact that you talk about a VC investment as a "position of power" over these women implies that you believe these women's ideas were worthless (and you're probably right).

      Personally, I get along very well with feminists

      You don't even get invited to the cocktail parties of the women we're talking about, let alone get to work with them.

      There's real advantages to doing things my way.

      True, men like you have been trying to ingratiate themselves to women for as long as humans have existed; it's a one of several reproductive strategies.

      If you can't get that through your head, then it's best that you treat women with caution.

      You treat women with caution by generally agreeing with them. I simply avoid many of them, including the entire VC and founder "community", male or female.

    48. Re: What it made clear to me by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Free markets work best without information asymmetries. If a VC is accepting bribes of whatever sort, the investors should ideally know about it, and then they can make their own decisions. (What they decide isn't my business, but keeping information available is at least a little my business.)

      There's lots of car dealers. If you don't get along with one, you can easily get another who will happily sell you a car. The VC and entrepeneur business is different. There's a limited number of VCs. The quality of the ideas doesn't work the way you seem to think. If it's obviously a good idea, chances are that lots of people are already doing it, and that makes it not so good an idea. VCs typically want the occasional big payoff, and for that they have to go for the dubious ideas (including going into an already crowded field - who would have expected Google to unseat Altavista and Lycos?). The really big payoffs will often be from dumb-looking ideas. There is an imbalance of power here.

      I haven't been trying to ingratiate myself with women, I've been trying to understand them. Lots of human behavior seems odd and interesting to me. I don't treat women with caution, and I frequently disagree with one or more women. You have the wrong viewpoint here.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  26. Re:Yet another company ruined by rabid SJWs by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    Mmm yes, delicious regressive tears, this is what I came here for! Now I can leave satisfied.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  27. Re:Sounds like ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not really, having children seems to be the only purpose of both sexes, why is the female's contribution to that celebrated, but the male's efforts reviled?

  28. Re: Sounds like ... by ooloorie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Although I agree with you that it was an inappropriate comment, I have to wonder if Susan Fowler would have gotten as much attention if she was not a young attractive female

    Of course not.

    And young attractive females have always had an easy time âmaking a differenceâ: allegations of sexual improprieties against men have often been fatal to the careers of those men, or simply fatal when the abuser was a white woman and the male was black.

    The idea that this is some newly developed superpower by women is not just laughably historically ignorant, it is offensive.

  29. Re:Sounds like ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    young attractive female

    She's meh.

  30. Re:That fucking bitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that you Travis? Maybe you need some anger management classes.

  31. Toxic to who? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    My wife works in the medical industry and more or less ignores what happens in technology. However this entire time with news stories on NPR and the nightly news she was firmly against 'bro-culture' and sexism in technology.

    When the Uber Miami Memo leaked I showed it to her as 'evidence' for the toxic, misogynistic, bro-culture that was everywhere. She read it through twice and then came back with, "Ok, so where's the sexism that people are complaining about?". Every single thing in there she thought was completely reasonable. ("Don't have sex with someone that is above you or in the same group.", "Don't do drugs".)

    There is a narrative that a lot of people are pushing and a lot of other people are onboard with defending without sitting down and listening to what some individuals consider offensive and toxic.

    1. Re:Toxic to who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's not what they forbided in that memo, it was HOW they forbid it.

      Telling people don't murder is totally reasonable. Telling them in a memo before a big trip implies that the company had a problem with people murdering each other.

      Same thing with the Uber memo. Any company that feels it is important before a big trip to warn people "hey, don't rape someone" means that rape has been happening WAY too much already,

    2. Re:Toxic to who? by swillden · · Score: 1

      She read it through twice and then came back with, "Ok, so where's the sexism that people are complaining about?"

