Honest question: is there a statute of limitations on what the tech world will tolerate with regards to misogynistic behavior (or bad behavior in general)? Or do people just pick and choose what they want to fight?
I ask because everyone rallied behind RadiumOne's CEO being canned after he beat up his girlfriend [0]. Similar with the Mozilla CEO (granted, the offense was different ... but it's interesting to point out that his transgression happened 6 years ago).
But now Dr Dre is about to become an executive at the largest tech company in the world and people seem to be lauding the move despite the fact of (A) misogyny in his lyrics since his NWA days and [1] (B) him beating the crap out of a female reporter, doing probation and settling a civil suit out of court [2].
Am I comparing apples and oranges here? (pun intended!)
That incident was 23 years ago and he did his time for it. He's also shown remorse for it and wishes it never happened.[0] He's a 49 year old man now and he's been married for 18 years. I think he's past that kind of stuff.
Genuine-seeming change of heart and remorse, including demonstrating it in action, is a big factor for me.
I read maybe one piece on Gurbaksh Chahal, but I never saw any remorse. Brendan Eich not only showed no remorse, he doubled down and dug in with his bigotry.
That's precisely why I asked about a "statue of limitations" ... I am curious.
Thank you for posting that video. I hadn't seen it. I'm generally skeptical of any celebrity's "remorse" when they get caught but it does help frame the current context.
The public remorse (even if feigned) matters. The internet would have forgiven Eich if he had publicly displayed regret with his donation, rather than tacitly standing behind it.
I don't agree with Eich views on marriage at all but it was refreshing to see that he DID NOT do what you suggest (which would've been a very hypocritical thing to do) and stuck to his believes.
Lying about a change of heart is obviously not ok. So, yeah, in a sense it is refreshing to not see someone lie about that. However, there is nothing wrong about stating that you had a genuine change of heart if you actually had one. My personal policy is to always believe that but also look at future actions.
Sticking to your beliefs is definitely not admirable, though. I’m not sure why you are claiming that. Sticking to your beliefs in itself is worthless.
If your beliefs are worthwhile then sticking to them is obviously the right thing to do, if they are not then not. You can’t just say that sticking to your beliefs is worthwhile, no matter what.
His beliefs could have actually changed. But I do agree, I don't want Eich, or anyone, to _lie_ about who they are or what they believe. If he really, truly feels the way he does he should stand by it and accept whatever happens... but if he truly regrets it, the way Donald Sterling does[1](I hope), then he could have stated that regret and all would probably be "forgiven"(scared to use this word implying someone needs to be forgiven for their beliefs... but hopefully I'm getting my point across that I agree)
they shouldn't have to lie about what they believe in, and they deserve all the public scorn they get for having bigoted views. It's that simple. If they somehow come around on their views and admit it was mistaken and wrong, then the media and public would likely not hold their previous views against them anymore. The taint will have been washed off sufficiently.
Different people think differently. That’s what this boils down to. To some distance in time matters more, to others less (or not at all). Both are valid viewpoints.
But, yeah, of course distance in time does matter when judging someone. Obviously. Not for everything, sure, but for many things.
He has learned to control his public image sure, but most of his lyrics of music that he has written, performed, and produced (even presently) seems very much misogynistic.
Look, we've got stories all over about the #YesAllWomen phenomenon on twitter currently. All the women asking for equality and stating that they have been sexually harassed/abused/assaulted in some way. Now in this story we have someone who holds a lot of past and current personal responsibility for sending a powerful message of inequality and harassment/abuse toward women.
Seems you are giving him a pass. I just wonder why women never seem to organize anything significant to oppose accounts and portrayals of mistreatment from entertainment sources such as rap music. Garbage in, garbage out. If people listen to rap music enough, they start to emulate the language, treatment and other thought patterns being drilled into their brains (it's voluntary brainwash/ thought programming really).
Oh the irony of the entertainment (and also the tech) industry...
