Yes. An alcoholic is a person with a disability and is protected by the ADA if s/he is qualified to perform the essential functions of the job. An employer may be required to provide an accommodation to an alcoholic. However, an employer can discipline, discharge or deny employment to an alcoholic whose use of alcohol adversely affects job performance or conduct. An employer also may prohibit the use of alcohol in the workplace and can require that employees not be under the influence of alcohol.
She mentions a bunch of times in the article about the fact that she is a problem drinker/alcoholic. A diabetic that can't drink a glass of orange juice has a problem too, but not one that they deserve to be judged harshly for.
If that were the only concern, then it probably would have been appropriate to drink the champagne. If your work suffers because your boss insisted you drink, then dicking around on HN for the rest of the day would be an acceptable option.
This comment is profoundly unsympathetic to people who have recovered from alcoholism and decided that for their own health they must abstain. This comment is profoundly unsympathetic to people with sensitivity to alcohol. I'm deeply grateful that my friends and the people I work with respect each others' boundaries with alcohol and other substances.
So what if you do "have a problem"? Is it right for someone to push alcohol on you, knowing that you have a problem? Perhaps I should offer discounts at the liquor store to people who turn in their AA coins, because alcoholism is "their problem" not mine?
Alcoholism aside, why do you think that it's OK to judge someone based on what they do/don't want to drink? Some people make the conscious choice to not have alcohol. That's OK!
> Consider that the one with a problem might be you if you can't even have one line of coke.
> Consider that the one with a problem might be you if you can't even have just one hit of this joint.
Why is it a problem for you if I don't want to put something that is not good for me into my body?
Would you feel the same if I questioned why you don't have "just one cigarette with the guys" I mean go on, one cigarette won't kill you and you make us all feel uncomfortable when you don't join in. Be a team player don't be that guy.
That's exactly right. The author does have a problem.
And one perfectly excellent way of managing the problem in question (alcoholism) is to not drink alcohol.
Pressuring unwilling non-alcoholics into drinking is already a dick move to begin with. Coercing alcoholics into drinking (and possibly triggering a relapse of a problem which kills tens of thousands of people a year and ruins an order of magnitude more lives) is a hundred times worse.
Yeah, I've had a few beers in my time, and still once in awhile. But I've finally realized in the last few years exactly how badly alcohol messes up blood sugar levels (honestly, practically every illegal drug is safer for me from a biochemical perspective because how the liver's function of regulating blood sugar levels is affected by alcohol) and so I drink far more judiciously now. I wish I'd paid more attention to this years ago.
But alcohol is not really the point of the article, it is the emotional relationship to alcohol that people / society has and of the immaturity of this relationship. Her boss in the first anecdote sounds like a wanna-be cult leader. She should have mentioned his age; that would have been useful, I think - I am assuming the older one gets, the wiser about such things normal people get (the pointlessness of bullying people like that).
You could substitute "agile", or some other fad buzzword, and you could easily write a similar article. I am now reminded of my stint at Peoplesoft, where first day of orientation was all about the wonders of becoming a PeoplePeople and PeopleThis and PeopleThat. It was pathetic.
Companies consciously are using cult indoctrination tactics now, I think. The idea of 'pay people a decent wage in return for quality work' is ... old fashioned. Instead, you are supposed to give your soul to the company in return for ... what? I don't remember this attitude when I was in my twenties, but that was before the Internet happened and 20 year olds started becoming billionaires.
When "rah rah rah" is the driving force, as opposed to a sense of professionalism, then that's not a job a sensible person wants. Software development / IT is not a religion, it is merely a craft.
The behavior of some of the author's colleagues is incredibly embarrassing, and the behavior of some of the author's managers is just reprehensible. I hope that the more reprehensible behavior is simply an indicator of the problems of unexperienced founders/leaders. I know the nature of these anecdotes is not uncommon, but there does seem to be a clear line between the discomfort associated with office-sponsored drinking events and outright harassment.
The larger discussion has merits, but I do think, for better or worse, startup culture is just a reflection of our alcohol focused social culture (and in full disclosure, I enjoy it). Startups are different in that they often blur the line between professional and social. This can certainly be problematic, but it's also one of the most significant reasons that I enjoy working at startups much, much more than traditional businesses.
Yeah, the founder at the beginning of the story seems like a real jerk -- taking personal insult at someone for refusing to drink champagne for the celebration, since "this is really big for us"? As if being there to celebrate with them isn't enough? And flipping out at anyone who asked for the same?
There is drinking to get drunk and there is having a glass of wine or a beer. If I've been working all day, and now it is after work and for some reason I am still working, a beer sounds great. If I was not disciplined enough to stop at one, I would definitely stick to zero though.
It's actually really weird being a young adult (23) who doesn't and has never drank. People will always look at you as if you're from another planet and you'll always be pestered for some justification. I remember taking an etiquette dinner/short class type thing during my college years and being reprimanded for responding, "No, thanks, but I don't drink," when offered a glass of wine. He said that I should always say, "No, thanks, but I won't be drinking tonight," otherwise I'd be making the others at the table feel bad about drinking alcohol.
I'll never understand that, but that seems to resonate through society: don't rock the boat and make people aware of a moral decision to drink or to eat meat or to X. Just go with the flow and let everyone take their soma.
Yep, pretty similar if you say "I won't eat that, I'm vegan." Then you're in for some serious discussions about how plants somehow feel pain. People are insecure.
It was an etiquette class -- presumably for formal settings. Of course they're going to steer you away from certain topics -- what did you expect from such a class in the first place...?
It's not about reminding people of a moral position, it's about making people feel bad about the situation they have put you in. If you serve meat to a vegetarian and they say "sorry I don't eat meat," you feel bad because you've put them in an uncomfortable position, and now you are concerned about whether they will be comfortable/have a good time. Same with drinking.
The fact that someone who doesn't drink considers it a "moral decision" makes people uncomfortable as well. If it were just about preferring to drink or not, no one would care, but when it becomes about morals people who do choose to drink feel like they're being judged.
Often times it's the non-drinkers who imagine that it is a moral judgement when someone else doesn't drink. Perhaps this is because they secretly feel that they are making a wrong decision but are doing so because the group is all doing it together. They then see one person not drinking as an affront because deep down they are judging themselves.
If you are truly comfortable with your own decision to drink you will not see someone else's decision not to drink as a threat.
How uncomfortable with their decision to drink must be the people who downvoted you. They cant argue beacuse they know they are wrong. Intellectual cowardice, plain and simple.
No. Try to simply pass with a no thanks, and almost always you'll face a line of questioning as to why not. It's really annoying. Even if they respect your decision not to drink they still ask why. Some get frustrated too.
I've, fortunately, only ever experienced this a single time. From a coworker of the opposite gender who was already a few drinks in, at an event where I was the only person not drinking.
I've never suffered the line of questioning that people always talk about. Perhaps a single "Why?" which is easily answered with "Personal choice." And honestly, if you deviate from the "norm" a "why?" should be expected and factored into the decision.
There are other decisions where you can expect to be asked "Why?" For example:
I don't have a Facebook account. "Why?"
I don't watch movies/TV shows. "Why?"
It could be argued the "why" isn't important. The question isn't asked out of importance, but out of curiosity. They're curious why I made the decision I made, especially because it is an unpopular decision.
At least as often as not, people don't ask those "why?" type questions out of simple curiosity. In my experience, there's often a component of defensiveness, regardless of how you answer.
And saying that it's okay to be questioned for your choices just because they're not as common--I have to adamantly disagree.
I think this is it. I was an alcoholic for a couple of years after I graduated from university, and in that time period as well as the time period leading up to that (frequent casual alcohol consumption, but not quite alcoholism), I made a good deal of friends who were heavy drinkers. Since December, I've had one beer and one glass of bubbly. I've started turning down my friends who offer me a drink. At first, they were confused.
