Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by lubesGordi 3407 days ago
Her claim is that Uber is an oppressive system and everyone just buys it at face value. Who has the jerking knee? I think it takes more work to assume ALL OF THE PEOPLE she was dealing with at Uber were in on some kind of sexist conspiracy against her than to think that maybe her perception's out of alignment. Even worse is to think that all these employees at uber hr can't recognize sexism and deal with it appropriately... it's her word against a bunch of people who I have no reason to think are unreasonable. Really, it's the assumption that Uber is an oppressive system from the get go that allows people to jump on her bandwagon and start deleting apps.
2 comments

Do you realise that racism and sexism are not conspiracies? If they were conspiracies, you would be a prime example of a co-conspirator: dismissing one woman's testimony because no men have testified in agreement with her.

Here is now HR takes part in "the conspiracy": they take no action against a man who is in a senior position because they do not want to lose their jobs.

Here is how "all these employees" take part in "the conspiracy": they do not speak up because the issue is not affecting them personally, they don't want to rock the boat, and maybe they feel that the woman in question is just a pain in the arse because she always talks back and challenges assumptions, so why would anyone stand up for her?

Sexism is not a conspiracy, it's a learned behaviour. You can't eliminate sexism by breaking the conspiracy, you have to find ways to adjust institutionalised behaviour.

Consider the classic story about the monkeys and the electrified bananas: monkeys in captivity were shown bananas. If any monkey went to pick up the banana, the entire cage would be electified, shocking all the monkeys. Eventually the monkeys would best up any monkey trying to pick up the bananas.

Then the researchers started replacing the population, and stopped electrocuting the monkeys. The society still best up monkeys trying to get the banana. Long after there were non of the original monkeys in the group, and none of the monkeys had been electrocuted, they still beat up any monkey trying to pick up the banana.

So too, in any institution the new people learn ways and means from the incumbents. They learn that certain people are beyond reproach, long after any remaining incumbents can remember why. They learn that certain issues are smply not discussed, and do not question why.

How do you get that institutionalised behaviour back to normal?

It's a question of who do you give the benefit of the doubt to? The woman who says "things are really bad at Uber for women" (and can point to plummeting diversity figures to back it up) or the company with the dodgy ethical history in many areas of employment law?

And that's also what makes the protest so appealing. The protestors _don't have to justify themselves_ to you; they don't have to meet your arbitrary bar of "yes, this is now real enough for me to consider it as sexism, you are permitted to complain".

They can just decide who they believe, and act accordingly. And have.