Hacker News Reader

Comment by houselouse | Hacker News Reader

> Invite women you work with for coffee

No chance of this being misinterpreted.

   Invite women you work with for coffee and 
   ask what they like or dislike about their
   day-to-day. If they mention concerns or
   problems they’re having, ask if there’s
   any way you could help make it better.

View on HN

Ask everyone you work with for coffee. Please don't omit the women.

I've mentored new hires, and in that context it's easy to say, "hey can we get tea and talk about how the first few weeks have been?"

Yeah, this. It's weird to single out women and it's equally weird to not include women. The whole point of these discussions and elaborate rigmaroles is to treat people the same regardless of gender.

Hello, I am Grace. Please include women in the workplace. Talk to us. Don't omit us.

If you aren't sure if it's HR appropriate to talk to women at your workplace please check with your HR team.

I hope your HR team will encourage you to talk to women and ask what they like or dislike about their day-to-day. If they mention concerns or problems they’re having, I hope your HR team will encourage you to ask if there’s any way you could help make it better.

We are engineers answering from different countries. Different countries have different cultural norms and laws.

I have a lot of respect for the concepts discussed here, but as a side note "check with your HR team" is a pretty bad idea in most cases. As it's often said, HR is there to protect the company. Not to help employees. Approaching HR with the question "Is it ok to talk to women?" is going to make that HR employee make a note in your file that you're potentially causing a harassing environment and there's documentation of you specifically targeting female employees. Not to mention, it sounds like a loaded a question. The type of thing someone would ask after a woman sounded offended or rebuked him, and the guy is going to HR to try to preemptively do damage control and get his side of the story out first.

Don't go to HR with your problems, it can only hurt you. If you're the victim of something inappropriate in the workplace, seek outside legal advice and follow their direction in communicating with HR.

Seconded, I have never worked at a company where talking to the HR team was a good idea for any reason.

If you are thinking about it you should probably seek a lawyer because they are not your friend.

Agreed, HR exists to protect the company, nothing else.

Nothing related to gender, but I once had a coworker at a mid-sized company angrily threaten me in his cubicle: "if we weren't in the office, I would slit your throat." I immediately went to HR about it and literally the first thing they asked me after I told them was "can anyone corroborate your story?" I couldn't since nobody overheard us, so I was screwed. It was the only time in my life that I actually feared for my life from another human being -- especially since I tried to report him. I walked to my car with a friend that night, fearing he'd be waiting for me in the parking lot.

This coworker had received complaints for other issues from others in my department as well, but the company just didn't act. He remained there until he finally was fired for incompetence.

You should have talked to the police too.

Taking to HR is like talking to the cops. It's only a good thing when you have the grievance.

Even then they can probably nail you for something if they're so inclined.

I second this. Grace's advice to include women is good. Going to HR is risky. My strategy is to just treat everyone about the same as well as I can. Make sure the pattern is clear in people's minds. Helps if any disputes, esp false claims, make it to HR. I hang out with them, too, if they're alright. I learn from the good ones. Anyway, it has side benefit that they mentally compare their experiences around me with what they hear. Should match.

Aside from wives, other elephant in the room: accusations of harassment, sexual or otherwise. So easy to make. I'd be curious to quantify the chilling effect this has on office relations.

> If you aren't sure if it's HR appropriate to talk to women at your workplace please check with your HR team.

In what workplace is it not appropriate to speak to someone else?

I agree, HR, or talking to a lawyer about the cultural norms and laws is super important. I've seen a few guys with good intentions to help our struggle, but just not socially savvy get in trouble, and just become super bitter against women.

>If you aren't sure if it's HR appropriate to talk to women at your workplace

I'm not sure what you mean by this. What's the meaning of "HR appropriate"?

My wife would be furious.

Elephant in the room. Nobody seems to want to discuss the very real chilling effect of spousal mate-guarding behavior on workplace camaraderie. Thank you sir.

Didn't know this was a thing. Can you explain why it would be a problem?

Ok, example. You've watched movies where a dude looks at a woman sitting alone or talked to her, and her boyfriend/spouse shows up. Sometimes he gets angry at the random dude, sometimes gets angry at here for talking to him.

Same sort of thing except reverse the roles. It is still a control mechanism, and still wrong no matter which way it goes.

I've had women get angry at me because I'm talking to "their" man, and some will get angry at men for simply looking at a pretty woman or talking to any others.

In the workplace, this means that treating women the same way as men - building rapport, having lunch, etc - winds up causing problems at home.

"Who the hell is this $female_name person that you texted about going out to lunch with?!" [throws plate]

[dodges plate] "My coworker!"

Shun women because if I casually mention saying something about having talked to a non male while my wife wasn't around the wife'll beat me. If I don't say anything about talking to non males then I'm hiding things, which never goes well if wife ever meets a non male coworker who doesn't describe me as super shy

Y'all have some super-paranoid jealous partners, if you can't even talk to a colleague of a particular gender, purely as colleagues. I hope both for your partner and for you that they stop being that way someday.

Oh sure I can. I'm just not taking one out for coffee alone.

You mean to say you aren't allowed go our for coffee with a colleague? That sounds like a really unhealthy relationship to be honest... She doesn't trust you alone with a person of the opposite sex?

as someone who has had such partners (and thankfully do not now), let me assure you that it's a fairly common phenomena.

Also, for me at least, yes; it was a very unhealthy relationship/lifestyle. You're absolutely right about that.

edit: I didn't realize spouse implied only married-partner. I changed my wording on that. I always thought it just implied 'live-in partner'. (i'm not the marrying type, hah.)

that's cute. not married eh?

I'm married. I have friends of both sexes. I'll go out alone with them if I please. He has the same freedoms as I do. I don't see what the problem is. That is being respectful and not allowing jealousy to stifle your partner's behavior. IMHO, if you can't trust your spouse to go out to lunch or coffee with their coworkers, perhaps there is a problem with the relationship.

