Comment by kitanata | Hacker News Reader

Comment by kitanata | Hacker News Reader

I was fired from Panorama Education for being autistic after being told I didn’t belong there because I have trouble controlling my tone. The same people shouting off diversity initiatives and renaming “master” branches to “main” because they care about inclusivity ignore and marginalize those around them when it actually matters. It’s performative at best. Despite being very “out” as on the spectrum, despite presentations and knowledge sharing on neurodiversity and despite organizing and participating in a resource group they stood by nothing of what they preached. And yes, this is legit and yes I am suing them and yes my attorney is working completely on contingency. Panorama Education, a company dedicated to and attacked by the GOP for being “woke” is itself an ableist organization. Even the emperor wears no clothes.

Most of these companies don’t actually care at all about any sort of DEIB initiatives… even the supposedly “woke” ones. It’s all a sham.

Edit: This was a few months back. I lead an entire engineering organization now for a company who despite having no DEIB program is truely the most inclusive work culture I’ve ever seen.

This is controversial of course, but I followed Kris Nova pretty closely and after some time I saw her trying to funnel her audience into a slack instance (or something like slack, might have been discord).

When I reviewed the rules, which I tend to take seriously I noticed that it said "We promote neurodiversity" and in the next line it says "don't be an asshole".

I understand that some people can see a distinction here. The problem I have with those two rules is that if you are a person who is autistic, your behaviour is seen by neurotypicals as "being an asshole", especially on text based mediums where communication is much more limited in context and less rich meta-communication like body language or tone.

When I pointed this out, I was blocked.

I can only gather that people want to be seen as inclusive, so they use things that are easily seen. That which is _not_ easily seen is ignored, like autism- though people will say they support people with it, I think they're not actually interested in understanding that autism isn't just being a bit anti-social, it's a mental illness and it can be difficult to live with! Another minor example of people not caring what cannot be seen: I don't see many people making a stink about economic background, but that is a massive differentiator in mental diversity.

>When I reviewed the rules, which I tend to take seriously I noticed that it said "We promote neurodiversity" and in the next line it says "don't be an asshole".

The only commonly tolerated, perhaps even celebrated, form of neurodiversity is asymptomatic depression.

I think people are quite happy to accept ADHD on public social media, as sufferers of ADHD are more likely to engage with an online community sporadically while being unable to concentrate on other things.

Especially if they start getting a dopamine reward for engaging.

I should have said asymptomatic disorders in general. It's okay to say that you suffer from ADHD, people will support you. But co-workers and especially bosses tend not to appreciate the issues that come with it, such as procrastination, inability to meet deadlines, lack of focus etc.

> When I reviewed the rules, which I tend to take seriously I noticed that it said "We promote neurodiversity" and in the next line it says "don't be an asshole".

There is always a limit to what can or can't be allowed in spite of someone's neurodivergent status. The classic real-world case is Terry Davis, who would go on HN to insult just about everone and rant about the "CIA niggers" or whatnot. Many people were willing to give Terry some leeway, but ... to a limit.

Or to put it in another way: if you – due to your neurodivergent behaviour – are excluding other people from a community then there's clearly a bit of a conflict.

None of this is easy or simple.

> None of this is easy or simple.

It's really sad that neither side actually gets this. Both (for the sake of simplifying, let's call it the left and the right) are filled with loud bigoted reprobates who don't realise they are the very things they hate, just with different labels attached.

An added layer of bewilderment is that the woke movement is becoming increasingly more bigoted, and seems to be using the fascist playbook more and more. Like, where's the self awareness?

I used to think that (due to tribalist human nature) mainstream American culture is structurally blind to the fact that virtue signaling by organizations is often superficial and sometimes gives cover for more discrimination than at places that don't try to sail the currents of the zeitgeist. Posts like this make me realize that sooner or later, organizations will figure out that it's usually better to just avoid carrying banners on social justice topics and focus instead on treating staff and customers fairly and with kindness. No idea on the ins and outs of your lawsuit but I hope that you encounter the justice that you appear to be seeking.

Yes, the executives who give long speeches about the oppressed are often also ones who push their teams to work 12 hour days and burn their people out. Somehow their kindness is only displayed in the abstract, never to actual people who work for them.

You might wanna consult with your lawyer about public posting while you're suing them. Otherwise, good luck.

If they want to counter with a SLAPP or disparagement lawsuit they’ll only dig their grave deeper. I am not the least bit worried. The laws and the facts are on my side.

GP was giving generally accepted as sound advice. Regardless of how things ought to be, seeking and considering the advice of your counsel while in a lawsuit is a good idea.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com