      It's in the fact that memo contained new policy, put in place to address a history of problems caused by a company culture that didn't have those basic and obvious norms. Even the CEO apparently hadn't previously felt it important to avoid sleeping with his subordinates. The fact they felt it necessary to tell employees to get permission from someone before having sex with them is particularly chilling.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    3. Re: Toxic to who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, hey, it's the ole Kafka trap! "They don't have a 'code of conduct' they're toxic bro culture" ok, we'll adopt a code of conduct... "obviously you had to adopt this because you had so much toxic bro culture REEEEEE!!"

    4. Re: Toxic to who? by swillden · · Score: 1

      Oh, hey, it's the ole Kafka trap! "They don't have a 'code of conduct' they're toxic bro culture" ok, we'll adopt a code of conduct... "obviously you had to adopt this because you had so much toxic bro culture"

      No. Most companies never bother to send out a memo like this, because they don't need to. They may or may not have something in the employee handbook about relationships between superiors and subordinates, but none of them ever feel the need to put in writing that you should get permission before having sex with someone.

      This memo is compelling evidence that either (a) they had some serious problems or (b) the CEO was ridiculously over-cautious, warning his employees not to do something that no one was doing anyway. Is there anything about Kalanick that makes you think "there's a dude who's always worried about things that aren't problems yet."?

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    5. Re:Toxic to who? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Well, the medical industry *IS* technology. However a ride hailing service, and quite a lot of other "tech" companies, have only a vague passing resemblance to technology. It's not a tech story so not sure why it's here, other than that it's a workplace story.

      Anyway, I would say that the toxic culture is what made the memo be necessary. Reasonable companies don't need memos to remind their workers to do reasonable things.

  32. Re: Sounds like ... by ooloorie · · Score: 1

    DYAC. abuser should be accuser

  33. Proved That One Person Can Make a Difference by v1 · · Score: 1

    Michael Knight would be proud!

    Well, okay, "person", not "man", but yeah, same thing. "Person" sounds very awkward in that context somehow. English needs to learn from these other languages that have gender-neutral pronouns that we can use to keep from offending the overly-sensitive. Otherwise it seems so forced when we have to force nouns into pronoun duties.

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    1. Re:Proved That One Person Can Make a Difference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe the overly-sensitive need to grow a thicker skin. Expecting the world to not offend you is a surefire way to become offended.

  34. We've yet to see by holophrastic · · Score: 1

    I think this is way too premature. She was complaining about the bro-culture. It still is a bro-culture. Firing a CEO is a nice consequence, but it is no where near a solution.

    If I had to guess, I'd say that in one year, everything will revert back to the same.

  35. Yo. Don't quote Lao Tzu. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It evidences monumentally bad practice.

  36. why is this on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot post #51238 on the identity politics at Uber. Still fail to see how this is Slashdot material at all.

  37. Re:That fucking bitch by war4peace · · Score: 1

    Ease off, Travis, you'll be a CEO again. Don't worry.

    --
    ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  38. Re: Yet another company ruined by rabid SJWs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fortunately for me I feed off progressive tears not regressive ones. There has been an almost inexhaustible supply over the past year what with all the snowflakes having complete and total breakdowns on a daily basis.

    Simply walk outside and listen for autistic shrieking. Then follow the sound until you find a group of sexually ambiguous people with unnatural hair color. Now just walk up to them while wearing your MAGA hat and presto! Instant feast!

  39. Stop with the anti bro femtards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone else fed up of this anti bro shit? isn't it enough that people are making an effort to be over inclusive of women... bro culture is a result of lots of guys working together, you are essentially complaining about guys being guys... do you hear about men complaining how girly culture is so annoying in majority female work environments? NO because it's obvious WHY. No one expects women to stop being girly just cos some guys wana work in fashion design. If you want to change the balance of gender fine but that doesn't mean you get the CHANGE the other gender.

    1. Re:Stop with the anti bro femtards by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      As a straight man, I dislike bro culture and want to see it eliminated in the workspace. I further resent the implication that a group of men working together will naturally turn into assholes.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  40. Re: MEN ARE TOXIC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Found the 400lb childless cat lady who hates men because they "just can't accept a strong woman like her..."

