Stripe for female founders has invited you to join Stripe Atlas • Hacker News Board

Re: Stripe for female founders has invited you to join Stripe Atlas

#71

Post by belorn » Thu, Aug 16, 2018, 1:26 PM UTC

onion2k wrote: post #65

headsoup wrote: post #9

I get the intent here and applaud encouraging female participation and equality, but this is pretty much just discrimination based on sex.

People who immediately shout about something being unfair when they're the ones who aren't benefitting but don't say anything at all when they do really bugs me. It's just plain selfishness. Fortunately I'm sure the people commenting here stand up to all discrimination and not just the things affect them.

The next time someone ask me if I identify as male and after I answer yes and I get a free entry, I will remember this post and call out the explicit discrimination for what it is.

Re: Stripe for female founders has invited you to join Stripe Atlas

#72

Post by pas » Thu, Aug 16, 2018, 1:52 PM UTC

evilturnip wrote: post #58

pas wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are thresholds and regimes for many things in life. And Stripe probably thinks that there are so few female founders, that to get to a healthy state of things they need to "affirmatively actionize" them. I don't know if they are right or not, but it can be argued that to correct hundreds of years of negative discrimination you need some positive discrimination.

No just remove barriers to entry so everyone has an equal opportunity. Positive discrimination not needed.

Let's say there are a barriers that formed over the last centuries, how do you plan to remove those quickly and effectively?

Re: Stripe for female founders has invited you to join Stripe Atlas

#73

Post by close04 » Thu, Aug 16, 2018, 2:06 PM UTC

fiiv wrote: post #53

close04 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Discrimination, just as the Latin word it derives from, is a process through which you distinguish between multiple groups or people. Just like to discern . The way you choose to to the distinction might be unfair: you either put someone at a disadvantage, or give them an unfair advantage. Most usage was focused on unfair disadvantage but it can be either really.

But by giving someone an advantage you then immediately give a disadvantage to the ones not within the group you have chosen to advance. Even if perhaps your original intention was merely to do the opposite and help people.

Not necessarily. Not all games are 0 sum games so it is possible to give one an unfair advantage without subtracting from another.

For example giving someone a free movie ticket doesn't mean that everybody else is penalized. They get to pay exactly what they were told and expected, and nothing changes their situation. But one person is subsidized, gets an advantage without it subtracting from the others. They all get to see the movie but one does so for free.

In a university admission exam giving one person an unfair advantage might mean that they get admitted instead of someone else. So someone has to lose for this person to win.

Re: Stripe for female founders has invited you to join Stripe Atlas

#74

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Aug 16, 2018, 2:08 PM UTC

bdcravens wrote: post #68

Lewton wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since the title has now been rephrased to something more representative of what Stripe is doing, I have to point out that my comment was made when the original title that zhangela made caused an absolute shitstorm I can't delete it now, so don't downvote it unless you're aware of the context it was made in I'm not a fan of the mod teams decision to unflag this with a rephrased title, as the discussions that were spaw…

I've learned when an article is submitted with a changed title, to always reference that title in my comments. Most of the time, it'll get changed. > so don't downvote it unless you're aware of the context it was made in "zhangela's inability to read?" is a bit of an attack regardless of context, unless the context is actually discussing literacy. HN downvotes comments with that kind of tone, and more so one-liner co…

[deleted]

Re: Stripe for female founders has invited you to join Stripe Atlas

#75

Post by csomar » Thu, Aug 16, 2018, 2:10 PM UTC

Are female less represented than, say, gay people? Are they less represented than, say, trans-black-woman or a non-binary-gender person.

Shouldn't we rise above and instead of helping minorities, just help/accept "everyone" already. A side benefit is to remind them that there is no such thing as "minority" and they are regular persons. And that no particular person no matter what his gender/color/religion is still a person and welcome.

And is it actually legal to give woman an unfair advantage? Or advertise capitalizing on it (I'm aware the offer is open to anyone).

Re: Stripe for female founders has invited you to join Stripe Atlas

#76

Post by belorn » Thu, Aug 16, 2018, 2:17 PM UTC

ddorian43 wrote: post #3

Is there any field AT ALL where males are underprivileged and they are somehow helped compared to females ?

Here in Sweden we have a rather good statistics over employment as part of tax collection and it is public record.

Men and women are employed in the same rate, with 85% of men working in gender segregated professions and 86% of women. As such it is rather simple math that is indeed supported by the actually numbers for each profession that about half of the professions are dominated by women and about half is dominated by men, with a small minority of 14.5% that has a minimum 40% men and women in them (The official minimum line for gender segregation).

You want a top 10 list? Last time I check the highest segregated profession was midwife at around 99.7% women to 0.3% men. Second highest is dentist nurse with 99.6% women. Third highest is stone brick layers with 99.4% men. Forth to ninth was all 99% and are listed as mechanics, tinsmith, carpenter, concrete construction worker, electrician, and plumber. Then its pediatric nurse at 98%. (2012 data)

If one goes by the 30 most common profession in Sweden (ie most employees per profession group), female dominated professions are 17/30, male dominated professions are 11/30, and equal is 2/30. In that list the top groups are truck driver, construction worker, secretary, mechanic and nurse. (2004 data)

Not sure how well google translate work but you can look at http://www.duochjobbet.se/nyhet/nio-av-tio-har-jobb-med-ojam... and http://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter-amne/arbet...

