Brendan Eich and “Gay McCarthyism”
Posted: 08 April 2014 03:24 PM   [ Ignore ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2714
Joined  2011-04-24

Brendan Eich was the head of Mozilla until he resigned over his previous backing of the anti gay bill in California. Many in the media seem to think his capitulation was the proper thing to do.  The term “gay McCarthyism” gets mentioned in conservative publications….maybe something like that is on the way.

Any thoughts?


http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-prop-8-campaign-20140407,0,3351555.story#axzz2yKpnSWxT

I can’t post other links for some reason, but one is “The American Conservative” which has an article about the so called “gay McCarthyism.”

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 April 2014 12:15 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  364
Joined  2014-03-12

I followed the coverage of this whole story when he was appointed and was not happy about his political views on gay marriage and saw no problem with some groups calling for a boycott etc, but really didn’t think much would come of that. I was very surprised that he decided to leave instead of staying. He refused to address the issue directly, which I though was a huge PR mistake. And I really don’t believe the so called gay macharthyists have the actual power to force a company to fire its CEO. I doubt Mozilla was really suffering financially enough because of a boycott to take that step. I think the real reason he left was because of the reactions of employees at Mozilla that were unhappy about his appointment and some of them left the company because of it. Mozilla had much internal strife about his appointment, and how that did not jive with its corporate image of open and progressive inclusiveness yada yada yada. The real power struggle here took place with in Mozilla, not from outside.

I don’t think he should have quit or accepted being fired. I think he should have addressed the issue head on reguardless of what his stance now is on the issue of marriage equality, instead of avoiding any dialogue on the issue and what his views are or were. I think the gay mafia is being blamed by the anti gay lobby for his not standing up for himself.

The problem here for me is that the whole thing unfolded in a way that killed an opportunity for a kind of public dialogue that I would love to see happen. But, he gave up so easily. He plays the victim, so I guess it follows that there must be a bully out there to be blamed.

I am gay and very pro marriage equality, but I don’t believe anyone should be fired for their politics, beliefs, or sexual orientation. This whole circus was hyped by both sides of the issue for their own political ends and I think that both camps deserve to be shamed equally.

 Signature 

“expectation is the mother of disappointment”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 April 2014 04:29 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1474
Joined  2009-10-21

Just to straighten something out, if you are the bully, you don’t get to claim any harm for being called a bully. And being an anti-advocate is not just a belief. It’s not a private thing. Likewise, if you’re calling a bully a bully, that’s not bullying or McCarthyism or anything else.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 April 2014 07:04 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4860
Joined  2007-10-05
Handyman - 09 April 2014 12:15 AM

The problem here for me is that the whole thing unfolded in a way that killed an opportunity for a kind of public dialogue that I would love to see happen. But, he gave up so easily. He plays the victim, so I guess it follows that there must be a bully out there to be blamed.

I am gay and very pro marriage equality, but I don’t believe anyone should be fired for their politics, beliefs, or sexual orientation. This whole circus was hyped by both sides of the issue for their own political ends and I think that both camps deserve to be shamed equally.

I agree that public dialog would have been a good thing. We need to discuss the issue of gay rights openly, and this was a golden opportunity we missed. As far as Eich being forced to resign, I think he got what he deserved: not because of his bigoted beliefs but because the employees at Mozilla are mostly extremely liberal and Eich could not lead them effectively. The brain drain had already started and was gaining momentum before Eich resigned. That is why he had to go. The man should never have been hired to work there as he does not fit in with the corporate culture.

[ Edited: 09 April 2014 09:46 AM by DarronS ]
 Signature 

You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds irrational beliefs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 April 2014 08:37 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  173
Joined  2011-11-06

I read one of the big issues within the company was that one of the key developers of the software was gay himself; so, the entire situation was emotionally charged, probably to a degree we’re unaware of, within the company itself. I think feelings were hurt and there were a lot of emotions involved. If the key developer was gay (so I read), and then the CEO ruling over your product is “anti-gay,” I suppose the dynamics were a bit awkward.

I am gay myself and probably would not wish for him to be fired, but I can see where it could create some awkward days in the office now that this has surfaced.

[ Edited: 09 April 2014 01:52 PM by FinallyDecided ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 April 2014 02:48 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2714
Joined  2011-04-24
Handydan - 09 April 2014 12:15 AM

I don’t think he should have quit or accepted being fired. I think he should have addressed the issue head on reguardless of what his stance now is on the issue of marriage equality, instead of avoiding any dialogue on the issue and what his views are or were. I think the gay mafia is being blamed by the anti gay lobby for his not standing up for himself.

The problem here for me is that the whole thing unfolded in a way that killed an opportunity for a kind of public dialogue that I would love to see happen. But, he gave up so easily. He plays the victim, so I guess it follows that there must be a bully out there to be blamed.

I am gay and very pro marriage equality, but I don’t believe anyone should be fired for their politics, beliefs, or sexual orientation. This whole circus was hyped by both sides of the issue for their own political ends and I think that both camps deserve to be shamed equally.

Well said.

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile