Live data from Hacker News

Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

techcrunch.com

51–60 of 205 posts

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#51

There are many women, myself included, who have directly benefited from the message that I could (if not, should ) do a startup. I was previously on an academic treadmill. It was more or less assumed that if you were capable, you wanted to be a professor. It took awhile before I could really see the pros/cons of tying my research to that particular structure. I think a lot of women -- highly competent women -- are st…

Was the message you responded to a generic "startups are a viable path for you" or that message, but aimed at women? I am assuming the latter, and that you're making the case that for women to receive the argument, it has to be promoted from a women-centric perspective, is that right? If so, I can definitely believe that. I understand and agree with the author's point about women empirically being less interested in…

It was more direct -- it was targeted specifically to me by a friend. But I also was greatly encouraged by Paul Graham's essays and Founders at Work.

I had only a few role models of people doing good science outside of academia (Craig Venter was one), but it would have made it easier for me if I knew other young women doing the same thing. There still aren't many, but the numbers are growing.

I do know women who felt, early on in their lives, quite specifically that they couldn't be both "smart" and "feminine." This is really tough, and it's going to be an influence for as long as technical or intellectual fields are perceived as being "guy's things." Most of us want to identify with something. When people's ideas for "woman" or "mother" or "entrepreneur" or "engineer" start to be mutually exclusive, it's going to restrict the futures they can imagine for themselves, and what they do. I mean, even "scientist" and "grad-school dropout" seemed contradictory to me, and scared me. If my stereotype for "entrepreneur" insists that I work 100 hour weeks until achieving world domination, how can that leave room for a family?

More immediately, leaving the family question out of it, oftentimes I may need to force a particular issue in an engineering or business discussion. To be heard, especially in a discussion where the male-dominated norms of raised voices are common, I may need to be forceful, stubborn, insistent, controlling, resolute. I have felt like less of a woman at those times. Ugly. It hurts me, yet it may be what is demanded of a startup founder. And in dark moments, I have considered that I didn't like who I was having to become to succeed, and considered dropping out. I can see why a lot of women do. This is a fine line to walk that doesn't really go away.

I think these pressures continue throughout adulthood. It leads to a lot of women downplaying their achievements and abilities. And not just socially. I think it gets into our heads and hearts. I think it's a major reason why women consistently underestimate their talents as compared to men.

I think it's really a big help for a lot of people to see a diversity of role-models, living their lives happily and without contradiction.

Even when I began trying to start startups, I thought I would have to do a software startup first. I pretty much started my current company by accident -- I was too afraid of doing a hardware startup and tackling the energy question head-on. I tricked myself into starting by saying I wanted to just make it an open source project, and hoping someone with more resources could take it further. A common mistake, which, once I realized I'd have to push it forward myself, I overcame.

Even then, I was quite afraid that as a young woman, without many credentials, the energy industry wouldn't take me seriously. It turns out that a lot of this can be dealt with by assembling a great team around oneself. Also, even though I've been dismissed on numerous occasions, without much of a thought on their part, because I am a young woman, it turns out that, for the most part, people can have their minds changed quite readily by confident expressions of confidence. Perhaps even by being unexpectedly knowledgable, they remember me better?

I will declare that misogyny still exists within the ranks of investors and engineers, which can be quite upsetting. It's far from the norm, but shows up once in a while. And it might not be so bad as to tip off everyone else that there's a problem, but it is bad enough to seriously unnerve someone, if they're unprepared.

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#52
post #5

In a roundabout way, the author points out that because of differences in preferences between groups, equal access to opportunities don't lead to equal outcomes. However, the 'equal opportunities don't lead to equal outcomes' argument is often used as an excuse to ignore inequality - if we all pretend we've all got perfectly equal access to opportunities, we can attribute any difference in outcomes between groups to…

Thus begins yet another unendable initiative. Differences exist, therefore we say there could be inequality. Since there could be inequality, better to consciously bias against the alleged inequality, just in case the inequality actually exists. And since it's impossible to prove its nonexistence, better to simply state that it exists. After all, there HAS to exist some bias somewhere, no matter how significant. It's safer to think this way because you avoid being labeled as "against equality", and can enjoy life with the other "enlightened".

I just call it pure cowardice.

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#53

Very few women are actually stay-at-home moms, and it is only even an option for a narrow proportion of women married to upper-middle-class and rich men. The women who are choosing not to do start ups aren't choosing not to in order to stay at home or work part-time. They are choosing to continue working for other people, never trying out their ideas. We are all poorer for it. Additionally, of course, plenty of peopl…

The women who are choosing not to do start ups aren't choosing not to in order to stay at home or work part-time. They are choosing to continue working for other people, never trying out their ideas.

I don't think that's totally true. Certainly there are plenty of non-rich, middle-class women who are at home raising children full time.

That's one way of interpreting it. Another way of looking at is that "working for other people" is not the negative you imply. Working for other people may be something women choose over entrepreneurship as a good way to get the work/life balance they want.

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#54

There are many women, myself included, who have directly benefited from the message that I could (if not, should ) do a startup. I was previously on an academic treadmill. It was more or less assumed that if you were capable, you wanted to be a professor. It took awhile before I could really see the pros/cons of tying my research to that particular structure. I think a lot of women -- highly competent women -- are st…

None of what you say is specific to women. As a former academic, I was told that a startup is a legitimate career path precisely once (in a grad student seminar, by Stephen Wolfram). Plenty of men are stuck in the same treadmills you describe, and there are many complaints that the grad school and finance treadmills also have too few women. I don't think Trunk is asserting that encouraging women to do startups "co-op…

I did acknowledge that this problem is a problem by degrees for most groups (with perhaps the exception of Stanford students.)