Now if any of those professions have programs to address gender segregation is an other question, but since most of those have around 90-99% gender segregation one can guess that the efforts are not that effective if they exist.

Re: Stripe for female founders has invited you to join Stripe Atlas

#77

Post by ddorian43 » Thu, Aug 16, 2018, 2:24 PM UTC

belorn wrote: post #76

ddorian43 wrote: post #3

Is there any field AT ALL where males are underprivileged and they are somehow helped compared to females ?

Here in Sweden we have a rather good statistics over employment as part of tax collection and it is public record. Men and women are employed in the same rate, with 85% of men working in gender segregated professions and 86% of women. As such it is rather simple math that is indeed supported by the actually numbers for each profession that about half of the professions are dominated by women and about half is dominat…

I know that. But I was asking where men are few and are helped more than women ?

Re: Stripe for female founders has invited you to join Stripe Atlas

#78

Post by repolfx » Thu, Aug 16, 2018, 2:36 PM UTC

DoreenMichele wrote: post #61

pc86 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a confusing, nonsensical rant, which is unfortunate because I feel like you're trying to make a good point but for the life of me I can't figure out what the hell it is.

Social stuff is complicated and one of the things that keeps oppressed groups oppressed is the fact that the rules are de facto different for them. So if you really want change, you need to somehow account for the fact that generic invitations won't be seen as "We really are actually inviting you, too" by some members of some groups. Is that any clearer for you? Because I don't think it's a rant at all.

It isn't clear. Women are not 'oppressed', especially not in the tech industry. Far from it indeed. The only way I've seen the rules be different for women is that there are lots of events, funds, trainings and jobs specifically reserved just for women.

Given this long history, I would assume from the headline on this page that men are either not allowed to apply or are strongly discouraged from doing so (like a group of men turning up at a "women in tech" event would be)- and if that isn't the case then Stripe are surely giving a very misleading impression.

Re: Stripe for female founders has invited you to join Stripe Atlas

#79

Post by repolfx » Thu, Aug 16, 2018, 2:39 PM UTC

onion2k wrote: post #65

headsoup wrote: post #9

I get the intent here and applaud encouraging female participation and equality, but this is pretty much just discrimination based on sex.

People who immediately shout about something being unfair when they're the ones who aren't benefitting but don't say anything at all when they do really bugs me. It's just plain selfishness. Fortunately I'm sure the people commenting here stand up to all discrimination and not just the things affect them.

When do men unfairly benefit from things in the tech industry? Can you show something specific, that isn't a strong assumption of invisible discrimination on the basis of statistically differing outcomes?

Cuz I don't recall encountering any "men in tech" events, or investment funds that invest only in men, or efforts to encourage white boys to study computers.

Re: Stripe for female founders has invited you to join Stripe Atlas

#80

Post by ianleeclark » Thu, Aug 16, 2018, 3:22 PM UTC

repolfx wrote: post #79

onion2k wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who immediately shout about something being unfair when they're the ones who aren't benefitting but don't say anything at all when they do really bugs me. It's just plain selfishness. Fortunately I'm sure the people commenting here stand up to all discrimination and not just the things affect them.

When do men unfairly benefit from things in the tech industry? Can you show something specific , that isn't a strong assumption of invisible discrimination on the basis of statistically differing outcomes? Cuz I don't recall encountering any "men in tech" events, or investment funds that invest only in men, or efforts to encourage white boys to study computers.

There aren't explicit posters on the wall pushing young white men into studying comp sci, but there are historical and sociological reasons for why they're over-represented.

> When do men unfairly benefit from things in the tech industry?

There's a systemic problem which benefits men over women, regardless of which industry. For example, men have a more positive sentiment for the same resume than women do: https://www.aauw.org/2015/06/11/john-or-jennifer/

Moreover, this sentiment might extend to women, as well, as reportedly 69% of women ask for less than their male counterpart for the same role https://hired.com/wage-inequality-report

> investment funds that invest only in men

I'd be surprised if most investment funds didn't invest in women, but this is a very surface-level view. You're ignoring privileges that a man would have over a woman in getting investments, such as: connections made through school, fraternities, or other networking phenomena; and men have a greater perceived ability (see the resume discrimination above).

> efforts to encourage white boys to study computers

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2014/10/21/357629765/when...

> Can you show something specific, that isn't a strong assumption of invisible discrimination on the basis of statistically differing outcomes?

Statistically differing outcomes might make sense if we were talking about smaller differences, but--when 11% of executives are women, women are earning 1/4 of computer science degrees, and the declining rate of women working in tech has fallen--you notice a pattern of exclusion across the entire spectrum of experience levels.