"Are you okay?" they'd ask. "Yeah, I just don't feel like drinking." Of course, I let them know that it doesn't bother me if they go ahead and have a few. Surprisingly (to me, anyway), after the first couple refusals, I've had several of them tell me that they were envious, and that they'd like to cut back on alcohol, too. I told them to just do it -- it's not hard, and once you get past the first couple of weeks (month tops), you don't even have that urge to drink anymore. This was fairly recent, so only time will tell if they actually follow through.
The main thing for me is that they clearly respect my decision not to drink, a few of them seem to even respect me more for turning them down. I think that'd be very different if I were to make them feel judged or inferior for their own choice to imbibe, however. People in that situation tend to get dismissive and start to mentally justify their own behavior. It can really make someone grumpy ;)
I find that it ironic, offering me meat or alcohol which I don't want doesn't make me feel bad at all, but expecting me to be very careful we with my words does. And it is very strange, this is all to ensure you don't learn something about me that might make you imagine I feel bad, which wouldn't even change the fact if I did feel bad and would make it likely to happen again.
Perhaps it is more a function of my age, but if the person was polite about it - but hadn't taken the time to inform me beforehand - then I'd be 'ah.. well, I wish you had told me. Anyway, please have some more brussel sprouts..." "Growing up" means learning to not be so porous to other people's emotional states.
It's really about the nature of the interaction that is the important thing. If they had told me beforehand, and I forgot.. then I'd feel bad. If they copped an attitude about their superiority, then I'd be dismissive of them. But their comfort / emotional state etc is entirely their responsibility as long as I fulfill my responsibility to make them feel welcome - and kowtowing to them is not part of that.
I loathe telling people I'm a vegetarian for this reason. People think that my decision to not eat meat is an attack on _them_ and not a choice I've made for myself.
My experience is that there are very, very few of those kinds of people. I do not practice veganism anymore, but the number of pushy vegans I saw was vastly, vastly outnumbered by the number of non-vegans who felt the need to profess how moral their own decisions around food were.
Person: Whatcha' getting?
Me: I'm not totally sure.
Person: How about the steak?
Me: No, I don't really want that. (oh no.)
Person: Really? It's supposed to be really good.
Me: I hear that, but I don't think so, not this time.
Person: Why not?
Me: Well, I don't eat meat at all, actually.
Person: Oh yeah? Are you vegetarian or vegan?
Me: Vegan.
Person: Oh, I'm so sorry to hear that. The steaks is gonna be so great. Don't you just hate how pushy vegans are? They're always going on and on and on about...
This story happened over and over and over and over and over and over and over to me.
It was the same with not drinking, too. "Why did you only get a Pepsi?"
To be fair, a ton of vegetarians are smug, moralizing douchebags who do attack others on their decision to eat meat. There's a humorous saying: "How do tell if someone is vegetarian/vegan? Don't worry: they will let you know."
There was a girl in my dorm during freshman year of college who would literally start sobbing if she saw anyone eat meat.
The vast majority of people who don't eat meat honestly don't care about anyone else's dietary choices. The reason it comes up is because most people assume everyone eats meat. If I was never offered meat, I'd never have to tell anyone that I'm not going to eat it.
There are always going to be outliers like that girl, but compare the relative frequency of seeing people like that vs the absurd number of bacon products (jelly, soap, toothpaste).
The girl I mentioned was an outlier, but hardly the only vegetarian/vegan I've known who always broached the subject of "meat ethics" at every opportunity.
People like that might make up a small portion of the vegetarian/vegan population, but they are a very vocal minority, which skews perspectives.
This is mainly a problem among the very young and very idealistic. As you pointed out you had this experience in your dorm. I also had similar experiences with zelots in college, much less so later in life.
People are social creatures and one aspect of that is that we feel a natural, slight constant pressure to harmonize our mental states with the people around us. Diversity is good, of course, but we experience dissonance in outlook as an uncomfortable friction. When together, we always seek common ground to focus on.
When someone says "I don't drink"—an entirely valid and acceptable choice!—at a point in time where we've already established that someone else in the group does, it draws attention to that disharmony. It's not that not drinking is the bad thing, it's just the delta between that and the previously accepted reality that another in the group does. You've subtracted some territory from the common ground.
To get a sense of this, consider an imaginary scene:
A group of people are standing around trying to decide where to go out. The first few people suggest a place that is does not serve alcohol and that they are OK with that since they don't drink anyway. The next person mentions that they do drink.
In this case, it's now the drinker who looks flatfooted, at least as I imagine the scene. To me, then, this indicates that it's not being a non-drinker that's socially awkward, just that expressing a divergent preference that is.
Fortunately, most people have tact and can gracefully handle a little dissonance here regardless of which preference comes up first. Certainly, in the groups I frequent, we try very hard to make non-drinkers and drinkers feel comfortable and included regardless of who makes the first move.
The way this tact gets expressed is through plausible deniability. We express our preferences as vague or potential so that if a clashing preference comes up, it's easy to retreat from ours and get back to common ground.
That's why, at least in American speech, people say things like, "I could go for __." "I would be up for __." "__ sounds good." All of those are softly worded enough that they can be amended later to reach consensus without losing face.
I'm omnivorous. I can't even imagine people having an issue with being vegetarian now. It's just so common. Around my area, finding out a person is vegetarian leads to an exchange of recipes.
Reminds me of that quote from William Gibson: "Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self esteem, first make sure you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes."
I drink and I don't see that comparison as a stretch. Our society regularly endorses drinking as a way to deal with your shitty life. This is just like the soma in Brave New World.
Except in Brave New World, soma is used to maintain a lie (which you're punished for refusing to believe) that life isn't unpleasant. In the modern world, alcohol is used by some people to cope with the common-sense fact that life is unpleasant.
One of the central themes of Brave New World is the collapse of realism and individualism in the attempt to maintain perfect order (and thus, ironically, control over reality). It's hard to leave that out of any conception of soma, especially when you consider that the pretentious fuck complaining about his coworkers taking "soma" really isn't all that much more enterprising or self-aware than anyone else, in the first place.
The good news is that this becomes less of an issue with age. In another 5 years you'll deal with this situation slightly less, and another 5 years after that (when many of your peers have kids or whatever) nobody will care at all.
I think most of this entire discussion simply revolves around the young age of the startup scene in general. It's the same with any scene full of people your age.
Now that I'm in my early 30s, I can tell you that anyone this age who's still doing peer pressure is someone you need to remove from your life immediately. Most of us just want to have a few cocktails and call it a night.
BTW, it's not "soma" when used in social situations. It's social lubricant. I'd equate alcohol with soma when a person is sitting on the couch watching NFL or MLB with beer, not caring about anything in the world. Which also has its place in the world, you just don't need to do that on a consistent basis.
Long story short, my advice to you is to find a few older friends who just don't care.
In my experience it is a company culture kind of thing. I have worked at companies where managers with kids are leading the weekly beer bash, and I have also been at places where there are multiple kegerators that no one ever touches.
Gentlemanly behavior or etiquette in general at least historically could be summarized to always make the people around you as comfortable as possible. In that way being as nice as possible to the drinkers makes sense, its not like you're billed by the spoken word or something. Also it makes the manager in the linked article a hopeless jackass for making the employee uncomfortable, even worse doing to in front of peers. Well, every continuum has a median and someone has to end up below it...
Its interesting that the topic changes but the subject never changes. Everyone expects this kind of behavior with food, now a days.
Historically it was normal for religion. You'd agree with your immediate boss or things would get very uncomfortable very quickly. Times change. Maybe someday people who don't drink won't be bullied, much as its pretty much OK to be Jewish nowadays, or whatever else.
Another set of current day examples are progressive/left wing political signalling on social media which is fairly mandatory, and strangely enough the ecosystem your phone belongs to (ios, android, or the also-rans).
> It's actually really weird being a young adult (23) who doesn't and has never drank.
As someone who never drank until I was 25, I can see your point. However, the negative thoughts people have about "don't rock the boat for being different" have never resonated with me.
I think the whole idea that everyone should always care about everyone else's feelings has gone way too far. I sometimes eat red meat, I enjoy good beer, I don't smoke or do any drugs. We can still be friends whether you agree, or disagree, with any or all of those points. If you don't think so, that's your problem.
