Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Reading red flags: Elizabeht Holmes documentary

Plenty of red flags here:

The funny thing though is that I'm not talking about Holmes.

There is another person in that short documentary that raises a lot of red flags for me.

I'll let this sit here for some days in case someone wants to go through it and see if they can spot the same.

Growfast has reacted to this post.
Growfast
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

The moment I watched the video, Phyllis Gardener (old Stanford professor) raises a lot of red flags for me.

 

Example -

1) Eye roll when she was asked whether Holmes had big dreams. (Very passive aggressive implying Holmes was stupid to dream)

 

2) Saying "when you are surrounded by Nobel laureates you take everything with a grain of salt" (Seems like a brag where she is using the fact of working with Nobel laureates as a measure of her intelligence and kind of implies she is smarter than the person who introduced Holmes to her)

 

3) saying Holmes charmed older men and not her, that older men start thinking with their privates. (Implies it was only the beauty of Holmes that got people with her, seems like she was jealous of Holmes success and blamed it on her beauty and that Gardener could do better if Holmes wasn't beautiful)

 

4) The way Gardener imitated Holmes seems like she again was jealous.

 

5) She was framing Holmes as being irresponsible for having a baby and that it was an act to gain sympathy though she knows nothing about the intentions of Holmes pregnancy (Kind of shows how she views everything done by a person she hates as to having an ulterior negative motive speaks so much about her negative mindset)

 

These are my thoughts. Feel free to share your own.

Lucio Buffalmano has reacted to this post.
Lucio Buffalmano

Bingo!

Perfect to a T, Growfast!

She does indeed seem like she's SO prejudiced against Holmes.

And what is an even bigger strike against her is that she applies the same nasty social climbing behavior to a whole class of people:

  • The people who first introduced Holmes (eye-rolle, how could they be so stupid to think she was smart)
  • The "old white men" whose brains go soft and fall for Holmes (one has to wonder: what's so different with her, doesn't her brain go soft too, then?)
  • The investors in Theranos (big eye roll, how could they be so stupid)

She ridicules and pushes all these people down while indirectly self-framing herself as "smarter / better".

Since she does it with whole classes of people, it's a safe assumption then it's something about her character, rather than some specific people she had issues with.

Some other red flags include how she often goes back to herself:

  • She didn't charm me (= I'm better than those gullible idiots)

A smoother way to say the same could have been "some people fall more easily for the charm game and others just happen to be better equipped for spotting liars".

  • I was predicting it 

A good rule of thumb here: even if you were predicting it, it makes you come across cheap to say and people doubt it: hindsight is always 20/20.

Plus, it's such a common and "easy" move that it doesn't take a genius to think about it)

  • I don't have tha... 

Then correct to "I doubt you have that" as she realizes she's been too self-referential.

Her attitude and voice also generally come across as very Smart-Alecky "I'm better than everyone else".

You always want to leave some room for reconsideration and possible mistakes.
But otherwise, in a few minutes, I'd personally feel quite confident that this is not the type of character I'd want to be close to.
And it's one of those characters I'd really have to put in effort to even fake cordial relationships since I find that approach to people repelling.

Growfast has reacted to this post.
Growfast
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?
Processing...