Are you suggesting this is a healthy dynamic that all married couples share?

i am not attesting at all to its health, just its commonality

just the ones that will likely end in divorce because somehow the husband thinks a woman will remain faithfully attracted to a witless, scared man for years on end.

There is a name for this. The name is isolation. Abusers do it. Mine did. Other things, too. I'm sure she still does. But not to me; I left. I can't help whoever's stuck with her now, and I'm sure there is someone. But I could help myself. Perhaps you could as well. Others helped me, too. Perhaps someone will do the same for you. If you want to hear from me, let me know, and I'll get in touch. You need not suffer this.

Exactly my thought.

For anybody interested in the topic of abuse, I strongly recommend, "Why Does He Do That? Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men": http://www.amazon.com/Why-Does-He-That-Controlling/dp/042519...

It is the single most astute book I have read. The author, a domestic violence counselor for men, mostly had clients who were court-ordered to attend his sessions. He spent a decade listening to vast amounts of self-justifying bullshit and then wrote a thoughtful, precise, and clear breakdown of why and how abusers work and how the abused can get out of it.

At this point I've given away 15 or so copies. Some to people who needed it urgently, and many to people who just wanted to learn more. Ignorance gives abusers cover, and I honestly think this book should be required reading for every high schooler so that they can spot and call out patterns of abuse.

Such a book has a great deal of value, to be sure.

Is it possible that there are significant differences in the way abusive men behave, and the way abusive women do, such that more is required to make a book useful to abused men than simply taking a book written for a female audience and swapping pronoun genders throughout? It seems possible to me. And the book you mentioned implicitly disclaims relevance to a situation of the sort under discussion here:

> In addition, I have chosen to use the terms he to refer to the abusive person and she to the abused partner. I selected these terms for convenience and because they correctly describe the great majority of relationships in which power is being abused. However, control and abuse are also a widespread problem in lesbian and gay male relationships, and the bulk of what I describe in this book is relevant to same-sex abusers.

From the perspective of a man who has been abused by a woman, it is very hard to read anything in this paragraph other than "Go away. You do not exist. This is not for you." Perhaps you may object that that is not an accurate reading. Do you imagine an abusive relationship to be strongly conducive to objectivity?

In any case, I'm having a hard time finding anything like a companion volume for men abused by women. It seems pretty reasonable to imagine that such a book would exist, but if it does, it's sorely in need of publicity. I've found some dating books, and some books of statistics, and some websites that seem to regard the fact that women sometimes abuse men as evidence of some kind of overarching anti-male conspiracy, which I'm not sure is helpful. But I haven't found a "Why Does She Do That?", or anything substantially similar. Perhaps I'm just looking wrong.

I think that's a totally legitimate criticism of this book. The material is clearly rooted in his personal experience, which was counseling a great number of male abusers.

I think that a lot of the core dynamic is similar, so I'd expect the book to be useful to anybody in spotting patterns of abuse and control. Personally, I found the book much more widely useful than the author's intent. But if someone in your position didn't want the uphill struggle of trying to read themselves into a book that didn't start out from an inclusive stance, I'd totally understand. Not only is that a lot to take on when somebody is already struggling, but I'm sure important differences would be missed.

Is it isolation if it's just women?

I used to think that's just how women are, too. Eventually I realized that I had been made to think so in service of a purpose not my own.

No, I mean if your spouse only cares to keep you away from other women, but doesn't care which men you associate with.

Ah, I see what you mean. I can't really speak to that from my own experience, which was that of a gay man married to a woman who set great store in the idea that she had turned him straight. (She had not, of course. She merely found him too young to have realized that what one's body says at any given time need not be taken as the final word on anything, and went to a great deal of effort to deny him that realization.)

Perhaps a place to start might be: What would we say of a man who only cares to keep his wife away from other men?

I'd say pretty much the same thing. I'd only consider that man controlling/isolating if he kept her from the women too.

I'm not sure I understand how it is acceptable for one's intimate partner to forbid on pain of punishment that one have contact with anyone.

This isn't a work place issue, it's a marriage issue. If your wife beats you for talking to women while she's not around, you need to document and prolly get a divorce. This is not okay.

But it is a valid point that this kind of drama at home impacts male behavior at work in a way that is exclusionary towards female colleagues and I appreciate the fact that some people are willing to admit it here.

While I also appreciate the fact that people are willing to be open about it...

Drama at home is drama at home. It's a reason, but not a convincing one to behave differently towards female colleagues at work. The real problem is that person's unusually unhealthy personal relationship issues, which colleagues shouldn't be expected to tiptoe around.

No one is asking anyone to tiptoe around anyone else's issues, and I think it requires a certain degree of tendentiousness to read this conversation in that way. We're not talking about men who are unhappy at home so they take that out on female colleagues at work. We're talking about men who are uncomfortable or even afraid to interact in any significant way with female colleagues, because they know that if they do so and their wives find out, punishment will result. If you think that sounds fucked up, you're right. Imagine how it must be to live a life like that.

It is, to say the least, not easy for anyone to speak publicly, even under a pseudonym, of being or having been abused by intimate partners. But it's something worth doing and worth encouraging. That's true because abusers rely on secrecy to escape the opprobrium their actions deserve. It is also true because every time someone describes abuse clearly as what it is, there's a chance that someone else, who hasn't yet realized the true nature of their suffering, will see in that description something which may be of value to them.

When you respond to such statements in so callous a fashion as this, you may very well in so doing make those to whom you so respond less likely to make such statements in the future. Please think about whether that's something you really want to do. I don't ask this on my own behalf, because you cannot harm me. But it is very possible that you can harm someone else. If it were me, that's not something I would want to do. But perhaps you feel otherwise.

Hell, more than a divorce, if the beating is literal. No one should be beating anyone.

I'm glad we sorted out that problem.