"don't rock the boat for being different" only applies to followers, not leaders. Nobody would ever accuse the college hockey star or the startup founder of rocking the boat because he doesn't drink. They would think it was courageous that he stood by his principles.
You'll get confusion whenever you don't do something that is part of the standard human experience. Drinking, having children, getting married, dating, not eating meat, etc.
Most unreasonable behavior as a reasonable reason behind it. Never drinking is unreasonable without significant personal/religious reasons. People are understandably curious about your reasons, which generally wouldn't be good small talk (e.g. it killed my X).
make people aware of a moral decision
This response came out unexpectedly negative
You make a moral decision to not engage, which means you have acted superiority to their decision to engage in something that you consider a moral choice. People are reacting to the superiority, not to the lack of alcohol (as it evidenced by the suggestion that you say you're not drinking tonight rather than 'don't drink').
No, but the top level poster specifically called their decision a moral one. Even if that means "it's not right for me", it still changes the tone from a non-moral statement about drinking.
I'm 32 and I don't drink alcohol nor coffee. I did try when I turned 18 just so I know what it's like.
It's definitely weird in a social setting when most of it involves drinking. To say it's a tech industry or startup thing is incorrect. From my view so much of the society revolves around alcohol and coffee. It's like people don't know how to have a good time without it.
Well I'm not surprised that a class on etiquette is going to make a point of teasing out the finer nuances of social interaction, but in most cases a simple "no thanks" will suffice. Most people don't care because in the real world there are plenty of people who don't drink (e.g. recovering alcoholics, designated drivers, people with health issues, legal issues, safety concerns, religious objections, or even people who just want to wake up on time for work in the morning).
Two things: 1) it actually seems like good advice, in general, to avoid implying moral judgment if you can avoid it. It tends to put them "on guard" and go into defensive-mode, looking for reasons to justify what they're doing, rather than thinking neutrally.
I remember an article about how it's more convincing, to pro-gun people, to say,
a) "This measure will reassure Suzy down the street", than
b) "This measure will save lives"
since b) implies a lot of moral culpability for opponents -- even though b) is a better reason for the law (if true).
2) There are parts of the country where not-drinking is normal or at least kept out of view. Say, Utah.
Drinking is not a moral issue. It's a health issue. If I am an alcoholic, have other health problems that prevent me from drinking, or just don't want to drink because I value my health, I certainly shouldn't have to go along with it because it makes some people uncomfortable. Those people are the ones who should be taking a look at themselves and their problem with someone not drinking. It is not my responsibility to make others feel better at my own expense because they can't deal with their own insecurities.
If I had a peanut allergy and someone offered me peanuts, should I just not rock the boat and go along with it? No peanuts for me tonight. Then they'll ask again and again. Why not just set them straight in the first place? If that doesn't go over well, it's probably a good idea to not be around those people anyway because those people obviously have no capacity for respect.
I can understand people who don't drink, but I don't understand people who have never drank. It feels like an obvious personal flaw, a sign of cowardice, that you would not have even tried something so routine and common in our society. If you have tried alcohol, and decided it wasn't for you, then that it all the more courageous. But it feels like you just aren't exploring all that life holds. Or, you don't have faith in yourself that you could get away from it.
There's also this societal concept that everyone has vices. And people would rather be able to recognize and see your vice, rather than have it be unknown. Bill Cosby comes to mind.
Do you feel this way about all mind-altering substances, or is it a function of ubiquity?
Where do you draw the line? I actually agree with you in theory: I think most people should try most things. I think my line, though, is a function of potential for addiction and abuse. On that scale, though, alcohol looks as bad as amphetamines, and far worse than something like MDMA.
If ubiquity is your primary factor, do you feel the same way about cigarettes? Should everyone try them to see what the fuss is about?
I agree with your position here. Sure, etiquette is basically a set of unspoken social rules to keep people from feeling uncomfortable; however, it's far more gauche of a host to not pay attention to this type of proclivity in their guest (especially a recurring guest). I don't think it's at all objectionable for someone to assert their choices in a clear way the first time.
I'm sure plenty of people will say it's not OK to bend over backwards to accommodate your guests. I agree with that sentiment as well! Where we'd digress is equating "not serving alcohol" or "choosing fish over meat" to "bending over backwards".
If you're really interested in making someone feel welcome in your home, you can go without booze or steak for one night!
Imagine you invited me over to your home for dinner, and you offered me a glass of tap water. And I said, "No thank you, I don't drink tap water."
Would you have any questions for me? Would you feel strange about drinking the tap water yourself now? Would you wonder why I chose to say "I don't drink tap water" instead of just "No thank you"?
This was an important lesson freshman year of college:
It's OK to drink, even if you're underage, but you MUST provide Equally-Attractive Non-Alcoholic Beverages (EANABs) at your parties. And you must ensure that people from outside the university cannot enter the party.
The author's boss is quite the philistine to insist that everyone drink! I guess he never worked with Muslims, alcoholics, anyone with an allergy or a genetic alcohol sensitivity, or anyone taking medicines that impact the liver.
This is also the reason why I tend to stay away from Meetups/Startup events/recruiting events/etc.
They tend to devolve into awkward situations for people like myself who don't drink or don't want to waste time with the "oh really? you don't drink at all?" conversations. I'm not an alcoholic, but people consistently feel the need to dive into why I don't drink, choose not to, and have never had a drink.
And as much as people here or anywhere may say that they either A) don't care whether I'm drinking or B) feel awkward around others who don't drink, the reality is that the culture is centred around whether you drink and how much.
People are curious because the answer to "why you don't drink" is usually a quite revealing fucked up reason.
Prior alcoholism, court order, "yeast allergy".
Its so RARELY because of the latest diet or preservation of your liver or religion that people are right often enough to consider it a red flag and want to know what fucked up reason you have.
I think you are probably living in a bubble if you think that those reasons are rare. I'm in Boston (not the most diverse place) and I know a bunch of people in the local industry who don't drink for religious or dietary reasons. Moreover, two of the things you mentioned as being red flags (alcoholism and an allergy in scare quotes) aren't things I would ever consider red flags. If someone is an alcoholic and abstains from alcohol, that's probably a pretty good sign about the person! If someone claims a medical condition which prevents them from drinking, well, I'm not a doctor/health expert so I'm not going to judge that.
> And as much as people here or anywhere may say that they either A) don't care whether I'm drinking or B) feel awkward around others who don't drink, the reality is that the culture is centred around whether you drink and how much.
I really don't think this is true. It may feel that way to you because you end up interacting a lot with the small portion of people who do care, but, for the most part, people are very indifferent to how much others are drinking.
Sometimes I go to things like this and drink, sometimes I don't drink, but because drinking is a non-issue to me I have never once been bothered by the environment. If someone asks why I'm not drinking I would just say something like "I have to be up early tomorrow," and that's it, issue resolved.
The stock answer in most places I know in Europe is to say that you can't drink because you have to drive afterwards. It doesn't have to be true but nobody will question it.
I don't drink because I don't like to drink. I don't like the taste, I don't like the feeling, and I don't like the aftermath.
I don't drink coffee either, because I don't like the taste. Someone wouldn't have to lie about why they don't drink coffee, so why is alcohol any different?
I'm told in both situations that "it's an acquired taste" -- that's nice, but I do not wish to acquire a taste for something I do not like.
The trick is to get one small beer and drink it all night. I do this all the time because I like to be out socialising and sometimes because it has professional benefits too but I do find it strange to base it around taking what is essentially a hard drug.
That sounds like a more interesting conversation than most the ones I have at these types of events. Even though I am a social drinker, I may give it up just so that I can use it as an icebreaker.
"No, I don't drink any longer. Strictly for the sake of small talk, really. But you say you do drink? Tell me about your history of drinking. Is it a long one?"
This behavior of someone taking offense to you not wanting to drink with them is something I've seen before. What's particularly infuriating about it is that you shouldn't need any particular reason not to drink. Whether it's because you're a recovering alcoholic, or you just don't feel like it, a simple "No thank you" should be enough.
On a side note, I remember having a discussion with a coworker about after work drinks. She noted how sometimes people would be willing to stay and work more if they knew they were going out for drinks afterwards. I imagine the way alcohol can relive stress with immediacy can lead one to willingly work in more harsh conditions. Hell, I've stood extremely late several times just because I knew I can join up with friends later for a drink.
We had someone who came to work for us that told the whole company he was a recovered alcoholic and everyone was real nice about it. The bosses and co-workers in this story just sound like colossal jerks.
I actually have an opposite problem, though. We stock the fridge with craft beer but since everyone is a health nut (I use it as a terms of endearment) no one wants beer at 6:00 so sometimes I end up being the only one and that feels awkward. But I've been at the office 11 hours, I want to treat myself.
Also, I find the thought of Beer Pong at the office to be very alarming. Foosball, sure, but Beer Pong? What are we, Freshmen in college?
But I'm in a East Coast office. We're annoyingly all business here. It is probably different elsewhere.
Every single time I've played we filled the pong cups with water and have whatever you're drinking (beer, soda, cranberry juice) on the side. Whenever they sink a ball, just drink your own drink. I was under the impression most people played like this?
I'm not a sober alcoholic, I'm just a person that doesn't drink for a variety of reasons. I can tell you that this isn't just startups. It's our entire society.
I work at a non-startup and there's a happy hour every Friday at the end of the day. Everyone else is VERY EXCITED for this Happy Hour. I'm still excited because we basically stop working, but not nearly as excited as everyone else.
Even outside work, when I go to social gatherings, people are drinking. Drinking is the main attraction for most people. If I go to a meetup, I'm the only one who cares primarily about what the meetup is supposed to be about. Go to a concert, other people get drunk, I am the only one actually trying to enjoy the music. Even hanging with my friends watching a movie, I'm actually trying to pay attention to the movie, but for everyone else, they have to "enhance" the experience with some beverages.
Go to any conference or convention? After-work party? These events are ALWAYS at bars. What am I supposed to do in a bar? It's the most uncomfortable place in the world to be for someone who doesn't drink. It's like someone who can't swim hanging out at the public pool.
While not drinking makes social life, especially in NYC, a bit more difficult, I do not have the same experience as you. Nobody has ever been a dick to me about not drinking. They just accept it. I've had some people ask why, but that's fine. I'll just explain to them. I guess that might be more troubling if my reason was a past of alcoholism. I've never had anyone get mad or anything. So I think that aspect might just be an aspect of startup bro culture. Not that I needed another reason to never work for one.
Right, it's very strange to try to localize this to one industry, because drinking is the main way that adults socialize in society all over the world.
I mean, I like it, so it's not a problem for me. But it is interesting how people minimize the dangers of it and exaggerate the problems of a much less harmful drug like cannabis.
"It's the most uncomfortable place in the world to be for someone who doesn't drink. It's like someone who can't swim hanging out at the public pool."
No one can tell the difference between a rum and coke, and a coke. It works for me pretty well. We have some similar outlooks, and perhaps you'll find my sneaky idea to be useful. Its much easier to fake drinking than to fake swimming.
I don't even have a variety of reasons not to drink. In the LSD community or whatever you want to call it there's a well known effect called the 50 trip limit or 100 trip limit or whatever number, after doing it 50 times you're either repeating because you never thought about it, or you're bored with the whole experience, or you're hopelessly addicted. Same with alcohol, at least for me. I've done it all, drank incredible amounts, stayed up all night, passed out, puked up gallons, made out, had all kinds of fascinating hangovers, its really an interesting, although fundamentally worthless, experience. I checked every square on the checklist. Once your inner completionist is satisfied, its really a very boring and unpleasant experience. And now that its boring, I just don't do it anymore. It isn't the kind of response that fits in 10 words or less at a bar. So I just order a coke and everyone assumes its a rum and coke.
Inebriation is certainly monotonous after a while, but there's a big difference between that and the world of beverages that happen to contain alcohol. People happily spent decades exploring different kinds of wine, beer, scotch, etc. and still don't feel they've run out of exciting new tastes and experiences.
I've tried everything you have listed there. The high is the same for me and it all tastes like shit (literally, it is bacteria feces after all). If you enjoy it by all means, but pressuring someone else into it is silly. It's a drug like everything else.
This is a common suggestion, but I don't want to drink Coke, it's really unhealthy. I want to drink nice tap water, which doesn't really look like vodka or gin, since it comes in a giant glass and you drink it at a much faster rate.
You can speak to the bartender/waiter (especially ahead of time) and ask them that despite asking for a rum and coke, you need a coke. They will be happy to help out (at least, they have been for me).
This seems to me a problem with an infantile culture, and not alcohol per se. The founder in the anecdote is obviously a person of poor judgment, unable to empathize, egotistical. This kind of enfant terrible is worshipped and celebrated by SV culture, given power, their fits and tantrums indulged and even encouraged as part of their mystique of genius, their disruptive zero-fucks-given.
This problem runs deep; alcohol is only a smidgeon of it.
Should it be seen as a red flag when you're given a tour of the office (maybe during an interview process) and they make it a point to show your the beer fridge? My anecdotes aren't data, of course, but every time I've had that kind of experience, I've discovered that there's an implicit expectation that you'll stay at work later and drink said beer.
I was hinting at that towards the end of my post: the idea that you're expected to drink it if it is offered, particularly after work hours are over. Not all of us fancy sticking around at the end of the day.
Things I enjoy doing: When there's some sort of thing where there's free alcohol, and somebody says they don't drink, interrupt before somebody can ask an intrusive question with "excellent, more for me then" and if possible clinking my glass with theirs. Usually spikes (pun absolutely intended) any issue before it starts.
I'm not sure it is just startups. I think larger/more established companies fit into this too, but they may just be emulating hip startups.
I work at a 100-500 person company. I do not attend most company events because of the amount of drinking. I hate meeting with clients because the amount of drinking.
As someone who used to regularly show up to work drunk, it's not a healthy atmosphere for me. However, I do feel an odd sense of loyalty because 2+ years ago they let me go to rehab instead of canning me.
Everyone knows the answer is _yes_ without clicking. The only qualification is to modify "startups" to "startup culture."
Are there exceptions? Of course!
But the prevailing culture enshrines and celebrates a lot of the worst aspects of being young, male, and competitive.
It's absolutely non-unique in this respect, but honestly, there should be a much stronger countervailing voice flatly stating, _we can do and be better than this_.
The counterpoint is that it's still true if I modify "startup culture" to "culture". It may be more in-your-face when it's about colleagues, but drinking-as-socialization is an American (and European) pattern, not a startup one.
It goes for college parties, it goes for dinner with clients at big companies, it goes for 4th of July barbecues, and it goes for fancy Sonoma Valley wine tastings. At a certain point it feels like pretense to blame it on startup culture - startup culture is largely an intensified, sped-up version of everyday culture, and everyday culture is plenty focused on drinking.
I disagree, though living in San Francisco it's hard to remember how unique and relatively narrow the cultural spectrum of this industry and place are.
The marriage of drinking and and alpha dominance displays of all kinds, are in my life experience dominant elements in contemporary US culture; they are not even tolerated in some circles. In many places I have lived what they call 'nightlife' is strictly demarcated by space and time.
I'd wager this is just one more place where the work / life distinction has become very blurred or has vanished entirely, around here. :/
In any event on the brighter side, we can look forward to the hangover!
I don't drink now, and I like to say "It works out pretty good - when people drink, they get relaxed. And when they get relaxed, I get relaxed" It's worked well for me, ymmv.
IMO, The tech industry has a huge alcohol problem in general.
It's not uncommon for even largeish companies to have beer kegs and frequent happy hours.
