[sawyer]

This is not a company where micro-aggressions will fly.

This seems like such a toxic philosophy to me. One of the worst things you can do for a workplace is stifle honest conversation and criticism, and this focus on not "micro-aggressing" will do just that - the way it has in colleges over the last few years.

[jkyle]

Microaggression is, by definition, to casually denigrate others by repeating or affirming stereotypes for the purpose of discounting contributions or establishing the dominate class as normal and the minority class as aberrant or pathological.

It is the exact opposite of honest conversation and criticism.

Some examples would be dismissing a woman's analysis because "women are bad at math". Turning to the one female colleague in the room and telling her to go get some coffee. Suggesting that a minority is unqualified and a diversity hire. Labeling LGBT coworkers as psychologically unsound. Telling a woman she must not take her career seriously if she is pregnant.

Having a policy against toxic environments is not, itself, toxic. Even if it makes some men who hold the above opinions feel "on guard". Because they should feel on guard about not spouting such vitriol.

[tomjen3]

In theory. In practice lots of things can be seen more than one way.

You can ask the women to go fetch coffee because she is closests to the door, because it is her turn or because she is a woman.

In practice it means you never ask the women to get coffee, even when she is sitting closest to the door and you would have asked a man in the same situation.

And the trouble isn't that you have to actually shut up about racists shit, the trouble is you constantly have to ask yourself "could this statement be read the wrong way" - it is like posting everything you do on tumblr, where the term originated.

[digler999]

> Some examples would be

none of those is micro. Those are egregious acts of sexism and discrimination in my book.

To me, a micro aggression would be very nuanced stereotypes and bigotry ( "let's have Wong do it, Chinese guys are great at math" ), or a condescending "let me know if you need help" from a male to female when she clearly already knows how to do it. Saying "I'll take it, this one's a man's job".

[kefka]

> Telling a woman she must not take her career seriously if she is pregnant.

I'm for equality, and the area around FMLA is not equal, by any means.

That issue is caused by the risk that women of child-bearing age have with regards to our laws on FMLA. Women (of child bearing age) are an inherent risk with strong legal ramifications if ignored. Once pregnant, they can effectively get up and leave their position. Depending what they were doing, can cause significant team problems. And the employer is required to provide their or a similar position back when they return. I'm sure the actuaries have calculated that risk appropriately.

To fix that, all gov't needs to do is apply FMLA to all parties in a relationship when one in it is pregnant. Then the actuarial cost equals itself out. Equality is approached.

[BossHogg]

If you can't have an honest conversation without being insulting or degrading, you're the problem.

[kefka]

"I'm offended so you need to shut up."

Is no way to have proper communication. And that's the point with branding things as "micro-aggressions". Its an effective social construct to silence someone by branding them as discriminatory. Usually, without proof.

[mavus]

> This is not a company where micro-aggressions will fly. This is a company where the first bedrock rule is that nobody gets interrupted, and the second is that everyone gets their say.

If you take the whole quote from the article, it doesn't seem like it would stifle honest conversation at all, if anything micro-aggressions would reduce open communication by making people believe their input is valid or wont be heard.

[tptacek]

Businesses are not colleges.

[beeboop]

I think you will agree a tyrannical workplace that stifles honest conversation and criticism is a pretty shitty place to work, and perpetuates the unhealthy power imbalance between employers and employees. A workplace shouldn't be a kingdom of the CEO where his word is law, at least not as it applies to your everyday behavior and speech. Exceptions of course to expecting widely accepted professional behavior.

[peterwwillis]

Startups are more like colleges than businesses. You drink a lot of beer, play ping pong, get no sleep, and after 4 years you're broke and moving back in with your parents.

[goodcanadian]

True, but most environments will benefit from open and honest (and civil) discussion.

[tomjen3]

No, we make more money.

But that doesn't mean being formal or faking professionalism is the best way to make money.

[escherize]

Right, businesses collapse under their own weight when you stifle honest conversations.