My own experience (and I won't claim this is necessarily representative) is that drinking is a big part of it, but nobody will care at all if you refrain. Asking for water or soda instead of alcohol will barely get a second glance.
I think the title of this article would be better written as "Do startups have an asshole problem?" It just so happened that the asshole problem manifested in terms of alcohol because that's where the author was set up to come into conflict with the assholes.
You could easily have the same sort of experience as a vegetarian in a company that revolved around barbecues and steak. That wouldn't mean startups have a "meat problem," but that they have an asshole problem that manifests in terms of meat because that's where you're in conflict. Other possibilities include smartphone ownership, hobbies, and political affiliation.
Alcohol is certainly an interesting case because it's one of the few drugs that's legal, socially acceptable, and extremely commonly used. The only other one I can think of is caffeine, and even there we tend to go out of our way to make non-caffeinated equivalents available. But it seems to me that hassling people because they don't drink is just a symptom of a larger problem, which is that there are assholes in power, and one of the things assholes do is hassle people who are different.
> I think the title of this article would be better written as "Do startups have an asshole problem?" It just so happened that the asshole problem manifested in terms of alcohol because that's where the author was set up to come into conflict with the assholes.
I think startups may have an asshole problem as well, but that's not the context I got from the article. Startups have a much larger problem and that is the insistence that your job is a lifestyle, a culture. It's not enough to show up and do your job well and get along with everybody. You have to fit in as well. If you don't, it affects your future career prospects. Drinking is the norm. It's expected, along with wearing certain clothes, using certain tech stacks and having certain political opinions. There are a multitude of ways not to fit in. Alcohol is just one of them.
Totally agree, but I'd take it in a different direction too, which is that startups have an expertise problem by definition. Most of the stuff in this article that just seemed beyond the pale WAS beyond the pale. But most of that stuff:
1. Came from people who would have definitely not been in C-suite positions at any established company
2. Would have been completely moderated by someone in HR at a traditional company, if not lead to termination / sanction
But, because it's a startup, you're getting people who have to do jobs they were never trained to do, or were never a good fit for. Your brainiac CEO may be lacking the soft-skills to actually be responsible for other people, and yet, he's the most qualified to really own the product vision. There's a reason these positions aren't mixed in traditional companies, and there's a reason why your CEO isn't the CEO at a stable company pulling in $$MM in revenue.
Do startups have an asshole problem? Yes. Do they have an "enforced fun" problem, as someone else asked? Yes again. To some extent, I think these are both reflections of something else: Silicon Valley style startups have an extrovert problem. Even though we're in an industry notorious for its prevalence of introverts, we're all called upon to put on our extrovert disguises for loud boisterous hyper-social fun from time to time. Why?
Part of it is that American culture in general tends to favor extroverts. Part of it is that startups have to do a lot of selling, both the company and the product, and that's extrovert territory again. Part of it, I think, is that VC culture strongly favors extroverts. VCs have to be that way due to the nature of their business, they favor founders who tend that way, they favor other execs who also tend that way, and everyone else just has to follow along. That's why non-VC startups tend not to have the same pathologies. People who cozy up to megalomaniacal show-offs a lot tend to become . . . well, anyone can complete that sentence.
Not because I think that most engineers at startups are assholes (quite the contrary), but because I think that puts the content of the article more succinctly.
If this were me, the next morning I'd be either a.) Talking with HR, or (more likely) b.) looking for another job.
I find the peer pressure to drink more in the immediate post-college crowd. Most folks in their 30s have seen friends get DUIs, or have alcohol cause trouble in their lives. Or we equate beer with large bellies. And we respect folks who refrain.
It's actually really weird being a young adult (23) who doesn't and has never drank. People will always look at you as if you're from another planet and you'll always be pestered for some justification. I remember taking an etiquette dinner/short class type thing during my college years and being reprimanded for responding, "No, thanks, but I don't drink," when offered a glass of wine. He said that I should always say, "No, thanks, but I won't be drinking tonight," otherwise I'd be making the others at the table feel bad about drinking alcohol.
I'll never understand that, but that seems to resonate through society: don't rock the boat and make people aware of a moral decision to drink or to eat meat or to X. Just go with the flow and let everyone take their soma.
The good news is that this becomes less of an issue with age. In another 5 years you'll deal with this situation slightly less, and another 5 years after that (when many of your peers have kids or whatever) nobody will care at all.
I think most of this entire discussion simply revolves around the young age of the startup scene in general. It's the same with any scene full of people your age.
Now that I'm in my early 30s, I can tell you that anyone this age who's still doing peer pressure is someone you need to remove from your life immediately. Most of us just want to have a few cocktails and call it a night.
BTW, it's not "soma" when used in social situations. It's social lubricant. I'd equate alcohol with soma when a person is sitting on the couch watching NFL or MLB with beer, not caring about anything in the world. Which also has its place in the world, you just don't need to do that on a consistent basis.
Long story short, my advice to you is to find a few older friends who just don't care.