Just recently we had a team event that revolved around alcohol, a mixology class. Although attendance wasn't mandatory, it wasn't exactly optional either. So there was a lot of awkwardness considering a number of people on our team were non-drinking muslims, 1 person was pregnant, and several others just don't drink.
This creates an exclusionary sort of culture, and as one of my coworkers said it "I don't really want to be forced to go to the bar with my middle aged male colleagues". If you think about it, it does seem a bit creepy.
Other industries have moved on from this sort of model. Sure, there still can be alcohol at events and the occasional BBQ with beer or happy hour, but they have strict policies about returning to work after consuming alcohol, and alcohol is not the main focus of the event.
I take full advantage of the beer keg at our office, but if it went away I certainly wouldn't be upset. I'd just do what I used to do, and go to the bar after work with coworkers who want to go.
I don't work at vegan companies, or non-profits, their cultures aren't compatible with me. However, I wouldn't go around saying they have a "smug problem" that's their culture and their welcome to it, the moment I want to work at those cultures I'll either accept the conflict or do as the Romans do.
What is assholish is to insist that everyone else change what they enjoy just because you don't like it.
Generally when highlighting problems, you want them to change...
I mean who is like "Oh you have a drinking problem, just keep drinking, it's fine, I dunno why I even brought it up"
I've been around alcoholics, one night I bought a case of beer and had a couple beers while coding, then I got a talk from my girlfriend in AA about how drinking alone is a sign of alcoholism.
Startups don't have a drinking problem, alcoholics have a self-control problem.
What does "it wasn't exactly optional either" mean? For whatever it's worth, Mixology course sounds terrible even as someone who partakes in alcohol.
"Other industries have moved on from this sort of model"
Source? I've worked for a few corps outside of strict tech focus and that was not my experience.
What's the end-goal of this anyways? You can't moderate social interactions, so if your company stops doing alcohol-related events, your teams are almost certainly still going to go to happy hours. I get that this would be a problem if every corporate event solely revolved around getting rip-roaringly drunk, and that would be needlessly exclusionary, but I also doubt that's the reality outside of some really fringe cases. Although maybe that is how it really goes down, and I've just had a sheltered workplace experience
"It wasn't exactly optional" was that there was an implied request that everyone would attend. It went on everyone's calendars and was during work hours, not after.
I'm not arguing alcohol should be removed from office functions. I'm saying [a] they shouldn't be the focus and [b] maybe we don't need to have fridges of beer where it is acceptable to grab one and go back to your desk.
My wife's company (a nationwide outdoor retailer) does have alcohol occasionally at events, but those are semi-regular BBQs at the end of the day, and are absolutely optional. My friends work in healthcare where there is zero alcohol. Other friends work in the government, also zero alcohol. My mother works for a shipping company, also no alcohol on premises. In fact, outside of tech no-one I know has alcohol kept on premises.
I haven't eaten meat in 29 years. I don't get offended when I go to work events where meat is served or even offered as a centerpiece of the event like at a pig roast.
That is a tremendously courageous post. Not many people can publicly discuss their addictions.
I've worked at many places that have had a strong alcohol after work culture, but it's only recently that I've seen it in work hours. As someone who likes to drink, it hasn't bothered me, but I also don't want to be exclusive of people. Many people choose not to drink due to their religion or health goals, as well as addiction.
I wish the world were a better place about this, but this is part of the background checking one needs to know about a new job. If you're worried about being able to take off to see your kid's play, you have to inquire if any of the senior execs have kids. If you are worried about age discrimination, you have to see if others with gray hair are thriving there. And if you're worried about an alcoholic culture, look for people who don't drink. This is very hard to bring up in an interview, but you can learn about culture via back channels.
For what it's worth, when I went through periods of non-drinking, I would just tell people that I was training for a martial arts competition, and needed to keep my weight down.
My own experience (and I won't claim this is necessarily representative) is that drinking is a big part of it, but nobody will care at all if you refrain. Asking for water or soda instead of alcohol will barely get a second glance.
I think the title of this article would be better written as "Do startups have an asshole problem?" It just so happened that the asshole problem manifested in terms of alcohol because that's where the author was set up to come into conflict with the assholes.
You could easily have the same sort of experience as a vegetarian in a company that revolved around barbecues and steak. That wouldn't mean startups have a "meat problem," but that they have an asshole problem that manifests in terms of meat because that's where you're in conflict. Other possibilities include smartphone ownership, hobbies, and political affiliation.
Alcohol is certainly an interesting case because it's one of the few drugs that's legal, socially acceptable, and extremely commonly used. The only other one I can think of is caffeine, and even there we tend to go out of our way to make non-caffeinated equivalents available. But it seems to me that hassling people because they don't drink is just a symptom of a larger problem, which is that there are assholes in power, and one of the things assholes do is hassle people who are different.
Not because I think that most engineers at startups are assholes (quite the contrary), but because I think that puts the content of the article more succinctly.
If this were me, the next morning I'd be either a.) Talking with HR, or (more likely) b.) looking for another job.
> I think the title of this article would be better written as "Do startups have an asshole problem?" It just so happened that the asshole problem manifested in terms of alcohol because that's where the author was set up to come into conflict with the assholes.
I think startups may have an asshole problem as well, but that's not the context I got from the article. Startups have a much larger problem and that is the insistence that your job is a lifestyle, a culture. It's not enough to show up and do your job well and get along with everybody. You have to fit in as well. If you don't, it affects your future career prospects. Drinking is the norm. It's expected, along with wearing certain clothes, using certain tech stacks and having certain political opinions. There are a multitude of ways not to fit in. Alcohol is just one of them.
Totally agree, but I'd take it in a different direction too, which is that startups have an expertise problem by definition. Most of the stuff in this article that just seemed beyond the pale WAS beyond the pale. But most of that stuff:
1. Came from people who would have definitely not been in C-suite positions at any established company
2. Would have been completely moderated by someone in HR at a traditional company, if not lead to termination / sanction
But, because it's a startup, you're getting people who have to do jobs they were never trained to do, or were never a good fit for. Your brainiac CEO may be lacking the soft-skills to actually be responsible for other people, and yet, he's the most qualified to really own the product vision. There's a reason these positions aren't mixed in traditional companies, and there's a reason why your CEO isn't the CEO at a stable company pulling in $$MM in revenue.
I find the peer pressure to drink more in the immediate post-college crowd. Most folks in their 30s have seen friends get DUIs, or have alcohol cause trouble in their lives. Or we equate beer with large bellies. And we respect folks who refrain.
Do startups have an asshole problem? Yes. Do they have an "enforced fun" problem, as someone else asked? Yes again. To some extent, I think these are both reflections of something else: Silicon Valley style startups have an extrovert problem. Even though we're in an industry notorious for its prevalence of introverts, we're all called upon to put on our extrovert disguises for loud boisterous hyper-social fun from time to time. Why?
Part of it is that American culture in general tends to favor extroverts. Part of it is that startups have to do a lot of selling, both the company and the product, and that's extrovert territory again. Part of it, I think, is that VC culture strongly favors extroverts. VCs have to be that way due to the nature of their business, they favor founders who tend that way, they favor other execs who also tend that way, and everyone else just has to follow along. That's why non-VC startups tend not to have the same pathologies. People who cozy up to megalomaniacal show-offs a lot tend to become . . . well, anyone can complete that sentence.
I am 23, work at a startup, and also never drink, but definitely disagree with the implications of this post. Startups don't have any sort of particularly entrenched alcohol culture in the US- everyone does. And it's not really a problem, either. You can't ask for planet earth to be a safe space so you never get tempted by your booze urges again, just continue refusing, it's not something that can- or should- go away entirely.
There is a big difference between work being a safe space where no one drinks, and one where your boss berates you harshly for not drinking. The article depicts the latter situation. I drink; I don't care if people don't drink. I would never, ever respond to someone asking for water the way this writer's boss did. The boss acts as though he has been personally insulted. That's garbage.
164 comments
[ 0.26 ms ] story [ 207 ms ] thread(from http://www.ada.gov/employmt.htm )
""in most cases, the court will find, or the employer will concede, that an alcoholic employee has a "disability" within the meaning of the ADA.""
http://warshawskylawfirm.com/lawyer/2011/12/12/Employment_La...