The commenter several up in this thread mentioned the threat of a beating from their wife so casually, like it was no big thing, like of course their wife would beat them for talking to other women. I presume it was just colorful language on their part, but if they are laboring under the idea that this would actually be a reasonable situation (fucked-up gender norms perhaps playing a role here), it's important to stress that it is not. Wives should no more express displeasure with their husbands through violence or the implicit threat of such than vice versa. (Nor, as noted, should anyone behave this way toward anyone)

Of course it's a crappy situation, but it is how life is for a lot of people.

I'm not quite sure where you're coming from here, but you give me the impression that by declaring a reality "not OK", we can act like that reality doesn't exist.

I'm not blaming any abuse victim for being in their position; I'm just saying "Hey, I'm sorry you're in that position. Maybe you've been led to believe that kind of relationship is normal and healthy, but I want you to know it's not. (Perhaps, in the cases of this thread, you've been especially trained to dismiss the idea of this counting as abuse because of the gender dynamics of the situation not matching a common image. But it remains abusive regardless). So if you ever get the opportunity to leave it or otherwise perhaps to change it, please don't hesitate to do so. Again, sorry for what you're going through."

I hope you're being hyperbolic. I've gotten lunch with female coworkers and mentioned it to my partner without issue. If your wife considers it to be unreasonable I would look at why that is the case, rather than suggest the advice given is wrong.

Hi. Woman here.

This is a form of abuse, and it seems she has a jealousy or insecurity problem. It is unfortunate that men aren't taught these sorts of markers in the same way as women - women are taught this is one of those red flag things. It is even more of a tragedy that it is culturally acceptable for women to be like this to a point, when we should be calling folks out for it.

I don't know what the rest of your marriage is like, it could be mostly peachy as far as I know. But this does impact your life significantly and adds to the overall issue of women not having equality at workplaces. I'd urge you to suggest counseling as a minimum.

My wife wouldn't, but having talked with her friends, she's the exception that proofs the rule.

This put this recent article in a new light: "Everything i am afraid might happen if i ask new acquaintances to get coffee."

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/everything-i-am-...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12334272

This whole thing sounds like it was thought up by Jared from the Silicon Valley TV series

What about asking no one? :) Some of us prefers to drink our coffee by ourselves.

That is perfectly acceptable. Well, you know, some folks will look down on you for the antisocial bit of it (which is a shame, some people relish their alone time), but if you are doing it equally, no real harm done either.

And some folks will look down on you for being a female. Guess we are in the same boat?

Oh, I give them other reasons as well. I'm pretty quiet myself, I'm an immigrant, and my hair is blue. :D

Edit: I actually find the woman thing being the least of the problems now. It was a bigger issue living in the US than here in Norway, it seems.

Look at the context: what is a non obvious way one could help a female engineer? Mentoring them. That might include checking up on them eg perhaps by chatting over coffee. At the least, if you are mentoring male colleagues (even informally), you should try to give similar guidance to your female colleagues.

I don't care about your coffee habits. There is a conversation happening, and you're responding to only one part of it.

There's one coffee shop in my city where startup people just all happen to turn up at. I find going there by myself and just casually bumping into others throughout the day is nice without taking up too much time.

Even if it's not misinterpreted by her, it could be misinterpreted by friends / colleagues / SO's if either of you are married or in a serious relationship. Inter-gender relationships are hard :( I'm reminded of this xkcd[0], 'Hooray! we've solved the problem of drama!'

[0] https://xkcd.com/592/

EDIT: I should add a bit of context. I am self employed as a contractor, but my 'boss' at my biggest client - the one that pays the bills - is a woman who is close to my age. We are both married. I would be a little bit uncomfortable going to lunch or coffee one-on-one with her, not because I question her intentions but because I'd rather not be seen on what could be interpreted as a 'date' with someone other than my wife in my community.

I agree that things can be misinterpreted, but that's not a reason to avoid relationships with people. It's a reason to keep things clearly communicated. And if people choose to gossip and act like high schoolers, let them. Maybe call them out on it, depending on the nature of your professional/personal relationship this can be easier said than done.

But, maybe this is just me, I'm not going to forfeit my good relationships with women (several single, attractive) just because my SO is getting jealous. If she doesn't trust me, then that needs to be addressed directly. And if she can't trust me, that's a bad sign for the relationship in the long-term.

If my coworkers start rumormongering because I go to lunch or coffee with a female colleague, they need to grow up. Men and women are quite capable of having professional, and personal, relationships that remain entirely platonic. And barring these sorts of professional relationships on the basis of gender means reducing the professional network of both people, which can result in long-term career setbacks. This is exactly the sort of thing that can hold women back in a male dominated field.

I'm going to side with GP's motivation. While it would be great if people didn't rumor-monger when they see two coworkers spending time alone, wishing it were different doesn't make it so.

There's a lot at stake. A simple your word against theirs or miscommunication can land you in serious HR trouble. This issue is incredibly sensitive and very charged. Why risk it?

Two reasons. First, these relationships are important to me in various ways. Second, because not acting means leaving or even encouraging the status quo. I'm willing to risk it because I trust the women that I have these platonic relationships with to not levy false accusations. So long as my judgment is accurate there's no material risk to me. And when it's not, I'll deal with it.

Are you single? You sound single.

I'm not single. I'm a woman, even. And I have the exact same theory as he does. I expect to be able to be friends with whomever the hell I like, and my husband has the same. I don't have to spend time around his friends if I don't want to, and the same for him.

I have a good enough relationship that we can both express distrust for the friend, but that isn't something binding or obligatory to follow. If I find myself jealous, that is a problem I need to overcome and not take out on him and I expect him to do the same. I don't have reasons not to trust him, and if one doesn't trust their spouse, perhaps they should address that issue.

I'd not enter into a long-term relationship thinking this wasn't the case, honestly.

No.

I think this could be misinterpreted as a setup for a date. I'd think that if some dude asked me and we hadn't had much small talk at the office. At the same time, it isn't horrible advice.