It's not about reminding people of a moral position, it's about making people feel bad about the situation they have put you in. If you serve meat to a vegetarian and they say "sorry I don't eat meat," you feel bad because you've put them in an uncomfortable position, and now you are concerned about whether they will be comfortable/have a good time. Same with drinking.
The fact that someone who doesn't drink considers it a "moral decision" makes people uncomfortable as well. If it were just about preferring to drink or not, no one would care, but when it becomes about morals people who do choose to drink feel like they're being judged.
I find that it ironic, offering me meat or alcohol which I don't want doesn't make me feel bad at all, but expecting me to be very careful we with my words does. And it is very strange, this is all to ensure you don't learn something about me that might make you imagine I feel bad, which wouldn't even change the fact if I did feel bad and would make it likely to happen again.
Perhaps it is more a function of my age, but if the person was polite about it - but hadn't taken the time to inform me beforehand - then I'd be 'ah.. well, I wish you had told me. Anyway, please have some more brussel sprouts..." "Growing up" means learning to not be so porous to other people's emotional states.
It's really about the nature of the interaction that is the important thing. If they had told me beforehand, and I forgot.. then I'd feel bad. If they copped an attitude about their superiority, then I'd be dismissive of them. But their comfort / emotional state etc is entirely their responsibility as long as I fulfill my responsibility to make them feel welcome - and kowtowing to them is not part of that.
I drink and I don't see that comparison as a stretch. Our society regularly endorses drinking as a way to deal with your shitty life. This is just like the soma in Brave New World.
> It's actually really weird being a young adult (23) who doesn't and has never drank.
As someone who never drank until I was 25, I can see your point. However, the negative thoughts people have about "don't rock the boat for being different" have never resonated with me.
I think the whole idea that everyone should always care about everyone else's feelings has gone way too far. I sometimes eat red meat, I enjoy good beer, I don't smoke or do any drugs. We can still be friends whether you agree, or disagree, with any or all of those points. If you don't think so, that's your problem.
"don't rock the boat for being different" only applies to followers, not leaders. Nobody would ever accuse the college hockey star or the startup founder of rocking the boat because he doesn't drink. They would think it was courageous that he stood by his principles.
It was an etiquette class -- presumably for formal settings. Of course they're going to steer you away from certain topics -- what did you expect from such a class in the first place...?
Gentlemanly behavior or etiquette in general at least historically could be summarized to always make the people around you as comfortable as possible. In that way being as nice as possible to the drinkers makes sense, its not like you're billed by the spoken word or something. Also it makes the manager in the linked article a hopeless jackass for making the employee uncomfortable, even worse doing to in front of peers. Well, every continuum has a median and someone has to end up below it...
Its interesting that the topic changes but the subject never changes. Everyone expects this kind of behavior with food, now a days.
Historically it was normal for religion. You'd agree with your immediate boss or things would get very uncomfortable very quickly. Times change. Maybe someday people who don't drink won't be bullied, much as its pretty much OK to be Jewish nowadays, or whatever else.
Another set of current day examples are progressive/left wing political signalling on social media which is fairly mandatory, and strangely enough the ecosystem your phone belongs to (ios, android, or the also-rans).
I'm 32 and I don't drink alcohol nor coffee. I did try when I turned 18 just so I know what it's like.
It's definitely weird in a social setting when most of it involves drinking. To say it's a tech industry or startup thing is incorrect. From my view so much of the society revolves around alcohol and coffee. It's like people don't know how to have a good time without it.
I loathe telling people I'm a vegetarian for this reason. People think that my decision to not eat meat is an attack on _them_ and not a choice I've made for myself.
People are social creatures and one aspect of that is that we feel a natural, slight constant pressure to harmonize our mental states with the people around us. Diversity is good, of course, but we experience dissonance in outlook as an uncomfortable friction. When together, we always seek common ground to focus on.
When someone says "I don't drink"—an entirely valid and acceptable choice!—at a point in time where we've already established that someone else in the group does, it draws attention to that disharmony. It's not that not drinking is the bad thing, it's just the delta between that and the previously accepted reality that another in the group does. You've subtracted some territory from the common ground.
To get a sense of this, consider an imaginary scene:
A group of people are standing around trying to decide where to go out. The first few people suggest a place that is does not serve alcohol and that they are OK with that since they don't drink anyway. The next person mentions that they do drink.
In this case, it's now the drinker who looks flatfooted, at least as I imagine the scene. To me, then, this indicates that it's not being a non-drinker that's socially awkward, just that expressing a divergent preference that is.
Fortunately, most people have tact and can gracefully handle a little dissonance here regardless of which preference comes up first. Certainly, in the groups I frequent, we try very hard to make non-drinkers and drinkers feel comfortable and included regardless of who makes the first move.
The way this tact gets expressed is through plausible deniability. We express our preferences as vague or potential so that if a clashing preference comes up, it's easy to retreat from ours and get back to common ground.
