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

Leap: An Online Community for Women

blog.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 364 posts

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#111

Post by QAPereo »

rarec wrote: post #72
rev_bird wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What problem is this intended to solve that isn't solved by moderation policies and forum culture? I think this comment thread is a pretty good illustration of the problem. A group of women are saying, "hey, we think this is a beneficial project, for this reason and this other reason," and a bunch of men are saying "WRONG it's pretty much white supremacy except against men." Forums reflect their membership -- in an…

On the same token, a specifically male only group tends to get crucified. It's more of a confusion of double standards, perceived or otherwise. Sure, most groups end up de-facto male only, but you never see groups actively advertised as male only.

Head over to MGTOW and see why. Maybe the need for men only groups in a society we generally have dominated is intrinsically different from women doing the same? In the same way that MRA’s inevitably raising the issue of female-on-male spousal abuse is both true, and a smokescreen. It is the “all lives matter” approach to scuttling honest debate.

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#112

Post by chrislynch42 »

jjeaff wrote: post #97
mychael wrote: post #86

Can someone help me understand how this site is not sexist and discriminatory against men?

Do you also consider separate men and women's bathrooms prejudicial and sexist?

As defined by merriam-webster.com I certainly do. Why do we consider all sexism bad?

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#114

Post by sievebrain »

cbcowans wrote: post #89
kdelok wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(not for me, so I'm not sure how much I could respond to questions) Is Leap for people who are i) female, ii) identify as a woman, or iii) both? I ask because I have a few friends who are biologically female, but genderqueer (by which they mean that they don't prescribe to the cultural stuff that is usually attached to gender). Would this be suitable for them? As a more general note, since this looks to be a communit…

Thank you for asking. iii – My goal is to create an inclusive community. I'd say Leap is suitable for your friend. I am also learning as I go, so would love feedback!

Again! Your goal is not to create an inclusive community. Your goal is to create an exclusive community.

Look, if want to create a female only website then go for it. But you have to own your actions. You can't exclude half the population then claim you care about inclusion. That is rank hypocrisy bordering on the delusional - you are doing the exact opposite of what you claim.

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#115

Post by fruzz »

turinapple wrote: post #99
fruzz wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish your experience was unique. A colleague was groped. She didn't report it. It would have likely diminished her future prospects. A friend was asked out on dates, unsolicited, multiple times by coworkers. She just had to laugh it off. Women at a previous employment reported not being taken as seriously as men in meetings, and being passed over for promotions in favour of less qualified men. A friend repor…

Thanks for sharing. Everytime I've tried to challenge others' behavior towards me, I've ended up the villain...

Yah. One thing I learned works are men who aren't recipient to the behaviour standing up.

There was an employee like that at my last job who would speak up. Not forcefully. I was really appreciative of what he was doing. He was treated pretty awfully, and ended up quitting.

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#116

Post by rev_bird »

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #105
rev_bird wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I am a bit triggered. This is tangential to your point, but I'm pretty sure what you're referring to isn't being "triggered." It's, I don't know, disagreeing? It has a specific and important definition, and it seems to be getting thrown around in other scenarios, to the detriment of those with PTSD. https://www.webmd.com/mental-health/what-are-ptsd-triggers

The word was properly being used. The definition of triggered is "anything, as an act or event, that serves as a stimulus and initiates or precipitates a reaction or series of reactions."[1] Definitions also change over time, and the colloquial definition of the word seems to be shifting to "Getting filled with hate after seeing, hearing or experiencing something you can't stand."[2] [1] http://www.dictionary.com/bro…

This seems like a disingenuous decontextualization of what was said. Your link to dictionary.com says this:

>to initiate or precipitate (a chain of events, scientific reaction, psychological process, etc.)

"Psychological process," in this case, is what I was talking about, and what I think the original commenter was referring to. "Trigger warnings" aren't warning you that you might feel "anything that will cause a reaction," they're to help people suffering with PTSD avoid having a panic attack.