It really all depends on the situation and your current 'comfort level' with the person. I mean, if you've been working together some time and have chatted at the office, might not be an issue.

It might help to mention that you wanted to talk about work or their experience - This helps make it clear that it isn't a veil for a date (this is not foolproof). It might seem more appropriate to ask them to eat lunch with you in the middle of the workday, and things like that.

In other words, make it a coworker sort of thing, and use your judgement. Whether she declines or accepts, just go on and treat her the same nevertheless.

Does it work to outright say "It's not a date, I just want to talk to you"? Or does it have the opposite effect and make the askee more wary that the asker may, in fact, take it as a date?

I can't answer so much on generalities on this one, as it probably depends on the the person. I've personally had people say this in different circumstances (not always work), and sometimes it is believable and sometimes not. Thing is that I didn't necessarily think along those lines until they brought it up.

I'd say if she seems to be really uneasy (and you might not tell, most women will try to just be polite), you can try adding it in. Probably unnecessary if you've put the why's of it upfront, though. If she says no, you can always add a little more about what you wanted to talk about, and tell them the offer is open if she'd like. Well, in your own words, and using simlar language as you would with any other coworker and stuff.

I will suggest that saying it is not a date is problematic. It is more effective to signal this is specifically work related in some other manner, like saying you want to discuss X project over coffee. Affirm it is work related. Don't reference dating at all.

Give the work meetings a proper name (eg 1:1) that everyone can use to designate the meetings as work related, and then it alleviates ambiguity.

This is what annoys me. With a male colleague I don't have to size my words or rethink too much what to say to ask for a coffee and a chat about work. Even if you have the best intentions you end up having difficulties to express something that should be pretty straight forward. IMHO that's the difference that makes so hard to treat women as any other colleague.

This works the other way around as well. I can ask a male coworker for coffee, and suddenly he thinks I'm interested. It gets weird. Same sorts of things happens with guys I thought were just a friend - dating was the furthest from my mind.

If I were to speculate, I think some of this has to do with the way we treat dating culture and flirting - lots of hidden meanings and things that aren't/shouldn't be said instead of simply being upfront about intentions. If some of the courtship ritual were changed, I think there would be less ambiguity. I also think this has a good deal to do with culture and the messages we are taught growing up (for example, women being taught they should be suspicious of men's intentions, even though most men aren't assholes in that way).

In a way, your expressed difficulties are precisely the problem.

I would say that the problem is the overprotective treatment women have lately but maybe that's a naive thought of mine (since I can't be fully in the position of a woman).

Or maybe it is just a complicated situation that we haven't solved yet because women pursuing careers in large numbers is a new-ish thing in the world:

http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2014/03/the-gray-zon...

I read your post when it was around here in HN and a few more. I think you are part of - what I think is a minority - of women that don't agree with everything that carries the flag of feminism and actually discern if a particular thing is good or bad for the sake of women.

Focus on the topic, I don't know if that grey area can be solved any time. Whereas there are feelings there will be people incapable of control them. And I'm not talking only about romantic feelings, I'm talking also about fears, insecurities, pride... we aren't taught to manage them if it is not done by our parents and that's something that doesn't seem to be changed any close in the future. So, for example, there always be guys that will misinterpret women that are just simply being nice to them and women fearing or feeling being left out of the group when there is just the common behaviour between guys.

It will never be fully solved, but cultural norms can change in a way that makes it a lot easier than it is currently. I believe that right now, it is so normal for men and women to only really talk if they are looking for a hookup that it creates a highly charged atmosphere anytime that rule is broken.

I have read articles about the problems created when men from countries where the veil is normal move to countries where it is not. For such men, who have lived their whole lives in a culture where women are covered from head to toe in public, it is a shocking level of nudity to see women with bare faces and exposed hair and bare arms, etc. For them, it is also highly sexually charged and they stare or make inappropriate sexual advances.

Western men are not shocked by seeing a woman's face in public and it does not strike them as inherently sexually charged. Yet, even western men (and women) tend to find it weirdly over intimate to really talk with members of the opposite sex and both men and women tend to err on the side of thinking it equates to being hit on. That piece can absolutely be changed so that it is much more normal to talk with people, regardless of gender, and not default to thinking it must be an expression of romantic interest.

There's nothing I can argue about what you have said. I would love to see that change, I don't have any special desire of making women uncomfortable at their workplace and even less to feel myself uncomfortable around them. I would gladly put on practise any new idea on that purpose but many of the things I've seen lately don't look like they have that purpose or go beyond that, making us men to feel "threatened" (maybe that's no the right word but I think you get the idea).

I get that this is something people find threatening and that a lot of what gets written is real blamey and accusatory. I get that men get framed as the bad guy.

I have literally spent my entire life working out another answer. I try to blog about that. I don't get much attention.

I think I have something unique to offer in that regard. I would sincerely appreciate it if I got more comments and I got promoted more by people in some way. Currently, it is mostly me posting my own writing and people largely ignore it.

If you want to see more constructive discussion and the spreading of the idea that, yes, things need to change without the subtext of because men are all rapey bastards and assholes, please consider leaving comments on my blog and sharing links to things you agree with on it.

Here is what I happened to have just finished writing when I saw your comment here, which I think I probably won't bother to post to HN because I am so frustrated with being ignored and with other aspects of doing that:

http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2016/09/change.html

Have a great day.

Or just go freaking have a coffee without overthinking the whole thing and finding 1001 ways that a conversation over coffee could be misinterpreted as god knows what... Christ people need to chill /rant.

I only overthink it because of the many times I just went and talked to a man only to have it lead to serious weirdness.

I wish it weren't necessary. Perhaps someday it won't be.

In today's climate, I would err on the side of caution. Being naively honest and straightforward can very easily be the worst possible approach, if you are unlucky.

I think it also depends on where you work. In my company it is very common to get coffee. Team's and groups regularly take coffee breaks or meet for coffee to touch base. I do agree generally though it could be misconstrued.