  41. Re: Yet another company ruined by rabid SJWs by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2

    That doesn't bother me much. I'm becoming kind of a fan of Trump these days.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  42. Re:Sounds like ... by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 2

    You must travel in strange circles. My efforts and contributions to having children have never been reviled. Except that time my mum caught me practising.

    On the other hand my wife's some of my wife's contributions deserve plenty more respect than mine - she was the one who suffered through 9 months of pregnancy (plus long term effects) and pushed giant meatsacks out her twat.

    God, I'm such a sucker for a trolling.

  43. Re:Sounds like ... by gweihir · · Score: 1

    I do not agree. They bring one AC in disrepute and that is it. People that generalize unsophisticated statement like that to a whole gender are not better than the one that just made that statement.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  44. Drives out WEAK people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and its called natural selection u fat faggot

  45. Re:Sounds like ... by crunchygranola · · Score: 1

    Also, when did we become a species?

    Since forever.

    3. Logic.
    One of the classes of things included with other classes in a genus.
    The set of things within one of these classes.

    --
    Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
  46. Re: Sounds like ... by Bartles · · Score: 1

    Last time I looked, male was a sex.

  47. Re: Snowflake kills company... by Bartles · · Score: 2

    I don't think potential means what you think it means.

  48. Good for her by ErichTheRed · · Score: 0

    I'm a guy, and I know I feel uncomfortable when I get paired with some sales guy who's a walking sexual harassment lawsuit waiting to happen when visiting one of our customers. I think most guys who are somewhat normal and have regular relationships with the opposite sex do too. The problem comes when the organization you work for doesn't do anything to actively discourage douchbaggery of any kind. I may be old school, but I think workplace interactions should be professional, and any "extracurricular activities" shouldn't need to be discussed in a work context.

    I hope she's getting a lifetime's worth of income from her settlements, because I know there are plenty of hiring managers who wouldn't touch someone who has a reputation like the one she has now. Maybe some things will change because of this, but I do know the technology world has shifted. It used to be exclusively nerds, so the complaints you'd get would be of the creeper/stalker variety associated with the "living in your mom's basement" crowd. Now, these web startups are using frameworks, APIs and SDKs to build software, so you're getting a lot of less technical people snapping Legos together to build apps...and just like the CS boom of the late 90s, you're seeing a lot of "bros" getting into the startup biz because of the money involved. If you want to see a parallel in another field, just look at how many former fraternity guys wind up in sales organizations and the culture that develops in most of them as a result.

    I just don't understand why people can't be professionals at work. Maybe it's working 100 hours a week with the same people in a cramped office, but I've mostly encountered professional workplaces in my career...usually we're too busy doing work to harass co-workers...

  49. occasionally, but usually not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think if Uber didn't have 99 other problems, they would have been able to rally the troops to successfully bury this. She had help.

  50. Re: Sounds like ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You saw Creimer naked at the gym? What a rough day you must have had.

  51. That's not why he resigned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He resigned because his mother died in a boating accident. Nothing in this article is true.

  52. Re:Sounds like ... by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    And it's attitudes like this that bring the entire male species into disrepute.

    If Silicon Valley males were a species, then the local women would be unable to mate with them and their tribe would expand only through recruitment.

    Oh wait --

  53. Re: Sounds like ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope you had a wonderful feminist's father's day, and thanked all the women in your life.

  54. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  55. Re:toxic gays by St.Creed · · Score: 1

    So... show me on the doll where the bad gay touched you.

    --
    Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
  56. Re:That fucking bitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We don't really care how you feel about your mother.

  57. Re:Snowflake kills company... by Khyber · · Score: 1

    She was hired by another company like a week or so after she left, dumbass. Do you bother paying attention to such important things like this or do you just cherry-pick a few statements and then refuse to do any critical thinking upon those statements before spouting off shit?

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  58. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  59. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  60. Oh you racists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Racists gonna race...

  61. Re:toxic gays by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone needs to learn the definition of consent. Oh and to stop being a bigot.

