>That's a choice Paul made. He CHOSE to stand behind a guy who signed his name to an entire book that dehumanizes his colleagues as a means of posturing.
>He didn't need to do it. So why?
>Paul wants impunity for guys like him, not shared dignity and decency for those in his field
Paul could have easily done nothing, so it's worth thinking about why he chose to take action. I'm not saying the author is necessarily correct, but it's absolutely worth thinking about. This mode of analysis is useful in similar situations, always think about who benefits from a choice or endorsement.
What was his work title in Apple? Was he in the management or in some high visibility position?
I don't see any problem Apple firing management for whatever reason. Apple is build around the brand. In brand companies you need to project an image.
For low level positions, most HR actions should be done bases on actions people take in the work. Even misogynistic pieces of shit should be able to work as a part of a team if they control themselves in the workplace. People are defective in multiple ways.
In the last team I worked we would have fired 2/3 of the Indian programmers based on their private beliefs of gender relations using the same criteria. They never bought it into workplace and we never asked. It just came out in private discussions.
>Was he in the management or in some high visibility position?
Yes.
>Even misogynistic pieces of shit be able to work as a part of a team if they control themselves in the workplace.
Why shouldn't people face consequences for their actions? You're stating that it's okay for someone to be prejudiced on the weekends, but people targeted by that prejudice don't have that privilege.
If Apple starts to probe opinions, they must reject huge number recent immigrants from India or China. I mean I work every day with highly educated foreign workers who never behave misogynistic way, but in private conversations it comes out that they really have sexist and racist attitudes not suitable for the workplace.
That does not mean I can't be their friend or coworker. I would not tolerate bullshit from them (actions) but I would not ask them to be fired because they are sexists when they are within their family.
I believe people can change and you should not judge people, you should judge their actions.
When you say something terrible, it enters public discourse. You may have intended it as a joke, as a wild, absurd exaggeration, but after you publish it, it's no longer yours to control it. Someone may take it seriously. It may drag the Overton window in a direction you didn't want to. It may naturalize some form of discourse or a particular point of view.
7 comments
[ 5.8 ms ] story [ 26.8 ms ] thread>That's a choice Paul made. He CHOSE to stand behind a guy who signed his name to an entire book that dehumanizes his colleagues as a means of posturing.
>He didn't need to do it. So why?
>Paul wants impunity for guys like him, not shared dignity and decency for those in his field
Paul could have easily done nothing, so it's worth thinking about why he chose to take action. I'm not saying the author is necessarily correct, but it's absolutely worth thinking about. This mode of analysis is useful in similar situations, always think about who benefits from a choice or endorsement.
I don't see any problem Apple firing management for whatever reason. Apple is build around the brand. In brand companies you need to project an image.
For low level positions, most HR actions should be done bases on actions people take in the work. Even misogynistic pieces of shit should be able to work as a part of a team if they control themselves in the workplace. People are defective in multiple ways.
In the last team I worked we would have fired 2/3 of the Indian programmers based on their private beliefs of gender relations using the same criteria. They never bought it into workplace and we never asked. It just came out in private discussions.
Yes.
>Even misogynistic pieces of shit be able to work as a part of a team if they control themselves in the workplace.
Why shouldn't people face consequences for their actions? You're stating that it's okay for someone to be prejudiced on the weekends, but people targeted by that prejudice don't have that privilege.
Yes. Actions.
If Apple starts to probe opinions, they must reject huge number recent immigrants from India or China. I mean I work every day with highly educated foreign workers who never behave misogynistic way, but in private conversations it comes out that they really have sexist and racist attitudes not suitable for the workplace.
That does not mean I can't be their friend or coworker. I would not tolerate bullshit from them (actions) but I would not ask them to be fired because they are sexists when they are within their family.
I believe people can change and you should not judge people, you should judge their actions.
We need to be careful with what we say or write.
Give me people who aren't offended at every little thing.
I'm happy for this support from PG. Maybe some of these folks will "cancel" HN now and go somewhere else.