Most definitely. It being common makes it much less likely to be misinterpreted, for sure.

There is a difference between "water cooler/coffee" as compared to going to a "coffee shop". When I read the article I thought "water cooler/coffee".

I'm regularly asked to "go get a cup of coffee" which is a two-minute walk down the hall to the Keurig machine and we end up talking about family, sports, etc. If another colleague were present, I would have no problem asking a female colleague if they wanted to "get a coffee" with us. For me it would be socially awkward if it were 1-on-1. And I wouldn't dare ask a female colleague to a coffee shop.

Just adding another data point — I've gotten coffee outside of the building (at a cafe) alone with male colleagues, both multiple and one-on-one, and it's always been fine.

I'm reading this as sarcastic. While there's some remote chance this could be misinterpreted, there's a remote chance that talking to any woman at all at any point could be misinterpreted as prurient interest. It's sort of a boring point.

Realistically, the conversation can go something like "hey, i'm going to the break area for coffee, wanna come?" ... "So how is your work going?" ... "Huh, that sounds ... Anything I can do to help?"

If you're completely risk averse but still want to be a supportive male, you can have this entire conversation without bringing up that they're a woman.

Alternatively, If you want, you can make a passing comment, maybe with a joke, like, "Just wanted to check in because engineering can be a boys club sometimes. Want you to feel like you're in the club." Maybe you can say "It's a little dorky, but I read this interview where a female engineer suggested talking directly to women about their experiences and it seemed like a good idea. I just wanted to see how this job is treating you."

As long as you don't leer while you say any of this, everything will be fine.

> you can have this entire conversation without bringing up that they're a woman

Exactly! Talk to them like they're a person. It's not that hard.

You'd be surprised how refreshing women find it when you talk to them like they're a person, not a "woman". At least based on what they've told me when I took that approach. Maybe they lied ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The idea is that you treat them like people, not like a bag of stereotypes.

But people have histories and unsaid feelings and assumptions. It's not uncommon that a woman in a male-dominated field has found that she becomes a magnet for attention, such that anytime a man asks her for some one-on-one time she -- as unfair as it is to that particular man -- can't help but be guarded. And it has nothing to do with what that man, in this particular occasion, decides to say.

I think it might be a bit presumptuous to think that a woman who feels she needs to be cautious just needs to have a contentious guy talk to her, as if she and her presumptions are a puzzle, and being contentious is all that's needed to solve that "puzzle"

As to the question of, "Well, if she's going to be guarded about everything, what do you say?" -- in the context of the current thread, my opinion is that it is nothing about what you say, but the context and setting. Don't ask her what it's like to be in a boy's club or similar small talk while she's working at her desk. Go out for coffee, and bring along another co-worker or 2, if the intention is to make a new worker become acclimated with the rest of the company.

Of course. Singling them out as "Hey you're different and don't belong, let me help you belong" starts you off on the wrong foot.

Treat them like they already belong.

As for it-might-look-like-a-date ... ask them to tag along for your mid-day coffee run. Don't ask them out for coffee on a Friday evening.

Yeah. In (short) retrospect, the thing that we're responding too -- the engineer who suggests we should ask them out for coffee -- is a bit strange and maybe missing context. I'm guessing during the interview, the question felt like it was asking for a concrete example, perhaps in a situation where coworkers have worked together for some time. I'd be surprised if anyone's idea of a good activity, when first joining a workplace, is: "Yeah ask me out to coffee and what I feel about being a _____ at my new company".

I see this pattern a lot: trying to tiptoe around unknown, unsaid feelings and assumptions as if it were a minefield. In practice, it doesn't need to be a minefield.

There's a formula for this kind of thing, but polite professionalism is also a communication skill that needs practice. The formula goes like this: 1. State why you're about to ask for whatever it is. 2. Ask for it.

Assuming #1 definitively isn't "to get a date with this person," then it's really quite straightforward to handle the situation. If they imply that they think you're making some advance, you can literally say "No, wait, I think there's some misunderstanding, I'm not doing that, I'm literally just [repeat your reason for talking to her]." And then make some concession to demonstrate the point, such as "If this would make you more comfortable, we can discuss this out in the common area."

If it's a casual conversation without a strong agenda, you can also just say that. "I don't really have an agenda, but I want to get a sense for your communication style so that I know how to work with you."

But this is on a thread titled "Ask a Female Engineer!"

I'm with you, treat 'em like they're people. And quit distinguishing them as different, like TFA.

To me, treating people like means paying close attention to what they have to say about their lives. Like it or not, some kinds of visible difference have a major effect on people's lives because of how others treat them.

We are slowing emerging from millennia of patriarchy. Insisting on pretending otherwise doesn't sound like treating people as people to me. It sounds like insisting that they conform to your expectations, which I think is pretty much the opposite of treating them as people.

A casual, "Hey I'm going to lunch, care to join?" works well with my colleagues. Usually they decline, to which one can reply, "Ok, have fun. See you in an hour"

i would never, ever ask another man out for lunch or coffee, just as i would never ever ask a woman out for lunch or coffee, and would equally decline if was asked.

Work doesn't need to be about buddies. work is about work. That's why you have a personal life. keep the two separate.

corollary #1: dear manager. I am not your friend, you are not my friend. i will never be your friend. Chances are i don't like you at all. Just be professional, and i'll be fine with that.

I'm guessing your way is most applicable when working a relatively low number of hours, like 35-40 weekly. Once you start pushing into 80-100 hours at work each week, being friendly starts to make more sense, if only to avoid going crazy from isolation.

Once you start pushing into 80 hours you need to forget about making friends at work and find another job. It's inhuman.

no this is the best policy for a normal job. You are not isolated, you are working. That means a good deal of communicating with coworkers, but about work, not about personal.

I my experience having lunch with colleagues helps to get to know your co-workers. Which in turn helps to work better with them. Usually they do not become my friends. It is still a professional relationship.