  62. Re: Sounds like ... by swillden · · Score: 1

    The idea that this is some newly developed superpower by women is not just laughably historically ignorant, it is offensive.

    Historically, do you think more women have harmed men with false allegations, or more men have harmed women with actual abuse?

    How about today? Do you think it's more common that women allege abuse, or that abuse against women occurs?

    --
    Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  63. Re:That fucking bitch by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    It's true. When it's time to pass some shit, people start wanting the assholes back.

  64. Re:toxic cucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We wouldn't be in this position if it wasn't people who shared views like yours. Maybe you wouldn't have to hear about all of this "Gay Stuff" if the last several decades didn't involve thugs assaulting gays for sport, known "fag bashing". But eventually if you oppress people long enough, they have to rise up and defend themselves. If that means making people like you aware that gays exist, and straight people like me insisting that gays are perfectly acceptable people, then so be it. You and others who share your views have made your bed, now lie in it. I couldn't care less if it makes you feel uncomfortable or "disgusted", but it seems like a small price to pay considering the offense society has committed against gays. Grow a pair, snowflake.

  65. Re:Sounds like ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That depends, did you get your wife pregnant and then run away for 9 months? Otherwise I think both of you deserve the same respect. You presumably couldn't have carried the child, even if you wanted to. So why give someone "plenty more" respect for this?

  66. Um no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With all due respect to Ms Fowler, I don't think she brought down the CEO. The behaviour that she describes is in a lot of tech companies. I don't recall seeing their ceo's exiting. It was all of the other illegal stuff that uber we're doing and the major VC funders were afraid of losing their money that brought down Travis.

  67. Re: Sounds like ... by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 1

    What does that even mean? If that's meant to be an insult then this is for you -

    *golf clap*

    If I'm a feminist then I can''t say it bothers me - I got there without trying. I just treat everyone with the respect I feel they deserve. If you're a cunt you get none.

  68. Re:Sounds like ... by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 1

    Boohoo - was a woman once nasty to da poor wittle snowflake.

  69. Re: Sounds like ... by ooloorie · · Score: 1

    Historically, do you think more women have harmed men with false allegations, or more men have harmed women with actual abuse?

    You're using terms like "harm" and "abuse" for a wide range of ill-defined behaviors subject to shifting moral views, so I don't think that question has an answer.

    What I do know is that the idea that women were powerless, fragile little beings subject to the whims of male passion hasn't been true for centuries in the West. Even when women had no political power, unwanted sexual advances by men towards women often had severe consequences for the man, and in many cases, simply the word of the woman was sufficient.

  70. Re: Sounds like ... by swillden · · Score: 1

    Historically, do you think more women have harmed men with false allegations, or more men have harmed women with actual abuse?

    You're using terms like "harm" and "abuse" for a wide range of ill-defined behaviors subject to shifting moral views, so I don't think that question has an answer.

    Okay, replace "abuse" with "rape".

    --
    Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  71. Re: Sounds like ... by ooloorie · · Score: 1

    Okay, replace "abuse" with "rape".

    We were not talking about "rape", we were talking about Fowler's allegations of sexual harassment. And the point is not whether Fowler's accusations of harassment were true or false; the point is that regardless of whether they were true, going public with a blog post (or taking legal action) is going to hurt Fowler. It may not be fair, but life isn't fair and will never be fair.

  72. Re: Sounds like ... by swillden · · Score: 1

    I wasn't talking about Fowler's allegations. I was talking about the larger context, both historically and now.

    --
    Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  73. Managed out by nessman · · Score: 0

    What's up with these millennial kids who expect to be hired, transferred 3 times and made boss in less than a year of being hired? Face it Susan, you were a squeaky wheel, a proverbial pain in the ass - and you got managed out the door.

  74. Re: Sounds like ... by ooloorie · · Score: 1

    I was talking about the larger context, both historically and now.

    So am I. I think people underestimate how much power women have had historically and how strong social prohibitions were against rape and harassment. And I think women in the US today are the most safe, protected, and privileged they have ever been in recorded history.