That's why, at least in American speech, people say things like, "I could go for __." "I would be up for __." "__ sounds good." All of those are softly worded enough that they can be amended later to reach consensus without losing face.
Reminds me of that quote from William Gibson: "Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self esteem, first make sure you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes."
I'm omnivorous. I can't even imagine people having an issue with being vegetarian now. It's just so common. Around my area, finding out a person is vegetarian leads to an exchange of recipes.
To be fair, a ton of vegetarians are smug, moralizing douchebags who do attack others on their decision to eat meat. There's a humorous saying: "How do tell if someone is vegetarian/vegan? Don't worry: they will let you know."
There was a girl in my dorm during freshman year of college who would literally start sobbing if she saw anyone eat meat.
Drinking is not a moral issue. It's a health issue. If I am an alcoholic, have other health problems that prevent me from drinking, or just don't want to drink because I value my health, I certainly shouldn't have to go along with it because it makes some people uncomfortable. Those people are the ones who should be taking a look at themselves and their problem with someone not drinking. It is not my responsibility to make others feel better at my own expense because they can't deal with their own insecurities.
If I had a peanut allergy and someone offered me peanuts, should I just not rock the boat and go along with it? No peanuts for me tonight. Then they'll ask again and again. Why not just set them straight in the first place? If that doesn't go over well, it's probably a good idea to not be around those people anyway because those people obviously have no capacity for respect.
I can understand people who don't drink, but I don't understand people who have never drank. It feels like an obvious personal flaw, a sign of cowardice, that you would not have even tried something so routine and common in our society. If you have tried alcohol, and decided it wasn't for you, then that it all the more courageous. But it feels like you just aren't exploring all that life holds. Or, you don't have faith in yourself that you could get away from it.
There's also this societal concept that everyone has vices. And people would rather be able to recognize and see your vice, rather than have it be unknown. Bill Cosby comes to mind.
Do you feel this way about all mind-altering substances, or is it a function of ubiquity?
Where do you draw the line? I actually agree with you in theory: I think most people should try most things. I think my line, though, is a function of potential for addiction and abuse. On that scale, though, alcohol looks as bad as amphetamines, and far worse than something like MDMA.
If ubiquity is your primary factor, do you feel the same way about cigarettes? Should everyone try them to see what the fuss is about?
Two things: 1) it actually seems like good advice, in general, to avoid implying moral judgment if you can avoid it. It tends to put them "on guard" and go into defensive-mode, looking for reasons to justify what they're doing, rather than thinking neutrally.
I remember an article about how it's more convincing, to pro-gun people, to say,
a) "This measure will reassure Suzy down the street", than
b) "This measure will save lives"
since b) implies a lot of moral culpability for opponents -- even though b) is a better reason for the law (if true).
2) There are parts of the country where not-drinking is normal or at least kept out of view. Say, Utah.
Well I'm not surprised that a class on etiquette is going to make a point of teasing out the finer nuances of social interaction, but in most cases a simple "no thanks" will suffice. Most people don't care because in the real world there are plenty of people who don't drink (e.g. recovering alcoholics, designated drivers, people with health issues, legal issues, safety concerns, religious objections, or even people who just want to wake up on time for work in the morning).
Yep, pretty similar if you say "I won't eat that, I'm vegan." Then you're in for some serious discussions about how plants somehow feel pain. People are insecure.
make people aware of a moral decision
This response came out unexpectedly negative
You make a moral decision to not engage, which means you have acted superiority to their decision to engage in something that you consider a moral choice. People are reacting to the superiority, not to the lack of alcohol (as it evidenced by the suggestion that you say you're not drinking tonight rather than 'don't drink').
I agree with your position here. Sure, etiquette is basically a set of unspoken social rules to keep people from feeling uncomfortable; however, it's far more gauche of a host to not pay attention to this type of proclivity in their guest (especially a recurring guest). I don't think it's at all objectionable for someone to assert their choices in a clear way the first time.
I'm sure plenty of people will say it's not OK to bend over backwards to accommodate your guests. I agree with that sentiment as well! Where we'd digress is equating "not serving alcohol" or "choosing fish over meat" to "bending over backwards".
If you're really interested in making someone feel welcome in your home, you can go without booze or steak for one night!
You'll get confusion whenever you don't do something that is part of the standard human experience. Drinking, having children, getting married, dating, not eating meat, etc.
Most unreasonable behavior as a reasonable reason behind it. Never drinking is unreasonable without significant personal/religious reasons. People are understandably curious about your reasons, which generally wouldn't be good small talk (e.g. it killed my X).
Imagine you invited me over to your home for dinner, and you offered me a glass of tap water. And I said, "No thank you, I don't drink tap water."
Would you have any questions for me? Would you feel strange about drinking the tap water yourself now? Would you wonder why I chose to say "I don't drink tap water" instead of just "No thank you"?
IMO, The tech industry has a huge alcohol problem in general.
It's not uncommon for even largeish companies to have beer kegs and frequent happy hours.