I agree that the colloquial definition is trending the way you describe, and I think it's irresponsible to just sit and watch it happen without speaking up in favor of the more specific psychological definition.

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#117

Post by booleandilemma »

fruzz wrote: post #80
turinapple wrote: post #54

I'm a woman that's worked in tech since 2011... at times the discrimination and treatment I've faced has made me want to quit the industry all together. But every time I reached that point I thought - no, I'm not the one who should have to leave, it's the people -- usually men -- who have not shown empathy, kindness or compassion. The ones who have bullied me and harassed me and made inappropriate comments or advance…

I really wish your experience was unique. A colleague was groped. She didn't report it. It would have likely diminished her future prospects. A friend was asked out on dates, unsolicited, multiple times by coworkers. She just had to laugh it off. Women at a previous employment reported not being taken as seriously as men in meetings, and being passed over for promotions in favour of less qualified men. A friend repor…

A friend was asked out on dates, unsolicited, multiple times by coworkers.

I’m a geek and don’t know the first thing about dating, but doesn’t at least one of the parties involved need to receive an unsolicited request? Isn’t that how it works?

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#118

Post by dang »

sievebrain wrote: post #110
lynnetye wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I understand this perspective, I also know that being a women in tech can feel incredibly lonely. Growing up, I was always comfortable being the only girl in a big group of guys. In fact, I still consider myself to be quite the tomboy. However, being the only woman in a room of 100 men at a meet-up can feel pretty isolating. (Especially when a dozen of them assume that I'm a recruiter. I'm not. I'm a web develo…

What? Of course you want to draw lines in the sand and create an us Vs them mentality. That's the entire point of the large efforts you are making to exclude men. Don't deny reality. It doesn't help you or your ever more dubious "cause". You have created an explicitly sexist community.

I'm happy to see that most comments in this thread have remained civil even when they disagree. This one, however, crosses into incivility and even personal attack. That breaks the HN guidelines and we ban accounts that do it.

It also looks like you've been using HN primarily for ideological battle. That's an abuse of the site too. Please read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and follow the rules if you want to keep commenting here.

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#119

Post by rarec »

ambivalents wrote: post #79
rarec wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the same token, a specifically male only group tends to get crucified. It's more of a confusion of double standards, perceived or otherwise. Sure, most groups end up de-facto male only, but you never see groups actively advertised as male only.

This once again reads as an illustration of the problem. This isn't an issue of double standards. You do understand the difference in experiences, right, between members of a group comprised and in support of a minority/systematically-unrepresented group, and a counterpart group comprised of a majority/the ones often perpetuating (even if indirectly) this imbalance?

I do. However, I'm not sure how that means that a subset of the majority cannot also have their own exclusive spaces while also allowing a minority to have the same. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against a woman only support group and find the idea of Leap great. What is the problem you're stating, in this case, that a woman only group can solve that one comprised of men and women could not? Genuine question.

If the answer is "Men cannot understand" that's fair, but a terrible simplification. You'll find most men are at least willing to try to understand, and by vilifying the majority and hiding in a smaller exclusionary group you may just end up worse off than before.

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#120

Post by dang »

sievebrain wrote: post #114
cbcowans wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for asking. iii – My goal is to create an inclusive community. I'd say Leap is suitable for your friend. I am also learning as I go, so would love feedback!

Again! Your goal is not to create an inclusive community. Your goal is to create an exclusive community. Look, if want to create a female only website then go for it. But you have to own your actions. You can't exclude half the population then claim you care about inclusion. That is rank hypocrisy bordering on the delusional - you are doing the exact opposite of what you claim.

I warned you once in this thread already (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16161338), but you've managed to break yet another HN site guideline with this comment, the one that reads as follows:

Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize.

Obviously Cadran was talking about making Leap inclusive within the scope of being a forum for women—that's what the question was about. You don't have to agree with any particular view to see that, it just takes basic respect. If you can't or won't abide by the rules here, please stop commenting until you can.

Post reply on HN