"If people listen to rap music enough, they start to emulate the language, treatment and other thought patterns being drilled into their brains (it's voluntary brainwash/ thought programming really)."
If young people play shooter video games, they become killers!
"If people listen to rap music enough, they start to emulate the language, treatment and other thought patterns being drilled into their brains (it's voluntary brainwash/ thought programming really)."
You made me login to say answer to this.
No we don't and that's a ridiculous statement. There's rappers who objectify women but that doesn't makes us more sexist than any other guy and you can't just generalize rap like that.
On related news, Battlefield and metal fans are starting to kill people because they can't like something and can't think for themselves.
"If people listen to rap music enough, they start to emulate the language, treatment and other thought patterns being drilled into their brains (it's voluntary brainwash/ thought programming really)."
I think Ben Horowitz will disagree with you, a couple of other VCs as well!
The assault charges notwithstanding (I don't really have an answer for that, other than "it was a long time ago", as per other comments), NWA is an interesting case. If you listen to 'Straight out of Compton', one of the defining albums in "gangster rap" as a genre, it paints a picture of LA which is like a dystopian future - where the world is blacks vs whites, people who live on the street vs cops, and where the options are kill or be killed. No matter how rough you had it growing up in the 70s and 80s LA, you would not have had it anything like 'Straight out of Compton" portrays. This kind of imagery in a film would not lead to lingering questions about the morality of the screenwriter or director, but it does for musicians.
In music we seem less able to separate the story from the artist than for other artistic mediums. Is it because many rappers maintain a public persona which is in line with that presented in the albums (even though it's not in line with the way they really are), or is it because music is still generally considered to be primarily about raw entertainment, rather than storytelling? It's interesting.
Yeah, those are all true. It's also not an open and shut case for films either - if a director consistently made films with antisemitic attitudes, questions would probably be asked about that director. Similarly, people have in the past questioned Quentin Tarantino's very frequent use of the word 'nigger' - though I personally think it's a stylistic choice than a racist one.
At the same time, no one is suggesting Matthew Weiner is a mysoginist because of his portrayal of men and women in Mad Men.
There's a similar split in stand up comedy, where if you wear a costume your "character" can say vile things and people laugh in the knowledge that you don't actually believe them, but if a stand up comedian's "character" looks no different from the actual stand up would off-stage, then people often mistake these things for the person's actual views.
I personally believe that gay people should be allowed the same exact rights as straight people. (Marriage, Adoption, Tax Status, etc...) That being said, I don't believe what happened to the Mozilla CEO was right. The amount of intolerance that was shown towards him was equally as bad as his own intolerance, perhaps worse.
I personally once thought that we should ban gay marriage. As I grew up and gained more understanding about homosexuality my view totally changed. I think we definitely have to give people the chance to change. I would guess that most of the people here on HackerNews grew up thinking that homosexuality was a choice and some sort of perversion. However, I would bet that most of us have changed our views as we have either accepted who we are or have had friends that were gay help our understanding grow.
As far as Dr Dre, I had never listened to his music or really followed him in the news. I would probably error on the side of a lot of the other comments, that we should give him a break because it appears that he has changed. My two cents.
Discrimination still exists, even for things some think are solved(e.g. race, gender). Often change doesn't occur unless some are forced to change, even while gritting their teeth.
CEOs are public figures, and if the public doesn't like what they stand for, they can certain;y ask the organization to make a change. Mozilla stood for openness and freedom, which is counter to the actions of the CEO. It's not intolerant to tell a company that their CEO is engaging in activity counter to the message of the organization, and ask for their removal.
a) Dr. Dre is a performer. Rap, distasteful as you may find it, is performance art. It's the same as gangster movies. Would you object to Apple working with Scorcese? It's a character, albeit slightly autobiographical, but not much different than someone like Bukowski, IMO.
b) The Dr. Dre - Dee Barnes incident took place in 1991, almost 25 years ago. Should an isolated incident, for which he has made amends, haunt the man for the rest of his life? I don't think comparing it to the RadiumOne CEO, a current crime, is reasonable.
c) It would be rather hypocritical for Apple to profit off the musical talent of young black males creating "offensive" music, but not deign to work with them due to some moral qualms.