I am curious: Are you going out for lunch alone? Or are you not going out for lunch at all? Or don't you have a lunch break?

I agree. This is bad advice. If the whole team is going, sure, but as a woman this sounds like the setup to a date.

Really hope guys reading this article, understand a lot of women are different, and to take what they are saying with a grain of salt.

Please correct me if I'm wrong - I think phrasing the request appropriately is a big part of this, and could mitigate a lot of potential misunderstanding. Something like:

"Would you be interested getting coffee sometime?"

Definitely sounds like a date setup to me, so framing it as (1) more immediate than a planned date, and (2) work related would be much better. Something more like:

"I'm going to grab some coffee in a minute, wanna join?” or "I'd like to discuss some work stuff with you, do you have time later today to chat over coffee?"

Again, these are just my initial thoughts so I'd be interested to hear if it doesn't actually make much of a difference.

It's honestly hard to tell sometimes. People are emotionally complex, and life is messy. But there is a reason office romances typically have HR rules in a lot of companies.

What? There are workplace rules for romances? Is that legal? I have never heard about that. Are they in the contract? Or the house rules? What are they covering?

Yea, my HR department has it in our contract. My last place had it so no couples were allowed in the same department.

Interesting.

- What happens if people become couples that are in the same department?

- Is one of them send to a differrent department?

- Is one of them fired?

- Is it ignored until it becomes a problem?

- Do they have to announce it? If so at which point? The first date? The first kiss? When they have sex?

- What if they keep it a secret?

So many questions!

I am certain this would be illegal or void in Germany.

Sorry don't have any answers, but I will say I met my husband at my last job, but I moved on to a new job to avoid the hr issues as he was the Team Lead.

It's actually why I find some of the advice from the other female engineers so troubling. Our relationship attraction first started when he took me for coffee break, to see how I was doing after my 6 month probationary period ended.

So, let's play "roles reversed" game. Or maybe not. It is sad however, that you cannot even ask another human being for a cup of coffee.

"cup of coffee" is code for date. Plausible deniability and all. There are other ways to talk that are less ambiguous.

As a straight male I've asked plenty of people, both male and female to grab a cup of coffee. So far no one seems to have been confused. They all understood it was just getting coffee and chatting.

Ok, then what's the code for cup of coffee?

The same. The only reason plausible deniability works is that it's ambiguous.

Ambiguous might not be quite the right term. In many cases for such an invite, it's desirable that it be pretty clear you mean a date, but you still retain deniability.

I guess you could say you want the implication to be clear and fairly unambiguous, but not explicit/provable.

Double entendre comes to mind.

"Hey, I'm heading out for coffee in 15, want to join?"

There is a big difference between "lets meet and talk to each other for an hour at the coffee shop on the weekend" and "We are at work, lets take a quick break!"

"Cup of coffee" -- it just depends on the context and how it is asked.

"Want to grab some (Starbucks|Blue Bottle|Peetz|etc)?" Maybe they'll just get a cookie.

it's also sad that you can't just call someone to netflix and chill....right?

No. I prefer to watch movies snd shows alone, so attention needs not to be divided.

"Netflix and chill" is current code for having sex. The idea is that you go over to someone's house turn on Netflix and proceed to ignore it while you have sex. @hnbroseph was playing off of the fact that this is another phrase that when taken literally is innocent, but has implied meaning in a certain cultural context.

Though "Netflix and chill" is probably less ambiguous in most cases since it wasn't a commonly used phrase before it gained its implied meaning.

I thought this was code for having so much bandwidth you can waste it

No, because it's a universal tongue-in-cheek way to state you want to have sex. "Cup of coffee" to "I want to fuck" however, is a stretch.

http://explosm.net/comics/2034/

Once again, inviting someone over to your place for coffee after a night out isn't the same thing as inviting a coworker for a cup of coffee in the middle of the day.

This is a great point it also underlines that a person might do something awkward not because they have bad intentions, but because they have read some less then stellar advice on HN.

> to take what they are saying with a grain of salt.

funnily, that would beat the purpose entirely.

Yea I was thinking about that. I think if their advice was screened by HR, it might be a lot more valuable for guys.

I have to agree with this, in that depending on length on circumstances, it could be taken as putting out the feelers for a date, even if that is not either party's intention.

The easiest way to get around this is to go as a group. Don't make it one-on-one.

This isn't only specifically about tip-toeing around a gender-related situation. I don't mind grabbing coffee/drinks with close colleagues of any gender, one-on-one, because that's the time we shoot the shit about stuff that doesn't need to be heard in-office (e.g. venting, likely). But if an acquaintance wants to get a one-on-one coffee, I feel justified in assuming we're going to be talking shop, like "Hey, I have this project idea, what do you think" or some other implicit solicitation.

This did happen to me once. I asked someone to a general get-to-know-you coffee and she spent the next two years mentioning her boyfriend to me and even mentioning a couple of times that she liked me as a friend but didn't want to date me. I thought it best not to mention that my interest in dating her was equally low.

I think it's totally ok to say, "Sorry if it didn't come across that way, but I'm really just interested in talking professionally." Many women have had previous bad experiences and react with that in mind. It's ok to clarify.

I am fasdf. Basically, I had already been so misunderstood, I thought the best approach was to say no more on the matter. Given how seriously she misunderstood one comment, who's to say how she could misinterpret another? (thinking that I was implying she was unattractive, etc.) She would say, as a group of us headed to an event, etc., "XXXX, we're just going to this as friends, I'm not interested in dating you, you know that, right?" (she would literally say things like this). I'd just nod and say "mmhmm" because anything else felt risky.

Yeah that's a tough situation to navigate if you know the other person isn't a rational actor.

In my experience, you have two real options:

1. Add no new information

2. Add new information as unambiguously as possible

I've personally found that dealing with the matter up front and letting the issue burn itself out is the best long term approach to keeping your own sanity.