If she were a diabetic would you be defending her employer insisting that she eat a Mars bar when she's said no?
So what if you do "have a problem"? Is it right for someone to push alcohol on you, knowing that you have a problem? Perhaps I should offer discounts at the liquor store to people who turn in their AA coins, because alcoholism is "their problem" not mine?
Craig Ferguson's comments on alcoholism are worth listening to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZVWIELHQQY
Anyone can judge anyone on anything. In this particular case if someone judged a teetotaler negatively for not partaking, I'd judge them as an idiot.
> Consider that the one with a problem might be you if you can't even have one line of coke.
> Consider that the one with a problem might be you if you can't even have just one hit of this joint.
Why is it a problem for you if I don't want to put something that is not good for me into my body?
Would you feel the same if I questioned why you don't have "just one cigarette with the guys" I mean go on, one cigarette won't kill you and you make us all feel uncomfortable when you don't join in. Be a team player don't be that guy.
And one perfectly excellent way of managing the problem in question (alcoholism) is to not drink alcohol.
Pressuring unwilling non-alcoholics into drinking is already a dick move to begin with. Coercing alcoholics into drinking (and possibly triggering a relapse of a problem which kills tens of thousands of people a year and ruins an order of magnitude more lives) is a hundred times worse.
http://www.niaaa.nih.gov/alcohol-health/overview-alcohol-con...
So addiction is partly a genetic issue. Forcing people to do something their bodies aren't designed to handle is a serious dick move.
Yeah, I've had a few beers in my time, and still once in awhile. But I've finally realized in the last few years exactly how badly alcohol messes up blood sugar levels (honestly, practically every illegal drug is safer for me from a biochemical perspective because how the liver's function of regulating blood sugar levels is affected by alcohol) and so I drink far more judiciously now. I wish I'd paid more attention to this years ago.
But alcohol is not really the point of the article, it is the emotional relationship to alcohol that people / society has and of the immaturity of this relationship. Her boss in the first anecdote sounds like a wanna-be cult leader. She should have mentioned his age; that would have been useful, I think - I am assuming the older one gets, the wiser about such things normal people get (the pointlessness of bullying people like that).
You could substitute "agile", or some other fad buzzword, and you could easily write a similar article. I am now reminded of my stint at Peoplesoft, where first day of orientation was all about the wonders of becoming a PeoplePeople and PeopleThis and PeopleThat. It was pathetic.
Companies consciously are using cult indoctrination tactics now, I think. The idea of 'pay people a decent wage in return for quality work' is ... old fashioned. Instead, you are supposed to give your soul to the company in return for ... what? I don't remember this attitude when I was in my twenties, but that was before the Internet happened and 20 year olds started becoming billionaires.
When "rah rah rah" is the driving force, as opposed to a sense of professionalism, then that's not a job a sensible person wants. Software development / IT is not a religion, it is merely a craft.
The larger discussion has merits, but I do think, for better or worse, startup culture is just a reflection of our alcohol focused social culture (and in full disclosure, I enjoy it). Startups are different in that they often blur the line between professional and social. This can certainly be problematic, but it's also one of the most significant reasons that I enjoy working at startups much, much more than traditional businesses.
I'll never understand that, but that seems to resonate through society: don't rock the boat and make people aware of a moral decision to drink or to eat meat or to X. Just go with the flow and let everyone take their soma.
This response came out unexpectedly negative.
If you are truly comfortable with your own decision to drink you will not see someone else's decision not to drink as a threat.
I've never suffered the line of questioning that people always talk about. Perhaps a single "Why?" which is easily answered with "Personal choice." And honestly, if you deviate from the "norm" a "why?" should be expected and factored into the decision.
There are other decisions where you can expect to be asked "Why?" For example:
I don't have a Facebook account. "Why?"
I don't watch movies/TV shows. "Why?"
It could be argued the "why" isn't important. The question isn't asked out of importance, but out of curiosity. They're curious why I made the decision I made, especially because it is an unpopular decision.
And saying that it's okay to be questioned for your choices just because they're not as common--I have to adamantly disagree.
"Are you okay?" they'd ask. "Yeah, I just don't feel like drinking." Of course, I let them know that it doesn't bother me if they go ahead and have a few. Surprisingly (to me, anyway), after the first couple refusals, I've had several of them tell me that they were envious, and that they'd like to cut back on alcohol, too. I told them to just do it -- it's not hard, and once you get past the first couple of weeks (month tops), you don't even have that urge to drink anymore. This was fairly recent, so only time will tell if they actually follow through.
The main thing for me is that they clearly respect my decision not to drink, a few of them seem to even respect me more for turning them down. I think that'd be very different if I were to make them feel judged or inferior for their own choice to imbibe, however. People in that situation tend to get dismissive and start to mentally justify their own behavior. It can really make someone grumpy ;)
It's really about the nature of the interaction that is the important thing. If they had told me beforehand, and I forgot.. then I'd feel bad. If they copped an attitude about their superiority, then I'd be dismissive of them. But their comfort / emotional state etc is entirely their responsibility as long as I fulfill my responsibility to make them feel welcome - and kowtowing to them is not part of that.
Edit: a word
Person: Whatcha' getting?
Me: I'm not totally sure.
Person: How about the steak?
Me: No, I don't really want that. (oh no.)
Person: Really? It's supposed to be really good.
Me: I hear that, but I don't think so, not this time.
Person: Why not?
Me: Well, I don't eat meat at all, actually.
Person: Oh yeah? Are you vegetarian or vegan?
Me: Vegan.
Person: Oh, I'm so sorry to hear that. The steaks is gonna be so great. Don't you just hate how pushy vegans are? They're always going on and on and on about...
This story happened over and over and over and over and over and over and over to me.
It was the same with not drinking, too. "Why did you only get a Pepsi?"
There was a girl in my dorm during freshman year of college who would literally start sobbing if she saw anyone eat meat.
There are always going to be outliers like that girl, but compare the relative frequency of seeing people like that vs the absurd number of bacon products (jelly, soap, toothpaste).
People like that might make up a small portion of the vegetarian/vegan population, but they are a very vocal minority, which skews perspectives.
When someone says "I don't drink"—an entirely valid and acceptable choice!—at a point in time where we've already established that someone else in the group does, it draws attention to that disharmony. It's not that not drinking is the bad thing, it's just the delta between that and the previously accepted reality that another in the group does. You've subtracted some territory from the common ground.
To get a sense of this, consider an imaginary scene:
A group of people are standing around trying to decide where to go out. The first few people suggest a place that is does not serve alcohol and that they are OK with that since they don't drink anyway. The next person mentions that they do drink.
In this case, it's now the drinker who looks flatfooted, at least as I imagine the scene. To me, then, this indicates that it's not being a non-drinker that's socially awkward, just that expressing a divergent preference that is.
Fortunately, most people have tact and can gracefully handle a little dissonance here regardless of which preference comes up first. Certainly, in the groups I frequent, we try very hard to make non-drinkers and drinkers feel comfortable and included regardless of who makes the first move.
The way this tact gets expressed is through plausible deniability. We express our preferences as vague or potential so that if a clashing preference comes up, it's easy to retreat from ours and get back to common ground.
That's why, at least in American speech, people say things like, "I could go for __." "I would be up for __." "__ sounds good." All of those are softly worded enough that they can be amended later to reach consensus without losing face.
Because for most people whether or not they drink isn't a moral decision, and comparing it to a drug from Brave New World is a wee bit of a stretch.
One of the central themes of Brave New World is the collapse of realism and individualism in the attempt to maintain perfect order (and thus, ironically, control over reality). It's hard to leave that out of any conception of soma, especially when you consider that the pretentious fuck complaining about his coworkers taking "soma" really isn't all that much more enterprising or self-aware than anyone else, in the first place.
Though, in context, I think your interpretation is likely correct.