Indeed, 25 years is a long time and I think if Dre had attacked a reporter from the WSJ for leaking the Beats acquisition the deal would have been off.
Side point: beating up a female reporter doesn't make you a mysogynist (it makes you an asshole). Wasn't sure what you meant because of your wording.
Our tolerance for entertainers seems to be much higher than for executives. And I doubt many in the tech world think of Dre as a "real" executive. He's there for marketing reasons, but doesn't have much oversight of the day-to-day and the damage he can do is limited. This perception might be wrong.
Well … in isolation you are right, but violence against women can be an expression of misogyny. Or not. It depends. (Though I would agree that focusing on that discussion is not particularly worthwhile. I would focus on the violence.)
I think dre has the potential to affect things more than say how alicia keys or will.i.am affect things at their respective companies. Certainly when it comes to marketing to minorities and such.
I assume he'd be mysogynist if him beating the reporter was related to the reporter's gender. In any case, the ex-CEO didn't serve time so I'd say he got off pretty easily.
One thing I feel the need to address, as does N.W.A. in many of their songs...
Bitches != All Women (when it comes to oldeschool rap lyrics at least)
A "bitch" in ebonics/early-hardcore-rap is a scandalous/hated woman for well known reasons. Like the local gold digger or crack whore which was very prevalent in their societies which they strongly felt the need to address. They're not referring to all women as being bitches.
This is explained quite eloquently in N.W.A.'s "A Bitch Iz a Bitch" which was produced by Dr. Dre. and DJ Yella [0][1]
Well OK then, lets just ignore all the rest of the disgusting and derogatory things that N.W.A. state about women. Not just Dre when he was in N.W.A, but in material since then that he has authored and produced. This isn't something that happened and stopped 20 years ago. This is who he is.
Do you seriously think someone is going to listen to this garbage for an hour each day and then go into society and be polite and respectful to women? You think it doesn't spill over? I know from personal experience that is does. I had friends who started to change the way they talked about and treated women after becoming heave N.W.A listeners. Years later they told me that they felt that it influenced them negatively and that the influence was pervasive. They regretted listening to that trash.
I don't understand people. You think watching porn regularly doesn't affect how you think sex should be (and what you expect from it)? Sex can never live up to a porno, it's a fantasy. Do you think that porn doesn't contribute to sexual harassment/abuse/assault? It's not hard to find lots of men's blogs, books, movies, ETC whom it has heavily affected. Surveys show that it's negative influence is widespread.
Influential things like gangster rap and porn that go into our brains break and form neuro-pathways. They actually shape how we think long term. They are mind altering in a negative way.
People think of them like alcohol. You can drink it now and it will be out of your system in time for work tomorrow morning. This actually is not the case though. These thoughts and images will NEVER leave our minds.
Why is this all a big deal? well here on HN, equality comes up quite often. Women's right to be treated equal, to be free from sexual harassment, and from being treated as inferiors. Do you think Dre's influence in years past and presently has helped women's equality or hurt it? I think the answer is quite obvious.
If you are female, can you imagine being his co-worker, or admin assistant at Apple? How uncomfortable would that be?
>Do you seriously think someone is going to listen to this garbage for an hour each day and then go into society and be polite and respectful to women?
Absolutely. That "someone" you mentioned is me.
>I don't understand people. You think watching porn regularly doesn't affect how you think sex should be (and what you expect from it)? ....... etc .... etc ....
What are you talking about?