There's a technique to the second one for making sure your bases are covered professionally since you're in potentially risky territory. Part of it is reporting what's happening to your manager and HR (paper trail). The second part is saying something like "Look, I'm not interested in you, never was. You're not even my friend. You're my co-worker, and we're going to hang out with co-workers. Are you okay with that?"

That's too bad. Maybe there is nothing you can do, since your nod and "mmhmmm" was not noticed. Maybe you have to mention a girlfriend to maintain symmetry, or something. It is uncomfortable to be misunderstood in this way; it's not necessarily all under your control. For what it's worth, I think it's fine to say directly, "I'm not interested in dating you," and let the chips fall where they may, but I understand that makes some people uncomfortable.

"Letting the chips fall where they may" can include permanent unemployability. Let's just say I'm not going to be asking anyone else to catch up over coffee.

Will you be believed when you clarify, that's then another thing...

One can't live one's whole life worried about this. When I (female) ask male colleagues etc for informational interviews, work coffee, other meetings, I face the same problem. All you can do is be clear in the first place and exit gracefully if misunderstanding persists.

"Hey, I'm really interested in your experience teaching kids how to create GUIs using tkinter. Could I ask you about that over coffee?" If there's a persistent misunderstanding that this is a romantic conversation, you just gotta leave it -- nothing else to do.

The natural conclusion of this train of thought is to never ask someone out for coffee to begin with as the OP was suggesting.

If you're going to take it that way, don't interact with humans ever. You do you, my friend. But that's black-and-white illogical thinking. "Once I asked a woman to discuss a tech thing and then she mentioned her boyfriend forever." Who cares? One person had a hangup or a bad experience, and the horrible outcome is that she mentioned her boyfriend a few times. Try again with someone else, guy or gal. Try asking two people to coffee at once. There won't be any tragedies if you are polite and professional.

I care.

I care when a woman takes a totally innocuous statement or question the wrong way and thinks to her self "That guy is creepy."

I care when she tells her friends "stay away from that guy, he's a creep."

I care when she gets promoted and becomes my boss and thinks "that guys a creep."

>the horrible outcome is that she mentioned her boyfriend a few times.

You're missing the point. The horrible outcome is that she will forever hold the irrational concern that you're hitting on her. It will colour everything you say or do.

I think he/she got the point, but just doesn't see it as a big deal. I don't either, though I can understand the hesitation.

The parent poster's point is that you really can't let that bother you, and that in situations like these a thicker skin for awkwardness pared with straightforward but polite communication will serve you better in the long run.

Exactly.

Since my bad experience inviting a female colleague out to coffee, I've never really gotten too socially close to my female colleagues, and it has harmed neither my professional career nor my social life. I have female friends, I just don't make them at work.

There will always be people who take things you say or do the wrong way. That just comes with the territory. If you want to be good at your tech job, you won't be able to avoid working with other people in some form, so you might as well make the best of it.

Your best move is to play the game with both hands above the table, not to avoid playing the game at all.

Here's a suggestion for what to say: "Sounds like there's some sort of misunderstanding. I'm not interested in you as anything more than a coworker. We're on the same team and I need to know how to work with you. If you don't want coffee how about we just chat sometime in a meeting room?"

If they're still being weird about it, then it's probably worth discussing with your manager because that other person is probably generally difficult to work with. Also to cover your own ass from the specter of future sexual harassment issues if that's what you're worried about.

If you're just worried about the other person making it weird... I don't mean to dismiss the concern, but there are plenty of weird people out there, and it's unimportant in the grand scheme of things.

>bad experiences

This can swing both ways of course. I've had situations where colleagues were interested in me, and got nasty when I made sure they knew it was professional coffee.

> couple of times that she liked me as a friend but didn't want to date me

The correct response for that would be.. "Don't worry, you're not my type."

Did you ask a coworker, or just someone random? If it was a coworker, that's... really weird.

I appreciate the effort put into these interviews, but most of the advice might be a short cut to HR and office drama.

This kid gloves attitude sounds condescending and forced. I don't care about the gender of my peers and that should be enough. Otherwise, you're just expecting a special treatment.

Female peers never had any issue with me. They know my friendliness is genuine, not a political effort.

> I don't care about the gender of my peers and that should be enough.

Not caring about their gender is awesome. You know what's not awesome? Refusing to accept that other people who do care might have had a big impact on their lives.

> Female peers never had any issue with me.

Well, they have never admitted any issue to you. It could be that they have no issues. Or it could be that they've put you in the category of "person not worth talking honestly with." Given that you have a strong aversion to what you see as "special treatment" and they might see as "fair treatment", I could see why someone might be inclined to flip the bozo bit. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bozo_bit#Dismissing_a_person_a...

> No chance of this being misinterpreted.

Easy fix: if you're a manager invite everyone for coffee and ask how they feel. In 5+ years at a company, the only time there was any structured one-on-one was during the final yearly review, otherwise it was unplanned (meeting in the hallway, or by the coffee machine).

You'll find a lot more if you talk to people one-one-one. It doesn't matter if they are women, men, other genders, races or age. Groups don't work, multiple managers doesn't work, just one-on-one.

In the author's defense, being a member of a certain identity group isn't great training for giving good advice about interacting with that group. If the prerequisite for talking about identity issues is being right all the time, no one's ever going to talk.

Identity politics is designed to be divisive. Its used to atomize people into identity silos which can then have there interactions policed by busybodies who know the right way we should all interact with each other.

Humans are divisive. We discriminate in all sorts of ways (positive and negative), and that discrimination becomes part of our culture. It's natural. If we don't talk about how our biases affect our interactions, the kinds of people who have historically gotten screwed by biases are going to keep getting screwed.

The kinds of people who have historically gotten screwed by biases come from every religion, ethnic group and culture in the world. Any genuine discussion would have to acknowledge that as a prerequisite. The narrative of oppressor and oppressed falls apart against the backdrop of reality when peoples real culture and history's are discussed. So does any potential political and economic power that can be gained through black and white grievance politics.

