Hacker News Reader

I think she's arguing that even if 100% of the current employee participants are happy going to a hooters restaurant, posting a photo of it will deter future female hires.

In reality, it won't deter only female hires. I have nothing against going to places like this (or strip clubs: subsidized steak, at least in Oregon) socially, but a fair number of people wouldn't want to go socially, and I absolutely wouldn't want to go in a work context.

DING DING DING THIS.

I have no problem with guys going to strip clubs or guys going to Hooters or guys hitting on girls at bars. I'm friends with plenty of people who do these things and still think they're great people.

But none of them take it to work, or go out of their way to take work to there.

What if 100% of current employees posted a photo of themselves at a gay pride parade, next to scantily clad gay men?

It's on their private time. But something tells me that Kathryn Hough wouldn't dream of attacking them.

I'd reject that on a company site or blog, unless I were selling something like PlanetOut. Expressing that you're EOE is good, but anything which implies exclusionary is as a practical matter bad for hiring. I wouldn't want people posting photos of themselves at a political rally either. If it's something like some small subset of employees go to a pride event (or post one of the "it's gets better" messages), that's a net positive, but "everyone at our company is homosexual; do not apply if you aren't" would be horrible.

(and of course what she as an individual thinks is appropriate isn't necessarily the final say for all companies, so attacking her presumed prejudices doesn't really win the argument...)

It's as much a marketing issue (to customers and potential hires) as it is a legal one. Going to hooters is 100% legal. It may prejudice a jury against you if there are discrimination lawsuits for other issues in the future, and it may make sales or hiring harder in some cases.

I see extremely limited upside to company trips to places like that, and lots of downside, so it's a bad idea.

There are lots of issues which fall on various points in this kind of branding. Personally, I'm fine with losing sales to anyone who dislikes firearms irrationally. Company shooting trips, sanction carry at the office on premises, etc are fine with me. As a practical decision that's a minor dislike by 10-20% of people, strong like by 5-10%, and irrelevant to most. Fine in the computer security industry, but if I were in the fashion, childcare, or animal-welfare industry, there would be a lot different numbers, so it wouldn't work.

Google Marc Jacobs lawsuit. Kathryn Hough's warning - which you call an attack despite the article's overtly friendly overtones - fits to a "t".

Pride Parade != Hooters-style Restaurant. Sorry. We're out there to be proud. Not sell beer and wings. Little different context, champ.

Pride, gluttony. Both deadly sins.

Well said. The issue is being considerate to people in general.

Anyway, the point of the story is to organize your company outings, if you must have them, at someplace everyone will enjoy.

Do you mean on a case-by-case basis though? IOW, if you had a group where everyone was happy going to Hooters, would you do it, or are you saying that one should always stick to the "safe" choice? If the latter, I wouldn't really agree, as that seems very limiting and likely to lead to a bland experience.

Well personally, I wouldn't want to go to Hooters with my workmates anyway... it seems like a form of unwanted intimacy. I prefer to think of my workmates as machines that consume dollars and produce work; seeing them leering at women would force me to think of them as people, and that's just getting dangerously close to blending personal and professional relationships.

(I'm exaggerating above, of course, but the thought of going to Hooters or similar with my workmates or especially with my boss fills me with a feeling of ick. Boundaries, people, boundaries.)

But in answer to your question, if some other people at a company I don't work for all want to go to Hooters (or the male-stripper equivalent) together then I'm not gonna sit around and disapprove of that. Or, closer to home, my workmates and I all do eat steak [I assume] so if we go to a steak restaurant we need not worry about the hypothetical vegetarian who might be our next employee.

Well personally, I wouldn't want to go to Hooters with my workmates anyway... it seems like a form of unwanted intimacy. I prefer to think of my workmates as machines that consume dollars and produce work; seeing them leering at women would force me to think of them as people, and that's just getting dangerously close to blending personal and professional relationships.

That's a fair and understandable position. I'm different in that I prefer to have fairly intimate (not necessarily sexual though) relations with my co-workers. The companies I've enjoyed working at the most, were the ones where we did things like going out to bars together after work, etc. For me, I like to blur those lines... life is life, I'm not a big fan of boundaries, borders, rules, limits, regulations, etc.

But, then again, I'm a fairly libertine leaning libertarian, so I can accept that not everyone will share my views...

Agreed, this has little to do with gender.

Other common situations are going to bars for company outings when people don't drink; doing outdoor type outings when people are physically impaired (obese or old or whatever).

Some people are going to have to be left out of certain situations, it's unavoidable, for a variety of reasons.

I probably wouldn't organize a company outing at hooters, but that said it's really not that controversial of a restaurant. I've seen families there the few times I've been there.

And at least they are in good company.

At a Berkshire Hathaway board meeting: http://i1-news.softpedia-static.com/images/news2/Bill-Gates-...

Berkshire Hathaway has something like 10 employees, right, with a median age around 60. This kind of thing making recruiting harder probably doesn't affect them as much as it would an operating business.