Hacker News Reader

Comment by facepalm | Hacker News Reader

"horrible ordeal" - I'm sorry, but if you dislike your workplace, you can always quit. That's not to justify sexual harassment, but the picture you evoke of a "horrible ordeal" just seems next to impossible. An ordeal would have to go on for quite a while, and then the question really is why don't you quit.

View on HN

Sorry but have you actually worked before because it's never that black/white.

You may love/hate any combination of work, boss, people, culture, location, pay, politics, perks, title etc. Maybe it was the perfect job except for the sexual harassment. In which case just quitting isn't so simple.

"it's never that black/white."

Exactly - that is exactly what I am trying to say... I just can't stand the mob mentality on here.

> I'm sorry, but if you dislike your workplace, you can always quit

sounds a lot like

"I'm sorry, but if you don't like racism, you can always move out of the south"

There are lots and lots of companies, and 50% of the population are women. I am pretty sure there are some companies that aren't sexist.

Imagine for a moment that she had quit.

Do you think that lets Tinder off the hook? She can still take legal action - an environment so horrible that a person feels the only option is to quit means "constructive dismissal" becomes a legal option.

I said nothing about letting Tinder off the hook. I just took issue with the "horrible ordeal" suggestion. I take issue with the whole fantasy that is going on in people's minds when they hear "accusation of sexism". I think it is going to the courts now? Why not wait until both sides have been heard.

It seems conceivable to me that women can be unpleasant to work with, too. There was a relationship involved, so some claims simply can not be true - if everything was so horrible, why were they in a relationship? Because women always fall for the jerks? Hardly...

I've been following your comments on HN for a while now -- I originally noticed that almost all of them are facepalm-worthy -- and you sound like a really angry, bitter person who hates women. So, let me ask out of genuine curiosity: do you get a kick out of continuously posting nonsense? Some sort of adrenaline rush maybe?

I certainly don't hate women. I also think this Tinder-CEO sounds like a jerk. I just can't stand it if people jump to conclusions and form a mob without even bothering to listen to both sides of the story. And the way people don't even consider the implications of what they are saying. Like if they complain that somebody behaves like an insecure teenager - what does that mean, really? Should they be banned from ever holding a job? Should a squat team be called in to take him out, or perhaps a lynch mob of volunteers recruited on HN? People are only human. And here there was a relationship involved. Maybe people on HN just lack experience?

And I am tired of the sexism sob story. I think the opposite is the case, really. People are falling over themselves to hire and to please women.

Being opposed to feminism is not "hating women" or being against equality. I am opposed to feminism because I think they hurt both men and women and they got their story completely wrong. Feminism has nothing to do with equality whatsoever.

Edit: OK, I'd really like to know: please show me one sentence that seems to show I hate women. Or what makes you think that I hate women?

>>I just can't stand it if people jump to conclusions and form a mob without even bothering to listen to both sides of the story.

Dude, this isn't a "he said, she said" scenario. We have written evidence, in the form of SMS messages and much more, that paints a very clear picture of the situation.

I mean, did you read the complaint at all?

I read the beginning of it now. It certainly sounds as if they were angry at each other.

What do you think: they called her a whore just because she is a woman?

I don't like people who call women whores. As I said, I also don't like the mob mentality on display here. I am sure all those things didn't happen just because she is a woman, there has to be some history.

While it would never occur to me to call somebody a whore, I wonder how many people here who were ever in a relationship before never had a fight with their partner and never said anything mean to them?

Of course washing dirty laundry in front of the company is completely stupid and out of place. Still - what is the appropriate punishment?

And you haven't answered: what makes you think I hate women?

I wonder how the typical co-founder ousting among male co-founders plays out. Do they typical just "agree to disagree" and stay friends? Or do they sometimes call each other names and start hating?

>>What do you think: they called her a whore just because she is a woman? I am sure all those things didn't happen just because she is a woman, there has to be some history.

That's not the point. The "history" does not matter in this context. At all.

She was discriminated against only because she is a woman. This is all over the evidence presented. They denied her co-founder status despite the fact that it was her marketing efforts that made Tinder successful. Joe Munoz, the guy who made the app, wrote to her: “I credit you 100% with the growth of Tinder and I think that sending you around the US to visit sororities was absolutely the best investment we could possibly have made on the marketing side.”

>>While it would never occur to me to call somebody a whore, I wonder how many people here who were ever in a relationship before never had a fight with their partner and never said anything mean to them?

Again, that's not the point. Calling her a whore during a private conversation outside of work would have been the couple's business. Calling her a whore at work, in front of other people, made it a hostile work environment. We also have evidence that the guy abused his authority and threatened to have her terminated.

>>And you haven't answered: what makes you think I hate women?

Maybe "hate" is a too-strong word. You just sound grossly ignorant. You seem to believe that people are demonstrating "mob mentality" and defending her simply because she's a woman. Whereas if Wolfe was Marteen's superior and subjected him to the same treatment, it would have been equally objectionable and illegal.

"They denied her co-founder status despite the fact that it was her marketing efforts that made Tinder successful"

And that claim is proven because they called her a whore? Or how? The "I credit you 100%" statement is not really the same thing, and anyway might have been made at a different time in a different context.

But I must admit I didn't read all the 70 pages. In any case, why not wait for the verdict of the court? You have only seen the claims made by one side.

>>In any case, why not wait for the verdict of the court?

Since the evidence is so overwhelming, it is very unlikely that it will come to a courtroom battle. The most probable outcome at this point is a settlement out of court.

Well that would be the equivalent to verdict of the court.

Another question that came to mind: if they fired her out of sexism, why did they co-found with her in the first place? Did they only get sexist overnight?

> then the question really is why don't you quit.

Maybe her options didn't vest yet? Things aren't always simple.

Well than the "horriblity" of her ordeal seems to have a price limit. It can't have been infinitely horrible.

Also not sure what kind of contract a co-founder has. Supposed she stopped coming to work and "worked from home" - could they take away her options for that?

Yes

It was that much of a horrible ordeal that she dated the guy, got back with him, etc etc.

It's like some messed up teenage reality TV show.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com