Just recently we had a team event that revolved around alcohol, a mixology class. Although attendance wasn't mandatory, it wasn't exactly optional either. So there was a lot of awkwardness considering a number of people on our team were non-drinking muslims, 1 person was pregnant, and several others just don't drink.
This creates an exclusionary sort of culture, and as one of my coworkers said it "I don't really want to be forced to go to the bar with my middle aged male colleagues". If you think about it, it does seem a bit creepy.
Other industries have moved on from this sort of model. Sure, there still can be alcohol at events and the occasional BBQ with beer or happy hour, but they have strict policies about returning to work after consuming alcohol, and alcohol is not the main focus of the event.
I take full advantage of the beer keg at our office, but if it went away I certainly wouldn't be upset. I'd just do what I used to do, and go to the bar after work with coworkers who want to go.
What does "it wasn't exactly optional either" mean? For whatever it's worth, Mixology course sounds terrible even as someone who partakes in alcohol.
"Other industries have moved on from this sort of model"
Source? I've worked for a few corps outside of strict tech focus and that was not my experience.
What's the end-goal of this anyways? You can't moderate social interactions, so if your company stops doing alcohol-related events, your teams are almost certainly still going to go to happy hours. I get that this would be a problem if every corporate event solely revolved around getting rip-roaringly drunk, and that would be needlessly exclusionary, but I also doubt that's the reality outside of some really fringe cases. Although maybe that is how it really goes down, and I've just had a sheltered workplace experience
"It wasn't exactly optional" was that there was an implied request that everyone would attend. It went on everyone's calendars and was during work hours, not after.
I'm not arguing alcohol should be removed from office functions. I'm saying [a] they shouldn't be the focus and [b] maybe we don't need to have fridges of beer where it is acceptable to grab one and go back to your desk.
My wife's company (a nationwide outdoor retailer) does have alcohol occasionally at events, but those are semi-regular BBQs at the end of the day, and are absolutely optional. My friends work in healthcare where there is zero alcohol. Other friends work in the government, also zero alcohol. My mother works for a shipping company, also no alcohol on premises. In fact, outside of tech no-one I know has alcohol kept on premises.
I haven't eaten meat in 29 years. I don't get offended when I go to work events where meat is served or even offered as a centerpiece of the event like at a pig roast.
I don't work at vegan companies, or non-profits, their cultures aren't compatible with me. However, I wouldn't go around saying they have a "smug problem" that's their culture and their welcome to it, the moment I want to work at those cultures I'll either accept the conflict or do as the Romans do.
What is assholish is to insist that everyone else change what they enjoy just because you don't like it.
We had someone who came to work for us that told the whole company he was a recovered alcoholic and everyone was real nice about it. The bosses and co-workers in this story just sound like colossal jerks.
I actually have an opposite problem, though. We stock the fridge with craft beer but since everyone is a health nut (I use it as a terms of endearment) no one wants beer at 6:00 so sometimes I end up being the only one and that feels awkward. But I've been at the office 11 hours, I want to treat myself.
Also, I find the thought of Beer Pong at the office to be very alarming. Foosball, sure, but Beer Pong? What are we, Freshmen in college?
But I'm in a East Coast office. We're annoyingly all business here. It is probably different elsewhere.
Every single time I've played we filled the pong cups with water and have whatever you're drinking (beer, soda, cranberry juice) on the side. Whenever they sink a ball, just drink your own drink. I was under the impression most people played like this?
I'm not a sober alcoholic, I'm just a person that doesn't drink for a variety of reasons. I can tell you that this isn't just startups. It's our entire society.
I work at a non-startup and there's a happy hour every Friday at the end of the day. Everyone else is VERY EXCITED for this Happy Hour. I'm still excited because we basically stop working, but not nearly as excited as everyone else.
Even outside work, when I go to social gatherings, people are drinking. Drinking is the main attraction for most people. If I go to a meetup, I'm the only one who cares primarily about what the meetup is supposed to be about. Go to a concert, other people get drunk, I am the only one actually trying to enjoy the music. Even hanging with my friends watching a movie, I'm actually trying to pay attention to the movie, but for everyone else, they have to "enhance" the experience with some beverages.
Go to any conference or convention? After-work party? These events are ALWAYS at bars. What am I supposed to do in a bar? It's the most uncomfortable place in the world to be for someone who doesn't drink. It's like someone who can't swim hanging out at the public pool.
While not drinking makes social life, especially in NYC, a bit more difficult, I do not have the same experience as you. Nobody has ever been a dick to me about not drinking. They just accept it. I've had some people ask why, but that's fine. I'll just explain to them. I guess that might be more troubling if my reason was a past of alcoholism. I've never had anyone get mad or anything. So I think that aspect might just be an aspect of startup bro culture. Not that I needed another reason to never work for one.
"It's the most uncomfortable place in the world to be for someone who doesn't drink. It's like someone who can't swim hanging out at the public pool."
No one can tell the difference between a rum and coke, and a coke. It works for me pretty well. We have some similar outlooks, and perhaps you'll find my sneaky idea to be useful. Its much easier to fake drinking than to fake swimming.