I think most of this entire discussion simply revolves around the young age of the startup scene in general. It's the same with any scene full of people your age.
Now that I'm in my early 30s, I can tell you that anyone this age who's still doing peer pressure is someone you need to remove from your life immediately. Most of us just want to have a few cocktails and call it a night.
BTW, it's not "soma" when used in social situations. It's social lubricant. I'd equate alcohol with soma when a person is sitting on the couch watching NFL or MLB with beer, not caring about anything in the world. Which also has its place in the world, you just don't need to do that on a consistent basis.
Long story short, my advice to you is to find a few older friends who just don't care.
Adding "...tonight" seems like a useful way to avoid of all that, so I may start using it.
Then again, I live in an area where you're more likely to catch flak for drinking then not.
Its interesting that the topic changes but the subject never changes. Everyone expects this kind of behavior with food, now a days.
Historically it was normal for religion. You'd agree with your immediate boss or things would get very uncomfortable very quickly. Times change. Maybe someday people who don't drink won't be bullied, much as its pretty much OK to be Jewish nowadays, or whatever else.
Another set of current day examples are progressive/left wing political signalling on social media which is fairly mandatory, and strangely enough the ecosystem your phone belongs to (ios, android, or the also-rans).
As someone who never drank until I was 25, I can see your point. However, the negative thoughts people have about "don't rock the boat for being different" have never resonated with me.
I think the whole idea that everyone should always care about everyone else's feelings has gone way too far. I sometimes eat red meat, I enjoy good beer, I don't smoke or do any drugs. We can still be friends whether you agree, or disagree, with any or all of those points. If you don't think so, that's your problem.
Most unreasonable behavior as a reasonable reason behind it. Never drinking is unreasonable without significant personal/religious reasons. People are understandably curious about your reasons, which generally wouldn't be good small talk (e.g. it killed my X).
It's definitely weird in a social setting when most of it involves drinking. To say it's a tech industry or startup thing is incorrect. From my view so much of the society revolves around alcohol and coffee. It's like people don't know how to have a good time without it.
I remember an article about how it's more convincing, to pro-gun people, to say,
a) "This measure will reassure Suzy down the street", than
b) "This measure will save lives"
since b) implies a lot of moral culpability for opponents -- even though b) is a better reason for the law (if true).
2) There are parts of the country where not-drinking is normal or at least kept out of view. Say, Utah.
If I had a peanut allergy and someone offered me peanuts, should I just not rock the boat and go along with it? No peanuts for me tonight. Then they'll ask again and again. Why not just set them straight in the first place? If that doesn't go over well, it's probably a good idea to not be around those people anyway because those people obviously have no capacity for respect.
There's also this societal concept that everyone has vices. And people would rather be able to recognize and see your vice, rather than have it be unknown. Bill Cosby comes to mind.
Where do you draw the line? I actually agree with you in theory: I think most people should try most things. I think my line, though, is a function of potential for addiction and abuse. On that scale, though, alcohol looks as bad as amphetamines, and far worse than something like MDMA.
If ubiquity is your primary factor, do you feel the same way about cigarettes? Should everyone try them to see what the fuss is about?
I'm sure plenty of people will say it's not OK to bend over backwards to accommodate your guests. I agree with that sentiment as well! Where we'd digress is equating "not serving alcohol" or "choosing fish over meat" to "bending over backwards".
If you're really interested in making someone feel welcome in your home, you can go without booze or steak for one night!
Would you have any questions for me? Would you feel strange about drinking the tap water yourself now? Would you wonder why I chose to say "I don't drink tap water" instead of just "No thank you"?
It's OK to drink, even if you're underage, but you MUST provide Equally-Attractive Non-Alcoholic Beverages (EANABs) at your parties. And you must ensure that people from outside the university cannot enter the party.
The author's boss is quite the philistine to insist that everyone drink! I guess he never worked with Muslims, alcoholics, anyone with an allergy or a genetic alcohol sensitivity, or anyone taking medicines that impact the liver.
What taught you this?
They tend to devolve into awkward situations for people like myself who don't drink or don't want to waste time with the "oh really? you don't drink at all?" conversations. I'm not an alcoholic, but people consistently feel the need to dive into why I don't drink, choose not to, and have never had a drink.
And as much as people here or anywhere may say that they either A) don't care whether I'm drinking or B) feel awkward around others who don't drink, the reality is that the culture is centred around whether you drink and how much.
Prior alcoholism, court order, "yeast allergy".
Its so RARELY because of the latest diet or preservation of your liver or religion that people are right often enough to consider it a red flag and want to know what fucked up reason you have.
about me living in a bubble of upstanding intellectuals
I really don't think this is true. It may feel that way to you because you end up interacting a lot with the small portion of people who do care, but, for the most part, people are very indifferent to how much others are drinking.
Sometimes I go to things like this and drink, sometimes I don't drink, but because drinking is a non-issue to me I have never once been bothered by the environment. If someone asks why I'm not drinking I would just say something like "I have to be up early tomorrow," and that's it, issue resolved.
I don't drink because I don't like to drink. I don't like the taste, I don't like the feeling, and I don't like the aftermath.
I don't drink coffee either, because I don't like the taste. Someone wouldn't have to lie about why they don't drink coffee, so why is alcohol any different?
I'm told in both situations that "it's an acquired taste" -- that's nice, but I do not wish to acquire a taste for something I do not like.
"No, I don't drink any longer. Strictly for the sake of small talk, really. But you say you do drink? Tell me about your history of drinking. Is it a long one?"
On a side note, I remember having a discussion with a coworker about after work drinks. She noted how sometimes people would be willing to stay and work more if they knew they were going out for drinks afterwards. I imagine the way alcohol can relive stress with immediacy can lead one to willingly work in more harsh conditions. Hell, I've stood extremely late several times just because I knew I can join up with friends later for a drink.
I actually have an opposite problem, though. We stock the fridge with craft beer but since everyone is a health nut (I use it as a terms of endearment) no one wants beer at 6:00 so sometimes I end up being the only one and that feels awkward. But I've been at the office 11 hours, I want to treat myself.
Also, I find the thought of Beer Pong at the office to be very alarming. Foosball, sure, but Beer Pong? What are we, Freshmen in college?
But I'm in a East Coast office. We're annoyingly all business here. It is probably different elsewhere.
edit: I didn't mind those at all. But I did not care for Pajama Day and the pressure to wear pajamas on Pajama Day
Beer pong is just dumb all the way around even as a freshman in college.
I work at a non-startup and there's a happy hour every Friday at the end of the day. Everyone else is VERY EXCITED for this Happy Hour. I'm still excited because we basically stop working, but not nearly as excited as everyone else.
Even outside work, when I go to social gatherings, people are drinking. Drinking is the main attraction for most people. If I go to a meetup, I'm the only one who cares primarily about what the meetup is supposed to be about. Go to a concert, other people get drunk, I am the only one actually trying to enjoy the music. Even hanging with my friends watching a movie, I'm actually trying to pay attention to the movie, but for everyone else, they have to "enhance" the experience with some beverages.
Go to any conference or convention? After-work party? These events are ALWAYS at bars. What am I supposed to do in a bar? It's the most uncomfortable place in the world to be for someone who doesn't drink. It's like someone who can't swim hanging out at the public pool.
While not drinking makes social life, especially in NYC, a bit more difficult, I do not have the same experience as you. Nobody has ever been a dick to me about not drinking. They just accept it. I've had some people ask why, but that's fine. I'll just explain to them. I guess that might be more troubling if my reason was a past of alcoholism. I've never had anyone get mad or anything. So I think that aspect might just be an aspect of startup bro culture. Not that I needed another reason to never work for one.
I mean, I like it, so it's not a problem for me. But it is interesting how people minimize the dangers of it and exaggerate the problems of a much less harmful drug like cannabis.
You can ask for a coffee, tea, a coke, alcohol-free beer, water, etc.
No one can tell the difference between a rum and coke, and a coke. It works for me pretty well. We have some similar outlooks, and perhaps you'll find my sneaky idea to be useful. Its much easier to fake drinking than to fake swimming.
