guacamoleSoda

I've worked at some of the FANGs, including Amazon. As far as their standard workspace equipment goes (e.g. computers, desk, monitors, etc...), they seemed to be more or less at parity with the other companies. The workspaces used to be on the drab side, but they've taken to modernizing them with bright colors and lounge furniture in common areas that looks trendy but is damned uncomfortable. They don't really have any perks like high-quality micro-kitchens (except at subsidiaries and sites where those sorts of perks are standard locally), cafes, gyms, etc...

EDIT: I should mention that I'm pretty easy when it comes to things like computer hardware and desks. I just need a terminal, chair to sit in, plain old desk, and I'll be happy. I might not notice any differentiating factors other people find important...

Got it. My plan right now is to use:

- An intern who I managed.

- A current co-worker who I've collaborated closely with on a number of projects.

- Our current team lead who I regularly collaborate with on architecture design, but I don't report to him.

These people already know that I'm looking for a new position and they've agreed to provide me with a reference. They should be able to confirm any projects and contributions at my current job, where I've been for 4+ years, as well as speak highly about my performance. Is this set of references good enough for a mid-level SDE position or should I look further back into my job history to add an actual manager [1]?

[1] I know I said I wanted senior SDE earlier but I realized I'm better suited for mid-level right now.

Thanks for your detailed response! It helps a ton. I've been feeling a bit neurotic because I don't have a large network to fall back on for references, but really want to get out of my current job.

Ah, I see how the wording can be confusing. I'll edit the post for clarification I'm not a contractor. I'm a full time SDE.

By "true" job, I meant to imply I've had short-term jobs, like SDE internships, during college. I suppose I could use references from those positions. However, I wouldn't want to as they were quite a while back and my personality and skillset and responsibility has grown substantially since then.

Anyways, my main concern was not including any sort of manager in my pool of references. Ideally, I'd just want to use current peers. They know me well and have a lot to say. I'm afraid anyone 5+ years back whom I only worked for 3 months would barely remember me.

Bay Area, probably like a good majority of contributors here but, you're right, I should add that info.

Unfortunately, I agree. I've had significantly more trouble dating in Silicon Valley than anywhere else I've lived. In fact, that's why I'm moving to NYC. Using dating apps as evidence:

On the east coast:

- I get 5x as many matches.

- Most of my matches respond to my openers.

- My matches are significantly higher quality.

- My matches suggest meeting up for dates.

- My matches compliment me.

- My matches never unmatch me.

The whole silicon valley gender skew seems like a bad situation for everyone involved. But I'm not sure what can be done about.

I suggested the old-fashioned method because it does no harm. My only issues with the orgies described in the article is there seems to be quite a bit of consent-through-manipulation.

My experience with Silicon Valley is much the same as yours. I'm just a mid-level engineer at a FAANG and my co-workers are boring-as-can-be. Nice people but introverted and tech-obsessed and they live relatively uneventful lives.

Still, I assume what's described in the article is happening to some degree, and it's an interesting lens through which to explore the gender and sexual dynamics of Silicon Valley (or Wall Street or w/e other high-powered industry we can think off). It's the age old story of royalty trading (promises of) power for sex. Even though both parties officially consent, is this behaviour morally okay? Or does the asymmetry complicate the situation? Are the powerful manipulating the less powerful? Or is it the other way around?

Preface: I spend a lot of this response talking about a hypothetical high-status man and a low-status woman. This isn't to be sexist or perpetuate stereotypes; it's just to use a common example that we've all probably seen and witnessed.

Preface 2: this response was to someone else in this thread but it got pulled out to the top level for some reason.

The intention of the article was, probably, just to shed light on the fact that this sort of stuff happens. It might not even be accurate. But, for the sake of argument, let's assume that it is. The author wasn't suggesting solutions. Why is it interesting to Vanity Fair readers?

- It's about the glamorous lives of the 0.1%.

- It's about sex.

- It's about drugs.

- A lot of these men are socially oblivious, so it provides material to laugh at otherwise powerful people. Who, in their right minds, sees a co-worker at a bondage-event and tells others at their workplace? And who, in their right minds, brings it up with said co-worker?

- If what the article reports is true, the behaviour of some of the male participants could reasonably be interpreted as sexually predatory.

It's the last point that's a bit troublesome. I think a lot of the men involved don't realize their behaviour is shitty. They flash wealth and reputation and make drunken suggestions like, which I've personally witnessed, "Oh, you're interested in starting a company... I could totally put you in touch with my friend who runs a VC firm. He's always looking for new investments. Hey, let's get another drink. You're super interesting. Oh, it's closing time. Wanna head back to my place, it's only a couple blocks away, and we could continue this conversation?"

It's even worse if the dude talking has some sort of professional connection with the woman (e.g. introduction through co-worker or investor). It's not illegal but it's lousy. It's also reasonable for her to think that their might be some form of punishment for saying, 'no'. I think the lesson those sorts of guys could learn is that they're, at best, being manipulative and assholes. And the lesson targeted women can learn is that these guys probably aren't telling the truth and they should stick to mostly professional channels to get ahead (if that's their reason for engaging sexually with these men).

Guys, if sex is your goal, I suggest the old-fashioned method. This isn't targeted at you, OP, but just a rhetorical bit aimed at the hypothetical male described in the article:

- Work your way into a good job.

- Be polite.

- Be funny.

- Work out.

- Dress well.

- Be financially responsible.

- Have a drink or two, if that's your thing.

- Don't be too flashy and avoid mentions of wealth or powerful connections.

- Show genuine interest in the other party and her friends and family.

- Be forward but not obnoxious about your intentions before sex (e.g. looking for sex, looking for a relationship, etc...).

- Never lie.

- Never EVER make promises or suggestions that you can help her career until you're well into a relationship.

- If you genuinely believe in her and want to help her career, do so, but save any romantic or sexual advances until after you've helped and you can't renege what you've done. Be absolutely clear that she doesn't owe you anything.

EDIT:

- And never kiss and tell. It might win you a few bar-room points but it's frankly trashy and teenager-like behaviour. Romantic and sexual relationships involve two parties and are inherently intimate and you might be violating your partner's trust and reputation by divulging you've had sex or what the sex was like and so on. Even if your partner is okay with it, a lot of people don't find talking about your sexual conquests entertaining.

This sounds like something out of Eyes Wide Shut, but with social awkwardness, baggy dad jeans, and crocs and socks.

I can't imagine this is emotionally healthy for most of the folks involved. The once socially-exiled men trading wealth and drugs and (implicit) promises of career advancement for sex. The women who hope to leverage their looks for access to a better life, but risk ruining their reputations due to societal double standards. Being aware of these facts, would either party feel good about the encounters?

Orgies are fine. I've never been to one and have no desire to go to one. The real issue here is the power-asymmetry between the men and women involved. It reminds me of someone like Harvey Weinstein inviting an aspiring actress up to his hotel room and making an advance. It puts the women in a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't situation. Just extending the invitation itself can be vaguely threatening to a lot of people.