I don't even have a variety of reasons not to drink. In the LSD community or whatever you want to call it there's a well known effect called the 50 trip limit or 100 trip limit or whatever number, after doing it 50 times you're either repeating because you never thought about it, or you're bored with the whole experience, or you're hopelessly addicted. Same with alcohol, at least for me. I've done it all, drank incredible amounts, stayed up all night, passed out, puked up gallons, made out, had all kinds of fascinating hangovers, its really an interesting, although fundamentally worthless, experience. I checked every square on the checklist. Once your inner completionist is satisfied, its really a very boring and unpleasant experience. And now that its boring, I just don't do it anymore. It isn't the kind of response that fits in 10 words or less at a bar. So I just order a coke and everyone assumes its a rum and coke.
This is a common suggestion, but I don't want to drink Coke, it's really unhealthy. I want to drink nice tap water, which doesn't really look like vodka or gin, since it comes in a giant glass and you drink it at a much faster rate.
Right, it's very strange to try to localize this to one industry, because drinking is the main way that adults socialize in society all over the world.
I mean, I like it, so it's not a problem for me. But it is interesting how people minimize the dangers of it and exaggerate the problems of a much less harmful drug like cannabis.
You can speak to the bartender/waiter (especially ahead of time) and ask them that despite asking for a rum and coke, you need a coke. They will be happy to help out (at least, they have been for me).
This is also the reason why I tend to stay away from Meetups/Startup events/recruiting events/etc.
They tend to devolve into awkward situations for people like myself who don't drink or don't want to waste time with the "oh really? you don't drink at all?" conversations. I'm not an alcoholic, but people consistently feel the need to dive into why I don't drink, choose not to, and have never had a drink.
And as much as people here or anywhere may say that they either A) don't care whether I'm drinking or B) feel awkward around others who don't drink, the reality is that the culture is centred around whether you drink and how much.
> And as much as people here or anywhere may say that they either A) don't care whether I'm drinking or B) feel awkward around others who don't drink, the reality is that the culture is centred around whether you drink and how much.
I really don't think this is true. It may feel that way to you because you end up interacting a lot with the small portion of people who do care, but, for the most part, people are very indifferent to how much others are drinking.
Sometimes I go to things like this and drink, sometimes I don't drink, but because drinking is a non-issue to me I have never once been bothered by the environment. If someone asks why I'm not drinking I would just say something like "I have to be up early tomorrow," and that's it, issue resolved.
The stock answer in most places I know in Europe is to say that you can't drink because you have to drive afterwards. It doesn't have to be true but nobody will question it.
I don't drink because I don't like to drink. I don't like the taste, I don't like the feeling, and I don't like the aftermath.
I don't drink coffee either, because I don't like the taste. Someone wouldn't have to lie about why they don't drink coffee, so why is alcohol any different?
I'm told in both situations that "it's an acquired taste" -- that's nice, but I do not wish to acquire a taste for something I do not like.
That sounds like a more interesting conversation than most the ones I have at these types of events. Even though I am a social drinker, I may give it up just so that I can use it as an icebreaker.
"No, I don't drink any longer. Strictly for the sake of small talk, really. But you say you do drink? Tell me about your history of drinking. Is it a long one?"
The trick is to get one small beer and drink it all night. I do this all the time because I like to be out socialising and sometimes because it has professional benefits too but I do find it strange to base it around taking what is essentially a hard drug.
People are curious because the answer to "why you don't drink" is usually a quite revealing fucked up reason.
Prior alcoholism, court order, "yeast allergy".
Its so RARELY because of the latest diet or preservation of your liver or religion that people are right often enough to consider it a red flag and want to know what fucked up reason you have.
I think you are probably living in a bubble if you think that those reasons are rare. I'm in Boston (not the most diverse place) and I know a bunch of people in the local industry who don't drink for religious or dietary reasons. Moreover, two of the things you mentioned as being red flags (alcoholism and an allergy in scare quotes) aren't things I would ever consider red flags. If someone is an alcoholic and abstains from alcohol, that's probably a pretty good sign about the person! If someone claims a medical condition which prevents them from drinking, well, I'm not a doctor/health expert so I'm not going to judge that.
This was an important lesson freshman year of college:
It's OK to drink, even if you're underage, but you MUST provide Equally-Attractive Non-Alcoholic Beverages (EANABs) at your parties. And you must ensure that people from outside the university cannot enter the party.
The author's boss is quite the philistine to insist that everyone drink! I guess he never worked with Muslims, alcoholics, anyone with an allergy or a genetic alcohol sensitivity, or anyone taking medicines that impact the liver.
Readit News
I think the title of this article would be better written as "Do startups have an asshole problem?" It just so happened that the asshole problem manifested in terms of alcohol because that's where the author was set up to come into conflict with the assholes.
