That seems a little backwards to me.
The whole of: When men cuss on stage, they're commanding. When women cuss on stage, they're unprofessional.
On other hand if she was so bad as the Secret screenshot claims, why wasnt she fired. Of course this whole incident could be a result of a slow firing process where the employer has to collect enough documentation in order to protect itself from any discrimination lawsuit.
Of course truth be told we simply may never find out what really happened since each party will try to protect its image.
Horvath isn't so much protecting her image as she is heaping dirt upon it. She's allegedly harassed in the workplace, and the first place she goes to is Twitter? Nowhere in the flowchart of "how to deal with workplace issues" will you find a square that says "whine on Twitter." "Blog about it" is also conspicuously absent.
A complaint or protest about alleged employment discrimination
to a manager, union official, co-worker, company EEO official,
attorney, newspaper reporter, Congressperson, or anyone else
constitutes opposition. ...
A complaint about an employment practice constitutes protected
opposition only if the individual explicitly or implicitly
communicates a belief that the practice constitutes unlawful
employment discrimination\13. Because individuals often may not
know the specific requirements of the anti-discrimination laws
enforced by the EEOC, they may make broad or ambiguous
complaints of unfair treatment. Such a protest is protected
opposition if the complaint would reasonably have been
interpreted as opposition to employment discrimination.
"Whine on Twitter" and "Blog about it" are examples of "a complaint or protest .. [to] anyone else", and so constitutes opposition. If "harassment" here was meant to imply discriminatory treatment on the basis of sex - which seems to be the general consensus of this thread - then it would easily fall under "broad or ambiguous complaints of unfair treatment."You can make up whatever ideas you want on what someone should or shouldn't do, but if you read the actual court cases you'll find that your views would protect workplaces with illegal discriminatory practices, including workplaces which actively support sexual harassment.
Lots of people seem to be taking the opportunity to jump on Github for "toxic culture" and so forth, but until we know what actually happened, they seem to be jumping to conclusions.
Some people might call this victim blaming, but until we find out who the actual victim(s) is/are in the situation, how can we know who is to blame?
A company could be the victim of a disgruntled ex-employee who wants to drag the company's name through the mud. And a company could have treated an ex-employee bad enough that she quit. The uninvolved public simply don't know enough facts to take a side one way or the other.
Not knowing any of the parties involved, I just can't pretend to know more about this than what is publicly visible, which is essentially nothing.
1. The OP has not yet explained what happened but says a blog post is on its way: https://twitter.com/nrrrdcore/status/444649347037155329
> I'm done keeping quiet and will be writing about my experiences soon.
2. Part of the problem stems from this Secret post that apparently refers to her: https://twitter.com/nrrrdcore/status/444646082857820160
My own opinion: unrelated to the issue at hand, but I'm sad at how technology in the world's brightest innovation sector is being used as I imagine it would be among high schoolers who had the power to invent and acquire millions in funding.
I have no doubt of her abilities since Im assuming Github is pretty good at their interviews. Its too bad something got broken professionally or personally that resulted in this outcry