Some personal advice: stop viewing your interactions in this transactional way and just be yourself. Stop giving a shit who reveals what and the perceived balance or imbalance of the same. Be kind and be generous.
Every conversation of a sensitive nature is an opportunity for disaster if not treated with the utmost care not to be "found out"
"Hmm, Ok well, I hate and resent all of you, but I absolutely rely on the paycheck from this scammy, terrible company."
"Uh, nevermind, stop being yourself."
Outside of work, you should be genuine. You don't have to be everyone's friend.
This is also why I don't socially interact with work mates.
Making an effort to conform to social norms of politeness goes a long, long way.
Don't get me wrong; feel free to upset people, but they should be upset about the factual content of the message, not the delivery!
"What did you do this weekend" is a loaded question if you're a cultural outlier at your workplace. Even decent people often have personal biases that lead to awkwardness and friction.
I don't know why everyone assumes that "different" has to be "asshole"
If anything, "asshole-ish" would be a part of "self" that is allowed to be expressed at work, so long as it is in limited doses
I mean, I can think of plenty of hobbies/cultural differences/etc., that could make things awkward between colleagues, but not much that would get you fired. "Wow, Bob likes to go Skiing in a Furry costume while voting Republican and being an Atheist. We can't have that, let's fire Bob." doesn't seem all that likely of a reaction.
Otherwise, I work in an environment in an industry that is much further "to the left" than SV Tech: academe. You may not believe it, but despite the cliche ostracism of "OMG that's a ::hushed tones:: conservative", it is quite easy to be one without self censoring. You simply refrain from injecting situations with those views when they're not called for, and if they are or you decide to do so during non-work times (breaks or side conversations) you be respectful of the other opinion. In short, don't be an asshole.
I get along with plenty of people all along the political spectrum at work, because we have an environment of respect and professionalism.
In other words, you tend to avoid sensitive topics at certain times.
But, if in every meeting I attended I went on a rant about how 4-year colleges inflate student debt for marginal gain and future earning potential (yes, the issue is more complex than that) then I would be labelled some flavor of asshole, unprofessional, etc.
However, consider the context of admissions standards and policy for the institution. It would not be inappropriate to discuss aspects of that idea. How some segment of our population may not be good fits for the institution or 4 year college in general, that they would be better served by some other path of advanced education and job training, and how it is part of our job to set students on a good path rather than chase tuition dollars that put the student in debt for no likely tangible benefit. That would be appropriate to do, and in fact I do this on a somewhat regular basis, backed up by rigorous data analysis (my own area of work) from both my own institution and national data, when we are setting enrollment goals and other related benchmarks.
It's also been perfectly fine for me to discuss other controversial/unpopular opinions with colleagues outside of meetings during non-work related breaks or side conversations so long as I do so respectfully. Roughly two decades of steady career advancement would indicate that none of this has hurt me professionally: I have literally never failed to be awarded a promotion I was seeking, and quite contrary to negative consequences I have developed a reputation of speaking honest, unvarnished opinion backed by solid evidence.
He should have stopped himself when he needed to add a disclaimer that he doesn't believe in prejudices and stereotypes. The need for such a statement is a giant red flag at which point one can ask themselves some critical questions.
When he is fired for this, a lot of conspiracy theories abound, up to and including in this thread. But he should work on the awareness to know what he was saying is a fireable offense by reasonable people. Apparently NLRB concluded the same.
This is all not the same as him being unforgivable or a bad person. In googling after this thread I noted an interview about him and autism. So he may very well deserve our sympathy and have an alternate explanation. The way people on forums like this one use him to allege a massive conspiracy at Google remains unwarranted despite this.
Thoughtful comment. Thanks again!
As for actual assholes, one shouldn't assume they want best for the team, or anyone else for that matter. Some people shine best when slinging turds making everyone else look bad. They are usually minority though and managable.
Be yourself / don’t model / etc. works for those who are able to take this analogy to children learning language (in a natural way) vs. learning language by studying grammar and vocabulary systematically. The former is desirable because it’s speedy, you grow the skills you use most (so it reinforces the right things) but sometimes it’s just not available. That can happen just because you suck at it.
There are very limited ways other people’s lives are better than mine (as an existence proof) and I used to model interactions. I stopped when my skill reached unconscious competence.
Social rules are even less concrete, meaning that learning the amorphous set of unwritten rules, guidelines, best practices, etc.,through analysis more than osmosis may let you know when it's okay to bend or break one.
There is an abundance of social stratification in language, and the ability to code switch in different social environments is an important skill. It doesn't matter that you would still be understood if you did not do so, what matters are the pragmatics and social labeling attached to speaking in/out of the current group's mode of speaking.
It is true that the formal study of linguistics (which was my own area of advanced degree) does not consider there to be an absolute correct way of speaking, that "grammar" is not some unchanging and inherently correct set of rules. They are, instead, a social convention. And like many other social conventions, breaking their rules has consequences, and understanding those rules and consequences is important to navigating in social environments.
hmmmm? one does not follow 2