You could easily have the same sort of experience as a vegetarian in a company that revolved around barbecues and steak. That wouldn't mean startups have a "meat problem," but that they have an asshole problem that manifests in terms of meat because that's where you're in conflict. Other possibilities include smartphone ownership, hobbies, and political affiliation.
Alcohol is certainly an interesting case because it's one of the few drugs that's legal, socially acceptable, and extremely commonly used. The only other one I can think of is caffeine, and even there we tend to go out of our way to make non-caffeinated equivalents available. But it seems to me that hassling people because they don't drink is just a symptom of a larger problem, which is that there are assholes in power, and one of the things assholes do is hassle people who are different.
I think startups may have an asshole problem as well, but that's not the context I got from the article. Startups have a much larger problem and that is the insistence that your job is a lifestyle, a culture. It's not enough to show up and do your job well and get along with everybody. You have to fit in as well. If you don't, it affects your future career prospects. Drinking is the norm. It's expected, along with wearing certain clothes, using certain tech stacks and having certain political opinions. There are a multitude of ways not to fit in. Alcohol is just one of them.
1. Came from people who would have definitely not been in C-suite positions at any established company 2. Would have been completely moderated by someone in HR at a traditional company, if not lead to termination / sanction
But, because it's a startup, you're getting people who have to do jobs they were never trained to do, or were never a good fit for. Your brainiac CEO may be lacking the soft-skills to actually be responsible for other people, and yet, he's the most qualified to really own the product vision. There's a reason these positions aren't mixed in traditional companies, and there's a reason why your CEO isn't the CEO at a stable company pulling in $$MM in revenue.
Part of it is that American culture in general tends to favor extroverts. Part of it is that startups have to do a lot of selling, both the company and the product, and that's extrovert territory again. Part of it, I think, is that VC culture strongly favors extroverts. VCs have to be that way due to the nature of their business, they favor founders who tend that way, they favor other execs who also tend that way, and everyone else just has to follow along. That's why non-VC startups tend not to have the same pathologies. People who cozy up to megalomaniacal show-offs a lot tend to become . . . well, anyone can complete that sentence.
Not because I think that most engineers at startups are assholes (quite the contrary), but because I think that puts the content of the article more succinctly.
If this were me, the next morning I'd be either a.) Talking with HR, or (more likely) b.) looking for another job.
Life is too short to have to deal with assholes.
I'll never understand that, but that seems to resonate through society: don't rock the boat and make people aware of a moral decision to drink or to eat meat or to X. Just go with the flow and let everyone take their soma.
This response came out unexpectedly negative.
I think most of this entire discussion simply revolves around the young age of the startup scene in general. It's the same with any scene full of people your age.
Now that I'm in my early 30s, I can tell you that anyone this age who's still doing peer pressure is someone you need to remove from your life immediately. Most of us just want to have a few cocktails and call it a night.
BTW, it's not "soma" when used in social situations. It's social lubricant. I'd equate alcohol with soma when a person is sitting on the couch watching NFL or MLB with beer, not caring about anything in the world. Which also has its place in the world, you just don't need to do that on a consistent basis.
Long story short, my advice to you is to find a few older friends who just don't care.
Adding "...tonight" seems like a useful way to avoid of all that, so I may start using it.
It's really about the nature of the interaction that is the important thing. If they had told me beforehand, and I forgot.. then I'd feel bad. If they copped an attitude about their superiority, then I'd be dismissive of them. But their comfort / emotional state etc is entirely their responsibility as long as I fulfill my responsibility to make them feel welcome - and kowtowing to them is not part of that.
Because for most people whether or not they drink isn't a moral decision, and comparing it to a drug from Brave New World is a wee bit of a stretch.
Though, in context, I think your interpretation is likely correct.
As someone who never drank until I was 25, I can see your point. However, the negative thoughts people have about "don't rock the boat for being different" have never resonated with me.
I think the whole idea that everyone should always care about everyone else's feelings has gone way too far. I sometimes eat red meat, I enjoy good beer, I don't smoke or do any drugs. We can still be friends whether you agree, or disagree, with any or all of those points. If you don't think so, that's your problem.
Its interesting that the topic changes but the subject never changes. Everyone expects this kind of behavior with food, now a days.
Historically it was normal for religion. You'd agree with your immediate boss or things would get very uncomfortable very quickly. Times change. Maybe someday people who don't drink won't be bullied, much as its pretty much OK to be Jewish nowadays, or whatever else.
Another set of current day examples are progressive/left wing political signalling on social media which is fairly mandatory, and strangely enough the ecosystem your phone belongs to (ios, android, or the also-rans).
It's definitely weird in a social setting when most of it involves drinking. To say it's a tech industry or startup thing is incorrect. From my view so much of the society revolves around alcohol and coffee. It's like people don't know how to have a good time without it.
Edit: a word
When someone says "I don't drink"—an entirely valid and acceptable choice!—at a point in time where we've already established that someone else in the group does, it draws attention to that disharmony. It's not that not drinking is the bad thing, it's just the delta between that and the previously accepted reality that another in the group does. You've subtracted some territory from the common ground.
