In the coming months, I hope that reallyread.it can be a place where this topic (women & workplace harassment) can be discussed openly, deeply, and thoughtfully.
Draw-dropping to hear that Ms. Ashbrook was previously at Weinstein's Miramax. I so badly want to hear her perspective, because I feel like without that there's no way to know whether she was (1) asleep at the wheel (2) an active enabler or (3) just in the wrong place(s) at the wrong time(s). Either way, HR, in general, is an insanely hard and ridiculously thankless job.
I don't think that these organizations (Vice, Weinstein) become successful in spite of their culture, I think they become successful because of it. That's an alarming thing to think about - arguably way more alarming than the individual incidents themselves. It's unfortunate that coverage of this phenomenon so narrowly focuses on "what happened" instead of delving into the mechanics of how misogyny grows businesses, especially creative & content production businesses. We forgive depictions and expressions of the "bad behavior," devouring movies and articles produced by these giants. But then we condemn them for being exactly what we pay them to produce. I guess what I'm trying to say is this: I'd be shocked to hear that people are shocked by this.
Changing the "no" to "yes" is complete bullshit. Hopper could/should have gotten more than 25k for that.
@Jeff and @Erica - Now we know why Vice had a 2-drink limit at the holiday party.
As someone who works at this company and knows Nancy Ashbrook and other encounters she's had with various employees, it's safe to say it's option 2 - active enabler. Her job was to protect the image of the company, not to keep employees safe and happy.
In the coming months, I hope that reallyread.it can be a place where this topic (women & workplace harassment) can be discussed openly, deeply, and thoughtfully.
Draw-dropping to hear that Ms. Ashbrook was previously at Weinstein's Miramax. I so badly want to hear her perspective, because I feel like without that there's no way to know whether she was (1) asleep at the wheel (2) an active enabler or (3) just in the wrong place(s) at the wrong time(s). Either way, HR, in general, is an insanely hard and ridiculously thankless job.
I don't think that these organizations (Vice, Weinstein) become successful in spite of their culture, I think they become successful because of it. That's an alarming thing to think about - arguably way more alarming than the individual incidents themselves. It's unfortunate that coverage of this phenomenon so narrowly focuses on "what happened" instead of delving into the mechanics of how misogyny grows businesses, especially creative & content production businesses. We forgive depictions and expressions of the "bad behavior," devouring movies and articles produced by these giants. But then we condemn them for being exactly what we pay them to produce. I guess what I'm trying to say is this: I'd be shocked to hear that people are shocked by this.
Changing the "no" to "yes" is complete bullshit. Hopper could/should have gotten more than 25k for that.
@Jeff and @Erica - Now we know why Vice had a 2-drink limit at the holiday party.
As someone who works at this company and knows Nancy Ashbrook and other encounters she's had with various employees, it's safe to say it's option 2 - active enabler. Her job was to protect the image of the company, not to keep employees safe and happy.