American Identity politics is about erasing peoples identities and histories and putting them into segregated groups based exclusively on skin color and gender then assigning a sliding scale between oppressor and oppressed to these groups. With 'white people' and 'male' being the oppressor and the other groups falling into some victim grievance class hierarchy who demand but will never get 'justice'. Its the perfect war of all against all that can be carefully manipulated by media and distract the population away from serious political and policy failures that we see all around us.

Identity Politics in the tech industry is simply ridding this wave trying to extract whatever power and resources it can before they become an inconvenience and money sink to corporations who think thy can use idpol for there own nefarious objectives.

I will point you to Charles H Smith who wrote an interesting essay on idpol from a leftist point of view.

Identity Politics = Totalitarianism

"The truth is we have more in common with people of different ethnicities and religions than we can possibly know in a totalitarian system drenched in the divisive propaganda of identity politics.

Identity politics are the core of every totalitarian state. Identity politics were the beating heart of Nazism, and the core strategy of the USSR's liquidation of kulaks and other groups identified as enemies of the state."

http://charleshughsmith.blogspot.nl/2016/09/identity-politic...

This is a touchy point. If a male boss only has coffee with male colleagues, the lack of mentoring is legally discrimination. (I'm not a lawyer, but this is how it was explained to me.)

If you ask once, and get rebuffed, at least you've done your part to not exclude.

I think that would be the worst for a woman: working in an office where nobody talks to you in fear of being misinterpreted.

I think that is a common experience for women. I find it really challenging to get men to engage me in meaningful, meaty discussion. Often, once they have, they suddenly are interested in a romantic liaison.

It's maddening.

Lol, maybe the problem is not working among many males but among many single males craving for a girlfriend!

I wish sorting for marital/relationship status solved this issue. I haven't found that it does.

In IT. many men in IT secretly dream of a partner that has an interest in their field.

I usually try to go in groups to avoid this.

Wanna grab lunch with me and Bob on Friday?

I think a way this can work is to actually make it work-related. "Hey, I have this project and I'd like to get your advice." That said, don't just do this with random women in your office. It should be someone you do actually work with and know before you ask to buy them coffee.

Agreed. In my experience, woman (IME) really are looking for someone to listen and relate, they aren't so interested in you "fixing" the problem.

I used to always have this in the back of my mind, and would be hesitant to network with men because of this. I started asking people to meet up for breakfast, and would keep the topic of conversation about work/industry/etc. Once I got married, I noticed my paranoia with interpreting male co-workers intentions went down quite a bit.

> No chance of this being misinterpreted.

At least for coffee it is less likely to be misconstrued as friendly conversation (not a date) vs afterwork drinks. A (female) friend who previously worked in early stage startups, around 75+% males, in a networking-oriented role said this was a constant challenge.

Just be very, very careful that this invitation is not extended while you are in an elevator.

Does phrasing exist though to keep if professional? Honest question. My best attempt would probably be:

"Hey would you like to go out for coffee professionally?"

Mention the topic. "Hey, I'm interested in your experiences adjusting to this startup environment after being at Microsoft. Coffee?" "Hey, I noticed you worked a lot with the devops folks at (place) and I want to learn about that. Coffee?" "Hey, I saw this project you did up on github and I was wondering if you tried neural nets like you mentioned you would. Coffee?"

These signal that you know something about the person besides their gender, and indicate you might actually be interesting to talk to.

"Hey would you like to go out for coffee professionally which is totally not me asking you on a date?"

"Coffee?"

"Want coffee?"

"Want to get some coffee?"

All these are just fine and work professionally. If someone takes it the wrong way, I'd take it as a warning sign myself.

I have a feeling that would be ruined by a few men who who had more than professional intentions.

Besides, nearly this entire conversation is because of a few people. It only takes a single creepy guy in a group of 100 to ruin everybody's experience.

Yes, but this is the case in many spheres of life. For example, very few men attack women on the street. However, because I know that women are watching out for this, whenever I am going to be passing a woman on the street in an isolated neighborhood at night, I make sure to stay well away from her, don't look at her, and overall try to make sure that she doesn't think I'm one of those bad guys.

Instantly awkward.

Sometimes it is liberating to embrace the awkward :)

I would not use the phrase "go out." That sounds like a date. I would find some other means to signal that this is professional. As others are saying, inviting someone to grab a coffee in the break room is much less likely to sound like romantic interest than saying something like "go out for coffee."

Try phrases like this:

Meet for coffee.

Grab a coffee together.

Let's discuss (professional thing) over coffee.

If that's really a worry, invite 3 women. That will make it clear that it's not a date, and it'll be much more likely that they'll feel safe talking about gender issues if they know they'll have backup and confirmation.

Oddly, this is how they fire people at my wife's workplace; take them out to coffee and drop the hammer.

I don't think this is professional advice. In fact, I think it's horibble advice. If I wanted to ask a female coworker how they were doing, I'd do it right in the office, as a professional to a professional.

I would never ask a female coworker out to coffee just to talk. I've had a female project manager ask me out for coffee, and I was too polite to refuse. I felt obligated to go. She asked me about my family and how-are-you-doing kind of things, but I still felt it was awkward. She was an awesome project manager, but I was new and didn't know her well enough to know her intentions.

Before I got married, this is how I would screen dates -- coffee or drinks. Small talk, and then if we clicked, another coffee until we were comfortable to go on a real date.

Contrary to popular opinion this is how most office affairs start, and I'm sure a fair bit of harrassment, not a dropped pencil in the copy room leading to spontaneous sex with disco music in the background.

I wonder if these issues would dissapear if Silicon Valley companies weren't so focused on hiring only 20-somethings, with a skewed sense of morality, and had a few crusty bastards with daughters lurking the halls.

I wish I got asked/was okayed to ask for coffee...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com