To get a sense of this, consider an imaginary scene:
A group of people are standing around trying to decide where to go out. The first few people suggest a place that is does not serve alcohol and that they are OK with that since they don't drink anyway. The next person mentions that they do drink.
In this case, it's now the drinker who looks flatfooted, at least as I imagine the scene. To me, then, this indicates that it's not being a non-drinker that's socially awkward, just that expressing a divergent preference that is.
Fortunately, most people have tact and can gracefully handle a little dissonance here regardless of which preference comes up first. Certainly, in the groups I frequent, we try very hard to make non-drinkers and drinkers feel comfortable and included regardless of who makes the first move.
The way this tact gets expressed is through plausible deniability. We express our preferences as vague or potential so that if a clashing preference comes up, it's easy to retreat from ours and get back to common ground.
That's why, at least in American speech, people say things like, "I could go for __." "I would be up for __." "__ sounds good." All of those are softly worded enough that they can be amended later to reach consensus without losing face.
There was a girl in my dorm during freshman year of college who would literally start sobbing if she saw anyone eat meat.
If I had a peanut allergy and someone offered me peanuts, should I just not rock the boat and go along with it? No peanuts for me tonight. Then they'll ask again and again. Why not just set them straight in the first place? If that doesn't go over well, it's probably a good idea to not be around those people anyway because those people obviously have no capacity for respect.
There's also this societal concept that everyone has vices. And people would rather be able to recognize and see your vice, rather than have it be unknown. Bill Cosby comes to mind.
Where do you draw the line? I actually agree with you in theory: I think most people should try most things. I think my line, though, is a function of potential for addiction and abuse. On that scale, though, alcohol looks as bad as amphetamines, and far worse than something like MDMA.
If ubiquity is your primary factor, do you feel the same way about cigarettes? Should everyone try them to see what the fuss is about?
I remember an article about how it's more convincing, to pro-gun people, to say,
a) "This measure will reassure Suzy down the street", than
b) "This measure will save lives"
since b) implies a lot of moral culpability for opponents -- even though b) is a better reason for the law (if true).
2) There are parts of the country where not-drinking is normal or at least kept out of view. Say, Utah.
I'm sure plenty of people will say it's not OK to bend over backwards to accommodate your guests. I agree with that sentiment as well! Where we'd digress is equating "not serving alcohol" or "choosing fish over meat" to "bending over backwards".
If you're really interested in making someone feel welcome in your home, you can go without booze or steak for one night!
Most unreasonable behavior as a reasonable reason behind it. Never drinking is unreasonable without significant personal/religious reasons. People are understandably curious about your reasons, which generally wouldn't be good small talk (e.g. it killed my X).
Would you have any questions for me? Would you feel strange about drinking the tap water yourself now? Would you wonder why I chose to say "I don't drink tap water" instead of just "No thank you"?
Just recently we had a team event that revolved around alcohol, a mixology class. Although attendance wasn't mandatory, it wasn't exactly optional either. So there was a lot of awkwardness considering a number of people on our team were non-drinking muslims, 1 person was pregnant, and several others just don't drink. This creates an exclusionary sort of culture, and as one of my coworkers said it "I don't really want to be forced to go to the bar with my middle aged male colleagues". If you think about it, it does seem a bit creepy.
Other industries have moved on from this sort of model. Sure, there still can be alcohol at events and the occasional BBQ with beer or happy hour, but they have strict policies about returning to work after consuming alcohol, and alcohol is not the main focus of the event.
I take full advantage of the beer keg at our office, but if it went away I certainly wouldn't be upset. I'd just do what I used to do, and go to the bar after work with coworkers who want to go.
"Other industries have moved on from this sort of model"
Source? I've worked for a few corps outside of strict tech focus and that was not my experience.
What's the end-goal of this anyways? You can't moderate social interactions, so if your company stops doing alcohol-related events, your teams are almost certainly still going to go to happy hours. I get that this would be a problem if every corporate event solely revolved around getting rip-roaringly drunk, and that would be needlessly exclusionary, but I also doubt that's the reality outside of some really fringe cases. Although maybe that is how it really goes down, and I've just had a sheltered workplace experience
I'm not arguing alcohol should be removed from office functions. I'm saying [a] they shouldn't be the focus and [b] maybe we don't need to have fridges of beer where it is acceptable to grab one and go back to your desk.
My wife's company (a nationwide outdoor retailer) does have alcohol occasionally at events, but those are semi-regular BBQs at the end of the day, and are absolutely optional. My friends work in healthcare where there is zero alcohol. Other friends work in the government, also zero alcohol. My mother works for a shipping company, also no alcohol on premises. In fact, outside of tech no-one I know has alcohol kept on premises.
What is assholish is to insist that everyone else change what they enjoy just because you don't like it.
I actually have an opposite problem, though. We stock the fridge with craft beer but since everyone is a health nut (I use it as a terms of endearment) no one wants beer at 6:00 so sometimes I end up being the only one and that feels awkward. But I've been at the office 11 hours, I want to treat myself.
