After a damning report on its unsurprising sexist, tech bro culture was released on Tuesday, Uber held an all-staff meeting to discuss the findings. As board member Arianna Huffington hailed the addition of Uber's second female board member, another board member, David Bonderman, made a misogynistic comment.

Yahoo Finance got audio:

While speaking, Huffington pointed out that Uber was adding a woman to its board, Wan Ling Martello.

“There’s a lot of data that shows when there’s one woman on the board, it’s much more likely that there will be a second woman on the board,” she said around six minutes into the recording.

“Actually what it shows is it’s much more likely to be more talking,” Uber board member David Bonderman said.

“Oh. Come on, David,” Huffington responded.

Yes. He. Said. That.

Yes. At. A. Meeting. About. Sexism. At. Uber. Thereby — thanks a lot, very clueless dude — proving the point.

Bonderman later issued an apology, but I am not even going to include it because he does not deserve it in any way.

Bonderman, the billionaire chairman of TPG Capital, resigned in the wake of the controversy, saying, "I directed a comment to my colleague and friend Arianna Huffington that was careless, inappropriate, and inexcusable. Having worked with the company for some months on the Holder report, I recognize the importance of implementing the requirements of the report. Uber is examining the issues with its culture, making significant changes and working to right what has been done wrong, which is extremely important for the future of the company. I do not want my comments to create distraction as Uber works to build a culture of which we can be proud."

"I appreciate David doing the right thing for Uber at this time of critical cultural changes at the company," Huffington said.

A 2012 study by professors from Princeton and Brigham Young University found that actually men talk more during meetings. Tali Mendelberg told the Times, "The study shows that men will dominate the conversation if there are more men than women in the group, and they dominate by a lot/ When you have just two women in the group, those women are much more silent than men are."

Former Uber engineer Susan J. Fowler, whose personal essay about the sexist culture perpetuated at the company—her many complaints about inappropriate colleagues and supervisors went ignored by HR—sparked the report, had some comments:

Previously: Travis Kalanick Confirms Leave From Uber; Company Told To Curb Employees' Alcohol & Drug Use

--No parking for your bulldozer? Just leave it on the beach. (Thanks to reader Joe, who sent this absolutely gorgeous postcard picture to us. GREETINGS FROM THE BULLDOZER!)

--Another reader, Erin, was accosted by Recall Jake McGoldrick people, did some research, and found out the consultant group doing their outreach is based out of the Mission.

--This link's for you, commenter Tin Man! (You Swells By The Numbers always kicks off Sunday mornings!)

--Google and YouTube's involvement in the 2008 elections.

--H. Brown endorses Robert Haaland. Kidding!

--People dressed up as gorillas.

--New GavinWatch video! (Budget.)

--Lawyers prevent us from giving you a full review of Bad Bugs Bunny, a collection of sexist, racist, and otherwise offensive Warner Brothers cartoons which screened as part of Another Hole in the Head -- but it was good, if disturbing.

This week's Big Movie: ! It’s a real surprise how divided the critics are about this one! Sure it’s franchising, sure it’s full of top shelf men in designer clothes and high-end accoutrement, but we thought it was all kicks and giggles. Groucho Reviews's Peter Cavanese however, says, “the plot of Thirteen is old, old news.”

Many, like Roger Ebert, expressed their exhaustion with this trope -- Scott Floundas of the Village Voice Media Collective went as far as to say that “this time the con is on the audience," and the Bay Guardian found Ellen Barkin's role somewhat sexist. Your local mainstream media critics, though (The Chron's Mick LaSalle, the Examiner's Rossiter Drake, and the Merc News's Bruce Newman) all thought it was perfectly fine.

We’re none too grouchy. Admittedly slick and shiny and lots of other bad sounding words for “expensive,” the film is still fun. It’s witty and clever and makes no real effort to pull the wool over your eyes. It’s really just expecting you to be on your toes. Maybe fitting we describe the film in clichés? Hard to say. Direction is still high grade (Soderberg after all), acting is great, the storyline of this one was more endearing than the others, even with all the love interest and family tension those others involved. However, the critics aren’t saying much about the film’s fuzzy points.

Filmstew.com’s Richard Horgan was a touch more charitable, writing, “It’s not as good as the first, better than the second," while SlashFilm's Peter Scierra was like, it's all kind of unbelievable, but not unfun either. Hm. That’s just what we thought of Pirates 3.

This may become one of those films that’s loved by fans and speared by critics. A reviewer on the Brisbane-based Rotten Tomatoes, Susan Granger, even called it a “guilty pleasure.” Few things get the critics sharpening their pencils faster.

SFist Sara, contributing.

....video goo-goo, video blah-blah. Even as people continue to debate whether Officer Andrew Cohen's now-notorious film project, involving African-American officers eating out of dog bowls and Charlie's Angels parodies is racist/sexist, in poor judgment, both, or neither, the post-video postmortems have already begun. Newsom -- was he right to react so swiftly? Going overboard? Or just trying to distract us from the murder rate?

Meanwhile, 8 of the suspended officers have been put back at their posts. And one officer held his own press conference to state that his inclusion in the video (sticking his tongue out) was from outtakes from a training video they were shooting and he had absolutely no idea the clips would be used in a potentially-sexist manner.

...and the latest? So remember how this whole thing started because "someone" leaked the clips to the press? Well, the San Francisco Sentinel is reporting that they have an email showing that the supposed leak was actually from director Andrew Cohen himself! Is this just to get attention? To get his co-workers in trouble? To get his attorney friend some more bad publicity? And why's Cohen got five separate lawyers in the first place?

Funny, the video's not nearly as interesting as the subsequent drama.