>Why is this all a big deal? well here on HN, equality comes up quite often. Women's right to be treated equal, to be free from sexual harassment, and from being treated as inferiors. Do you think Dre's influence in years past and presently has helped women's equality or hurt it? I think the answer is quite obvious.
I really couldn't care any less, I was only commenting on the fact that "Bitches" in an N.W.A. song is not referring to all women in general.
>If you are female, can you imagine being his co-worker, or admin assistant at Apple? How uncomfortable would that be?
I can literally think of 10+ females that I know who would jump at the chance to work alongside Dr. Dre for FREE.
Even after calling them Bitches on stage, he experienced no shortage of women trying to sleep with him after every show he performed.
Try listening to some N.W.A. sometime, you never know, you just might like it!
There no "the tech world", there's just people who are, indeed, choosing what they do and do not want to fight about. If you feel so strongly about this, get people involved, get a Twitter campaign or boycott going, and just like in every other such situation, if enough people make noise then you may or may not get results. Much like open source, if you see a problem and do nothing, that's on you, not the community.
There's no inherent need for balance (like you seem to want: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7623043 ) in people exercising their free speech. If it bothers you, do something about it.
I disagree that there's no "tech world". Maybe that's the wrong term but hey.
I do feel strongly about bad behavior (and I try to do some small parts)–but not about the lack of balance. I just find it intriguing and possibly worthy of discussion. I'm inclined to call it "hypocrisy" but maybe that's not the correct term.
I'm naive enough to think I can change what people choose to fight. Like open source, sometimes you find a bug but don't know how to fix it. What can you do besides submit an issue in GitHub?
yep get a couple of ppl worked up over an issue and you can get most things changed. The question is why aren't ppl rallying around this? And I think there are many reasons why.
Maybe Im just old, but HN seems pervaded with this kind of 'right on' ness, or competitive self righteousness, i don't even know what to call it. Sort of a che guevera hat wearing teenager kind of flavour. Makes my eyes roll.
If you're young you probably don't know what I mean.
No over analysis of this reply please, my eyes might not come down again if I keep doing it. :)
Honestly, it was the only interesting thing I could think of with regards to this news story and it's something I've pondered since the Apple/Beats rumor started. It was an honest question and I just wanted some smart replies–not the top spot.
If this was reddit, that'd be called 'karmawhoring' - posting comments that play to the crowd while being tangentially related to the story, in order to get a big pile of internet points.
I get that juvenile Redditors find pictures of cats amusing - I find it less easy to grasp why a technical hacker/start up community is less interested in the technical/business aspects of a major tech deal than the somewhat unsurprising revelation that a famous rap artist said mean things about women (many years ago from what I [now unfortunately] understand).
Because we are a (generally) well educated, grown-up, empathetic community who realise that hacking/start-ups are great, but not the be-all and end-all of life, and that some things are important to stand up for/against even when only tangentially related to the topic at hand.
Let me be blunt, we are all adults. He is in a favored minority category and as such he gets a pass unless he offends and even more favored minority group, simple as that. Society is shaped by those whose voices are the loudest, unfortunately some have learned to shout down others to the point there is no discussion permitted. When one side won't stop shouting to the point society accepts their position as the norm then where is society?
I ask because everyone rallied behind RadiumOne's CEO being canned after he beat up his girlfriend [0]. Similar with the Mozilla CEO (granted, the offense was different ... but it's interesting to point out that his transgression happened 6 years ago).
But now Dr Dre is about to become an executive at the largest tech company in the world and people seem to be lauding the move despite the fact of (A) misogyny in his lyrics since his NWA days and [1] (B) him beating the crap out of a female reporter, doing probation and settling a civil suit out of court [2].
Am I comparing apples and oranges here? (pun intended!)
[0] http://techcrunch.com/2014/04/27/ceo-gurbaksh-chahal-fired-f...
EDIT: spellling
[1] http://rapgenius.com/Dr-dre-bitches-aint-shit-lyrics
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dee_Barnes#Dr._Dre_incident