[adwn]

To summarize: Most of the team wants to watch progam A; watching program A during dinner is an established team ritual; author wants to change channel to program B, which is "met with incredulity and laughter". Some time later, program B is running; team members come in and want to change the channel to program A. And that latter event is the most alienating during her time at Microsoft.

Wat.

It gets better: Because program A is baseball, and program B is Friends, and since we all know that baseball is a man's program, and Friends is a woman's program, this is really about gender discrimination and sexism.

> People would question my social skills.

I really do.

[zasz]

The implication is that the rest of the team felt comfortable enough in that environment that they could change the channel without even having to ask, while OP was loudly ridiculed for wanting to change the channel in a more polite way. The rest of the team felt comfortable with the team dynamic in a way that OP did not, and by ridiculing her, they made it clear that her desires were less important than theirs, thus proving that her sense of discomfort was justified.

To put it as clearly and simply as possible, as if we were examining the results of a double-blind clinical trial:

OP attempts to change the channel. OP is loudly ridiculed in an unpleasant way.

Rando teammate changes the channel. Everyone thinks it's a really funny joke.

What changed? Just the OP. It's pretty obvious the team doesn't like her the way it likes the rest of its members. Is this necessarily an example of sexism, like the seat-belt incident that OP also references? Not necessarily, but it's certainly quite alienating.

Also, while I'm generally sympathetic to the idea that there is a hierarchy of things that are better and things that are worse, how impactful an event is, is ultimately subjective and often not under any conscious control. The time I was mugged in San Francisco honestly made much less of an impression than the time my coworker said he hated all of us and refused to go out for lunch.

[bloaf]

Say you were on a baseball team for a couple of years. After every game, your team always goes out to Bob's Pretty Good Pizza for beers. What do you think would happen if you one day suggested that instead of Bob's, the team should go to Carl's Seafood Shack?

You'd probably get laughed at.

It wouldn't be because people thought seafood was dumb. It wouldn't be because you looked funny, or were female, or played poorly that day. It would be because you misunderstood why the team went to Bob's week after week. The team doesn't go to Bob's because they've got a taste for pizza, they go to Bob's because they want a comfortable routine, shared experiences, and customs to uniquely identify their group.

The suggestion of giving those comforts up because you had a taste for fish sticks instead of pepperoni would be funny to the people who really appreciate them.

And so it goes with baseball on the TV.

[Jommi]

Yep, it has more to do with team dynamics and authority levels than anything related to sexism.

It's a simple fact that usually in groups the majority rules. The majority wanted to watch baseball, not Friends.

[zasz]

Sure, but you can be a majority that's a tyranny, or a majority that occasionally is more accommodating.

[Jommi]

Yup, and it sucks and I would personally not be part of that kind of circle. Ofcourse in a work environment this is hard to avoid. That's why "Culture fit" is stressed so much in recruiting.

[marvin]

This is unrelated, but I don't really get why one would want to watch TV with colleagues. It's not like you're productive when doing it. The requirement for the infamous "culture fit" is lower if you don't require that all coworkers are 100% socially compatible with each other. Then again, I'm from Europe.

[geon]

Sure. Neither one is about sexism, though.

[geon]

> while OP was loudly ridiculed for wanting to change the channel in a more polite way

No. OP wanted to change the channel away from THE established channel.

Had OP been a male, and a woman changed the channel back to baseball, the situation would have been the same.

[marvin]

> The implication is that the rest of the team felt comfortable enough in that environment that they could change the channel without even having to ask, while OP was loudly ridiculed for wanting to change the channel in a more polite way.

And not only once -- the single event of her requesting a switch to the different show was repeatedly ridiculed, as if this was a completely outrageous suggestion. This would have been quite okay if she asked "could we watch Friends today instead" and the other team members looked at each other and simply responded "Eh, we'd all really like to watch this game".

[ddalex]

What happend to democracy lately ?

[pigpaws]

This is EXACTLY what democracy is. THIS is how it works. Two wolves and a sheep trying to decide what's for dinner.

you may be thinking about a 'Republic', in which the rights of the minority are protected, but THIS is democracy in ACTION.

[cathartes]

I think what's more unsettling to me about that part of her story is that there was only One Right Answer: the sports game. I'm accustomed to team dynamics with aggressively asserted opinions; but even within the group, those opinions generally differed by substance or degree. Faced with this kind of consensus, I'd feel alienated too; because I know this behaviour would be integral to my daily work interactions with those people . . .

[coroutines]

I think she blogged about this because it's a very small incident, but it had a very powerful effect on her.

I worked at a womens' clothing store for a while and I often felt like my opinion wasn't valued. The staff was mostly made up of women and I was treated inappropriately in the form of sexual harassment and unprofessional workplace conversations. I tried my best to keep out of it but I must admit I made mistakes.

Anyway, in the morning we often had a 'ritual' that we'd all get coffee in the backroom and talk about anything the store needed that day. I really liked what seemed like a time for open communication in the beginning. Everyone would have their coffee mugs lined up next to the machine - but for some reason another gal always moved my mug to the other side - she'd often separate property by gender? It was strange, to say the least... I always just put my mug with the others, but I started noticing that she would separate them. Over time this began to really bother me simply because of how small and benign it should have been. I'd come in, glance over, see that my mug was off to the side by itself... and it was easy to feel like I wasn't part of the team.

It just felt like... after all the serious problems there had to be dumb small ones too. Like not being able to enjoy Friends after long day of working on Microsoft Flight Sim. Everything had to be a problem, no matter how small the thing was. A coffee mug. A favorite TV show.