I don't even have a variety of reasons not to drink. In the LSD community or whatever you want to call it there's a well known effect called the 50 trip limit or 100 trip limit or whatever number, after doing it 50 times you're either repeating because you never thought about it, or you're bored with the whole experience, or you're hopelessly addicted. Same with alcohol, at least for me. I've done it all, drank incredible amounts, stayed up all night, passed out, puked up gallons, made out, had all kinds of fascinating hangovers, its really an interesting, although fundamentally worthless, experience. I checked every square on the checklist. Once your inner completionist is satisfied, its really a very boring and unpleasant experience. And now that its boring, I just don't do it anymore. It isn't the kind of response that fits in 10 words or less at a bar. So I just order a coke and everyone assumes its a rum and coke.
You can speak to the bartender/waiter (especially ahead of time) and ask them that despite asking for a rum and coke, you need a coke. They will be happy to help out (at least, they have been for me).
This problem runs deep; alcohol is only a smidgeon of it.
Then you may not have seen as much of this phenomenon as others of us. There are definitely companies encouraging on-site drinking.
I work at a 100-500 person company. I do not attend most company events because of the amount of drinking. I hate meeting with clients because the amount of drinking.
As someone who used to regularly show up to work drunk, it's not a healthy atmosphere for me. However, I do feel an odd sense of loyalty because 2+ years ago they let me go to rehab instead of canning me.
Are there exceptions? Of course!
But the prevailing culture enshrines and celebrates a lot of the worst aspects of being young, male, and competitive.
It's absolutely non-unique in this respect, but honestly, there should be a much stronger countervailing voice flatly stating, _we can do and be better than this_.
It goes for college parties, it goes for dinner with clients at big companies, it goes for 4th of July barbecues, and it goes for fancy Sonoma Valley wine tastings. At a certain point it feels like pretense to blame it on startup culture - startup culture is largely an intensified, sped-up version of everyday culture, and everyday culture is plenty focused on drinking.
The marriage of drinking and and alpha dominance displays of all kinds, are in my life experience dominant elements in contemporary US culture; they are not even tolerated in some circles. In many places I have lived what they call 'nightlife' is strictly demarcated by space and time.
I'd wager this is just one more place where the work / life distinction has become very blurred or has vanished entirely, around here. :/
In any event on the brighter side, we can look forward to the hangover!
Just recently we had a team event that revolved around alcohol, a mixology class. Although attendance wasn't mandatory, it wasn't exactly optional either. So there was a lot of awkwardness considering a number of people on our team were non-drinking muslims, 1 person was pregnant, and several others just don't drink. This creates an exclusionary sort of culture, and as one of my coworkers said it "I don't really want to be forced to go to the bar with my middle aged male colleagues". If you think about it, it does seem a bit creepy.
Other industries have moved on from this sort of model. Sure, there still can be alcohol at events and the occasional BBQ with beer or happy hour, but they have strict policies about returning to work after consuming alcohol, and alcohol is not the main focus of the event.
I take full advantage of the beer keg at our office, but if it went away I certainly wouldn't be upset. I'd just do what I used to do, and go to the bar after work with coworkers who want to go.
What is assholish is to insist that everyone else change what they enjoy just because you don't like it.
I mean who is like "Oh you have a drinking problem, just keep drinking, it's fine, I dunno why I even brought it up"
I've been around alcoholics, one night I bought a case of beer and had a couple beers while coding, then I got a talk from my girlfriend in AA about how drinking alone is a sign of alcoholism.
Startups don't have a drinking problem, alcoholics have a self-control problem.
Addiction is a disease.
"Other industries have moved on from this sort of model"
Source? I've worked for a few corps outside of strict tech focus and that was not my experience.
What's the end-goal of this anyways? You can't moderate social interactions, so if your company stops doing alcohol-related events, your teams are almost certainly still going to go to happy hours. I get that this would be a problem if every corporate event solely revolved around getting rip-roaringly drunk, and that would be needlessly exclusionary, but I also doubt that's the reality outside of some really fringe cases. Although maybe that is how it really goes down, and I've just had a sheltered workplace experience
I'm not arguing alcohol should be removed from office functions. I'm saying [a] they shouldn't be the focus and [b] maybe we don't need to have fridges of beer where it is acceptable to grab one and go back to your desk.
My wife's company (a nationwide outdoor retailer) does have alcohol occasionally at events, but those are semi-regular BBQs at the end of the day, and are absolutely optional. My friends work in healthcare where there is zero alcohol. Other friends work in the government, also zero alcohol. My mother works for a shipping company, also no alcohol on premises. In fact, outside of tech no-one I know has alcohol kept on premises.
Edit: Uhh... I was downvoted for asking this? Depressing.
I've worked at many places that have had a strong alcohol after work culture, but it's only recently that I've seen it in work hours. As someone who likes to drink, it hasn't bothered me, but I also don't want to be exclusive of people. Many people choose not to drink due to their religion or health goals, as well as addiction.
I wish the world were a better place about this, but this is part of the background checking one needs to know about a new job. If you're worried about being able to take off to see your kid's play, you have to inquire if any of the senior execs have kids. If you are worried about age discrimination, you have to see if others with gray hair are thriving there. And if you're worried about an alcoholic culture, look for people who don't drink. This is very hard to bring up in an interview, but you can learn about culture via back channels.
For what it's worth, when I went through periods of non-drinking, I would just tell people that I was training for a martial arts competition, and needed to keep my weight down.
I think the title of this article would be better written as "Do startups have an asshole problem?" It just so happened that the asshole problem manifested in terms of alcohol because that's where the author was set up to come into conflict with the assholes.
You could easily have the same sort of experience as a vegetarian in a company that revolved around barbecues and steak. That wouldn't mean startups have a "meat problem," but that they have an asshole problem that manifests in terms of meat because that's where you're in conflict. Other possibilities include smartphone ownership, hobbies, and political affiliation.
Alcohol is certainly an interesting case because it's one of the few drugs that's legal, socially acceptable, and extremely commonly used. The only other one I can think of is caffeine, and even there we tend to go out of our way to make non-caffeinated equivalents available. But it seems to me that hassling people because they don't drink is just a symptom of a larger problem, which is that there are assholes in power, and one of the things assholes do is hassle people who are different.
Not because I think that most engineers at startups are assholes (quite the contrary), but because I think that puts the content of the article more succinctly.
If this were me, the next morning I'd be either a.) Talking with HR, or (more likely) b.) looking for another job.
Life is too short to have to deal with assholes.
I think startups may have an asshole problem as well, but that's not the context I got from the article. Startups have a much larger problem and that is the insistence that your job is a lifestyle, a culture. It's not enough to show up and do your job well and get along with everybody. You have to fit in as well. If you don't, it affects your future career prospects. Drinking is the norm. It's expected, along with wearing certain clothes, using certain tech stacks and having certain political opinions. There are a multitude of ways not to fit in. Alcohol is just one of them.
1. Came from people who would have definitely not been in C-suite positions at any established company 2. Would have been completely moderated by someone in HR at a traditional company, if not lead to termination / sanction
But, because it's a startup, you're getting people who have to do jobs they were never trained to do, or were never a good fit for. Your brainiac CEO may be lacking the soft-skills to actually be responsible for other people, and yet, he's the most qualified to really own the product vision. There's a reason these positions aren't mixed in traditional companies, and there's a reason why your CEO isn't the CEO at a stable company pulling in $$MM in revenue.
Part of it is that American culture in general tends to favor extroverts. Part of it is that startups have to do a lot of selling, both the company and the product, and that's extrovert territory again. Part of it, I think, is that VC culture strongly favors extroverts. VCs have to be that way due to the nature of their business, they favor founders who tend that way, they favor other execs who also tend that way, and everyone else just has to follow along. That's why non-VC startups tend not to have the same pathologies. People who cozy up to megalomaniacal show-offs a lot tend to become . . . well, anyone can complete that sentence.