Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Women Entrepreneurs Created a Fake Male Cofounder to Dodge Startup Sexism

fastcompany.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 30 posts

Re: Women Entrepreneurs Created a Fake Male Cofounder to Dodge Startup Sexism

#21

Post by novembermike »

zaptheimpaler wrote: post #18
Mz wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a woman. I tend to effervesce. I actively work at toning things down. I wonder a lot how much of that is innate wiring and how much of that is socialization. But, generally speaking, when a guy does the same thing, it gets interpreted as gay. Stereotypes tend to come from somewhere. We don't just make them up whole cloth due to innate assholery. I don't have all the answers. In fact, I am not sure I have any answ…

I have thought about this a bit.. here is IMO a pretty insightful quote into personality "When I say that Professor Lindzey’s left shoe is an “introvert,” everyone looks at his shoe as if it were something the shoe was responsible for. . . . Don’t look at that shoe! Look at me; I’m the one who is responsible for the statement." The mere existence of the word feminine implies there is a dichotomy between male & female…

It's an interesting idea but a lot of the research is pointing against things that are near the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Culture is an influence, but it isn't normally close to a majority influence.

Re: Women Entrepreneurs Created a Fake Male Cofounder to Dodge Startup Sexism

#22

Post by aaron695 »

> Early on a web developer they brought on to help build the site tried to stealthily delete everything after Gazin declined to go on a date with him.

Really?

Or as artists did they have no idea wtf he was doing technically and made this up in their heads.

Sorry, artists do not make for good business people or logical purveyors of the world.

They do however make (hopefully) great art.

Re: Women Entrepreneurs Created a Fake Male Cofounder to Dodge Startup Sexism

#24

Post by geezerjay »

zaptheimpaler wrote: post #18
Mz wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a woman. I tend to effervesce. I actively work at toning things down. I wonder a lot how much of that is innate wiring and how much of that is socialization. But, generally speaking, when a guy does the same thing, it gets interpreted as gay. Stereotypes tend to come from somewhere. We don't just make them up whole cloth due to innate assholery. I don't have all the answers. In fact, I am not sure I have any answ…

I have thought about this a bit.. here is IMO a pretty insightful quote into personality "When I say that Professor Lindzey’s left shoe is an “introvert,” everyone looks at his shoe as if it were something the shoe was responsible for. . . . Don’t look at that shoe! Look at me; I’m the one who is responsible for the statement." The mere existence of the word feminine implies there is a dichotomy between male & female…

> "When I say that Professor Lindzey’s left shoe is an “introvert,” everyone looks at his shoe as if it were something the shoe was responsible for.

...or perhaps people look at the shoe due to the claim, and they do so in order to evaluate for themselves if Professor Lindzey's statement has any merit or is in fact just bullshit.

After all, either the shoe is "introvert" or it isn't, and the veracity of that claim does not depend on who stated it.

There's a very good reason why the Royal Society's motto is "Nullius in verba" ( literally "take nobody's word for it").

Advocating that the message should be ignore and instead the focus should be shifted to the messenger is just absurd and goes against basic concepts of rational reasoning and even the scientific process itself.

If militants of a particular social cause feels compelled to attack rational reasoning to even be in a position to make a case for their cause then that speaks volumes about the cause.

Re: Women Entrepreneurs Created a Fake Male Cofounder to Dodge Startup Sexism

#26

Post by zaptheimpaler »

geezerjay wrote: post #24
zaptheimpaler wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have thought about this a bit.. here is IMO a pretty insightful quote into personality "When I say that Professor Lindzey’s left shoe is an “introvert,” everyone looks at his shoe as if it were something the shoe was responsible for. . . . Don’t look at that shoe! Look at me; I’m the one who is responsible for the statement." The mere existence of the word feminine implies there is a dichotomy between male & female…

> "When I say that Professor Lindzey’s left shoe is an “introvert,” everyone looks at his shoe as if it were something the shoe was responsible for. ...or perhaps people look at the shoe due to the claim, and they do so in order to evaluate for themselves if Professor Lindzey's statement has any merit or is in fact just bullshit. After all, either the shoe is "introvert" or it isn't, and the veracity of that claim do…

You missed the point entirely.

There is no hard definition of introvert or feminine. There are no hard definitions and eternal truths when it comes to people evaluating other people. Only perceptions and judgements made by other people. The closest thing to a truth in this scenario is consensus.

You can point to a test that grades someone 1-10 between introvert and extrovert. That test, too was made based on someones subjective idea of extraversion/introversion, formed by direct perception of people before they converted it into a set of questions with objective answers. One of the measures of the validity of the test will be inter-rater reliability, that is, how much do different people rating a person agree on the score they assign - consensus. If people are unable to broadly agree when rating the same person, it would not even be accepted as valid test.

I'm honestly clueless what social cause you think I'm advocating for - i wasn't really advocating for any, just pointing out an idea I find interesting that seemed relevant here. Of course, your perception of how political my statement is may differ, informed by your own interpretations. But surely that is not objective reality and must be rejected by the rational thought you espouse.

Re: Women Entrepreneurs Created a Fake Male Cofounder to Dodge Startup Sexism

#27

Post by sctb »

aaron695 wrote: post #22

> Early on a web developer they brought on to help build the site tried to stealthily delete everything after Gazin declined to go on a date with him. Really? Or as artists did they have no idea wtf he was doing technically and made this up in their heads. Sorry, artists do not make for good business people or logical purveyors of the world. They do however make (hopefully) great art.

Could you please not post such inflammatory unsubstantive claims? We're trying to have a civil discussion around some semblance of a shared reality and comments like this get in the way and worse.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Women Entrepreneurs Created a Fake Male Cofounder to Dodge Startup Sexism

#28

Post by Uhhrrr »

anaheim_ducks wrote: post #12
tomlock wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That interview seems deliberately casual though. Could it be that sometimes the perception that someone is "effervescent" is attributable to a tendency to perceive women as "effervescent"?

Bingo. Does he seriously think the two women would write emails the same way they would give interviews?

Probably not exactly the same way, but there is undoubtedly a positive correlation for most people.

Re: Women Entrepreneurs Created a Fake Male Cofounder to Dodge Startup Sexism

#29

Post by aaron695 »

sctb wrote: post #27
aaron695 wrote: post #22

> Early on a web developer they brought on to help build the site tried to stealthily delete everything after Gazin declined to go on a date with him. Really? Or as artists did they have no idea wtf he was doing technically and made this up in their heads. Sorry, artists do not make for good business people or logical purveyors of the world. They do however make (hopefully) great art.

Could you please not post such inflammatory unsubstantive claims? We're trying to have a civil discussion around some semblance of a shared reality and comments like this get in the way and worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

How does one "tried to stealthily delete everything" in a code base for a site.

Explain how one goes about this technically?

For any web dev who's dealt with clients, this rings of a 'type' of common client who has no idea what you are doing but sees ghosts on every corner.

This piece is amazing advertising for the site. Great marketing.

But I'll call it as I see it. This is at least embellished to try and get VC capital / hits. I have no problem with fake it till you make it. But I'll still call it.

I was only commenting on the nonsense/not the full story of "because of a refused date a contractor goes evil" but I'd like to see these emails. Did the reporter? Did they fact check? They have not said they did, so I'd guess no. Did they follow up the contractor for comment? This is what real reporting is.

If the objection is about artists. Point stands. 99% of people are not great at many things. It's a common saying great at X but a bad salesperson.

Post reply on HN