I don't think it helps to say we can share much worse experiences. Sexism or whatever this is doesn't go away because by comparison she had it easier than others. It's clear she felt undervalued in her team and that's a problem - especially in terms of how her productivity (may) have suffered. Microsoft should be working to reduce dumb stuff like this so everyone can work at their peak productivity - with the side-benefit of feeling camaraderie among their colleagues.

Personally I'd just go buy my own damn TV and watch alone in my office? :p

Maybe I don't have social skills either. :-)

[adwn]

> I think she blogged about this because it's a very small incident, but it had a very powerful effect on her.

If it's a very small incident, why is it such a big deal for her? Especially compared to the real harrassment by her mentor in the car?

> Over time this began to really bother me simply because of how small and benign it should have been.

Well, did you ask your coworker why she did that? Being an adult also means standing up for yourself (it doesn't have to be overly confrontational, just ask politely), especially since it apparently was just a single person, not bullying by your entire team.

[coroutines]

When you reframe it, what she experienced with the TV is minor - but I'm saying the bigger issues seem even more serious when you deal with minor stuff too? It's like if you forgot to do a chore and you stub your toe while doing that chore?

As a followup to the thing I went through: I did confront my coworker. I spent a few weeks feeling like I couldn't bring it up because it's so small. This particular lady had always treated me funny so I didn't expect the conversation to go well. She said this was how they did it at her house (separating mugs) and I shouldn't care about it. I was the only dude on the staff so it just felt like I was being isolated from the group with mugs! I felt immature for even bringing it up. She stopped doing it for a while but when she switched shifts I'd get in the next day and see she'd done it again... it still makes me irrationally angry.

Now I just don't drink coffee, haha. XD

[vlod]

Just to mess with here, I would move my mug back to the group and take her mug out and place it by itself. ;)

[EliRivers]

You have misrepresented the case, although I do agree that it's not overtly a male/female thing.

People are in a shared TV-viewing area. There is something being shown on TV. New person enters and decides to change the channel without asking.

This is the action of a total dickhead. I don't care what the established ritual is. If a group of people are clearly watching something else (and they must be, because here they are in the tv viewing area, and something else in being shown, and if they wanted to watch something else they'd have already changed the channel), to pick up the remote and change channel without asking is the action of a dickhead.

Possibly the action of someone on the aspergic scale, possibly the action of a sociopath who just doesn't care what other people want. Coming in and changing the channel without asking is simply a massive dickhead thing.

[Turing_Machine]

"People are in a shared TV-viewing area. There is something being shown on TV. New person enters and decides to change the channel without asking. This is the action of a total dickhead."

If it were a random situation, perhaps. If it is the established norm that a specific program is watched at a specific time, not so much.

[golergka]

But the story doesn't tell us that anyone was actually watching Friends at the moment.

[cathartes]

But she was explicit in saying no one even asked if anyone was watching. Instead, each person in succession walked in, recoiled in horror, and decided to flip the channel without a word. One person doing this is unexceptional. Two? Less than chance, but possibly coincidence. Three or more, however, suggests a gestalt of in-group sports dickery existed around her.

[croon]

It's inferred by people being in the area to laugh at everyone picking up the remote.

[EliRivers]

You know what, the story also doesn't tell us that nobody was on fire at the moment.

When you walk into a shared TV viewing area with people in it, and there is something being shown on TV, even if it looks like nobody is looking at the screen at that moment, you should still ask before changing channel. Social fact. If it looks like nobody is watching it, you can soften it a little by framing the question as "Is anyone watching this, or can I change channel?"

[DanBC]

You had a great point until you brought in psychiatric diagnoses.

I think this is an example of the conjunction fallacy, or The Linda Problem.

Bob walks in and changes the channel even though other people are watching.

Is Bob an asshole, or is Bob and asshole and has Asperger's?

[austinjp]

Indeed.

For those unfamiliar with the Linda problem, Daniel Kahneman's Thinking Fast and Slow explains it.

There are far more assholes than there are people with Asperger's. Consequently Bob is probably an asshole, plain and simple.

[fleitz]

Your point is still great, and IT IS a sociopathic thing to do, they are immediately asserting dominance and challenging anyone to question it.

That doesn't mean they are going to kill you, it means they understand how social hierarchies work and are moving up the ladder.

[EliRivers]

I disagree with your assessment of my comment, but upon re-reading I can see that I was not clear enough.

I believe I suggested that this was the action of a dickhead, OR the action of someone who would have trouble understanding the social rules that suggest he shouldn't just change channel without asking (e.g. Aspergic, or a sociopath of some sort; probably not textbook psychopath, as they're often charming and quite able to abide by social rules in this sort of situation). If I had said "AND" rather than "OR", I would agree with you. I certainly intended to offer the Aspergic/sociopath option as an alternative rather than an additive.

[mosselman]

I completely accept that there IS sexism, especially in sectors that are dominated mainly by one gender, but this example is ill chosen.

In fact I feel discriminated against as a man. I'd much rather watch Friends that baseball, but apparently the author claims I'd much rather watch baseball because of my genes.

"Cool story bro". Fistbump.

[Swizec]

> baseball is a man's program, and Friends is a woman's program

Yeah I don't get that part either. When I was a kid everyone watched Friends. We never realized it was supposed to be "for girls".

Hell, the main cast is 3 men and 3 women. Doesn't get more neutral than that.

[tehrei]

Yeah, this is typical male group dynamics. Same would happen if I were to suggest Friends instead of baseball.

I wonder though, how do groups of women solve that?