Also, I find the thought of Beer Pong at the office to be very alarming. Foosball, sure, but Beer Pong? What are we, Freshmen in college?
But I'm in a East Coast office. We're annoyingly all business here. It is probably different elsewhere.
edit: I didn't mind those at all. But I did not care for Pajama Day and the pressure to wear pajamas on Pajama Day
Beer pong is just dumb all the way around even as a freshman in college.
I work at a non-startup and there's a happy hour every Friday at the end of the day. Everyone else is VERY EXCITED for this Happy Hour. I'm still excited because we basically stop working, but not nearly as excited as everyone else.
Even outside work, when I go to social gatherings, people are drinking. Drinking is the main attraction for most people. If I go to a meetup, I'm the only one who cares primarily about what the meetup is supposed to be about. Go to a concert, other people get drunk, I am the only one actually trying to enjoy the music. Even hanging with my friends watching a movie, I'm actually trying to pay attention to the movie, but for everyone else, they have to "enhance" the experience with some beverages.
Go to any conference or convention? After-work party? These events are ALWAYS at bars. What am I supposed to do in a bar? It's the most uncomfortable place in the world to be for someone who doesn't drink. It's like someone who can't swim hanging out at the public pool.
While not drinking makes social life, especially in NYC, a bit more difficult, I do not have the same experience as you. Nobody has ever been a dick to me about not drinking. They just accept it. I've had some people ask why, but that's fine. I'll just explain to them. I guess that might be more troubling if my reason was a past of alcoholism. I've never had anyone get mad or anything. So I think that aspect might just be an aspect of startup bro culture. Not that I needed another reason to never work for one.
No one can tell the difference between a rum and coke, and a coke. It works for me pretty well. We have some similar outlooks, and perhaps you'll find my sneaky idea to be useful. Its much easier to fake drinking than to fake swimming.
I don't even have a variety of reasons not to drink. In the LSD community or whatever you want to call it there's a well known effect called the 50 trip limit or 100 trip limit or whatever number, after doing it 50 times you're either repeating because you never thought about it, or you're bored with the whole experience, or you're hopelessly addicted. Same with alcohol, at least for me. I've done it all, drank incredible amounts, stayed up all night, passed out, puked up gallons, made out, had all kinds of fascinating hangovers, its really an interesting, although fundamentally worthless, experience. I checked every square on the checklist. Once your inner completionist is satisfied, its really a very boring and unpleasant experience. And now that its boring, I just don't do it anymore. It isn't the kind of response that fits in 10 words or less at a bar. So I just order a coke and everyone assumes its a rum and coke.
I mean, I like it, so it's not a problem for me. But it is interesting how people minimize the dangers of it and exaggerate the problems of a much less harmful drug like cannabis.
You can speak to the bartender/waiter (especially ahead of time) and ask them that despite asking for a rum and coke, you need a coke. They will be happy to help out (at least, they have been for me).
You can ask for a coffee, tea, a coke, alcohol-free beer, water, etc.
They tend to devolve into awkward situations for people like myself who don't drink or don't want to waste time with the "oh really? you don't drink at all?" conversations. I'm not an alcoholic, but people consistently feel the need to dive into why I don't drink, choose not to, and have never had a drink.
And as much as people here or anywhere may say that they either A) don't care whether I'm drinking or B) feel awkward around others who don't drink, the reality is that the culture is centred around whether you drink and how much.
I really don't think this is true. It may feel that way to you because you end up interacting a lot with the small portion of people who do care, but, for the most part, people are very indifferent to how much others are drinking.
Sometimes I go to things like this and drink, sometimes I don't drink, but because drinking is a non-issue to me I have never once been bothered by the environment. If someone asks why I'm not drinking I would just say something like "I have to be up early tomorrow," and that's it, issue resolved.
I don't drink because I don't like to drink. I don't like the taste, I don't like the feeling, and I don't like the aftermath.
I don't drink coffee either, because I don't like the taste. Someone wouldn't have to lie about why they don't drink coffee, so why is alcohol any different?
I'm told in both situations that "it's an acquired taste" -- that's nice, but I do not wish to acquire a taste for something I do not like.
"No, I don't drink any longer. Strictly for the sake of small talk, really. But you say you do drink? Tell me about your history of drinking. Is it a long one?"
Prior alcoholism, court order, "yeast allergy".
Its so RARELY because of the latest diet or preservation of your liver or religion that people are right often enough to consider it a red flag and want to know what fucked up reason you have.
It's OK to drink, even if you're underage, but you MUST provide Equally-Attractive Non-Alcoholic Beverages (EANABs) at your parties. And you must ensure that people from outside the university cannot enter the party.
The author's boss is quite the philistine to insist that everyone drink! I guess he never worked with Muslims, alcoholics, anyone with an allergy or a genetic alcohol sensitivity, or anyone taking medicines that impact the liver.
What taught you this?