But I think women, in part because of a certain stereotype of what womanhood or motherhood should be (I think the signal from the media that such a huge number of mothers are stay-at-home is hard to ignore), and in part because of the collective sum of the world's signals, make startup career paths or STEM career paths in general less plausible for women than they should be, and less plausible than for men.

Stability most probably influences women towards defined career paths. But the mental calculus they do in making this decision might not be well informed. Even if any particular startup fails, if you're good you can join another one, or enter a larger company if need be. An entrepreneurial skill set is much more resilient to outside forces than other career skills. I think this message isn't quite communicated as well as it should be.

Frankly, I think all career paths should feel more plausible for everybody. I hear that in Iceland, there is no trouble with reinventing yourself and trying a completely new career three or four times.

I'm much more interested in spreading the attitude that one can do what one wants and be who one chooses to be than achieving exact gender population parity in every given sub-field.

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#55
post #5

In a roundabout way, the author points out that because of differences in preferences between groups, equal access to opportunities don't lead to equal outcomes. However, the 'equal opportunities don't lead to equal outcomes' argument is often used as an excuse to ignore inequality - if we all pretend we've all got perfectly equal access to opportunities, we can attribute any difference in outcomes between groups to…

Thus begins yet another unendable initiative. Differences exist, therefore we say there could be inequality. Since there could be inequality, better to consciously bias against the alleged inequality, just in case the inequality actually exists. And since it's impossible to prove its nonexistence, better to simply state that it exists. After all, there HAS to exist some bias somewhere, no matter how significant. It's…

[deleted]

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#56
post #5

In a roundabout way, the author points out that because of differences in preferences between groups, equal access to opportunities don't lead to equal outcomes. However, the 'equal opportunities don't lead to equal outcomes' argument is often used as an excuse to ignore inequality - if we all pretend we've all got perfectly equal access to opportunities, we can attribute any difference in outcomes between groups to…

Thus begins yet another unendable initiative. Differences exist, therefore we say there could be inequality. Since there could be inequality, better to consciously bias against the alleged inequality, just in case the inequality actually exists. And since it's impossible to prove its nonexistence, better to simply state that it exists. After all, there HAS to exist some bias somewhere, no matter how significant. It's…

"Pure cowardice". Anyone who disagrees with you does so because they're afraid of acknowledging the truth that you've arrived at. Great comment.

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#57
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"natural imperatives" also say that people are attracted to the opposite sex. So what do we do with all those pesky gays? Probably encourage them to go to church more. Certainly, any kind of "if you think you might be gay , that's OK, be gay !" is just encouragement against "natural imperatives" - we should "Stop" doing that !

Downvoted for projecting opinions on to parent that are completely unwarranted. Pointing out what seem to be tendencies that a majority hold does not imply there is anything "wrong" with those who deviate from the norm, nor does it imply any attempt at "fixing" the deviation.

as it turns out, I disagree.

> You just can't dish out career advice without considering human happiness and human nature as a whole.

This is an article that doesn't just say, "keep in mind not all women want to do a startup". It says, "stop encouraging women to do startups!" Parent post then links this advice to the fact that "human nature must be considered when we give advice". So it links the inaccurate assumption that "human nature" implies "all women want to have babies", which is about analogous to the assertion that all people are attracted to the opposite sex, to an endorsement of the article's premise - that nobody should ever be encouraged otherwise.

The downmod you gave me is actually because of my tone. Feel free in that regard. I've observed the Hacker News community to have an incredibly low tolerance for sarcasm as an argumentative device.

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#58
post #36

One thing that I took away from this is that there are plenty of women in their early 30s who have children who want to work part-time. I've heard this echoed in my girlfriend's circles as well. Perhaps a marketplace for mom's seeking part-time work is in order.

I like this idea, my mom ran many small businesses while myself and my siblings were young. She still sells quite a lot on the micro-stock photography websites.

However, to be successful, you'd need to find part-time work that mom's where inherently better at. Or to put it better work that can't easily be done, by single guys in developing countries.

If you can't figure out a way to do this, the target demographic will be crowded out by people from countries with very low cost of living (which is starting to happen with stock photography).

Before someone says it, I don't mean to imply that developed countries deserve these jobs any more than developing countries. I'm just pointing out that a job site for moms fails if moms can't compete.

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#59
tl;dr: Some women say it's hard for women to start startups. But none of them have started startups like I have. Except for Facebook's C.O.O. But who wants her life? Wouldn't most women want to be GOOD moms? VCs say they want to encourage women to start startups. But since they're not themselves women who have started startups, they can't know what I know, which is that women have ovaries and want to work part time.

Now please excuse Penelope while she repeatedly hits refresh on her blog stats for a few continuous hours to see how this post did for her site.

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#60
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. What's a startup business, or even a traditional career, going to get you in the end? Admiration? Adulation? Money money money? As most people with children will be able to tell you, all of those things are vapid and empty compared to spending time with your children . Perhaps many women choosing to stay home raising families instead of pursuing careers have found something more rewarding to do with their time.

>all of those things are vapid and empty compared to spending time with your children. Yes, for some. Come to think of it, spending time with the kids is probably the number one reason men downshift (by choice) as well. What is complicated and not fully understood by me is how accurately we have accounted for women who voluntarily choose to downshift in all of the 'glass ceiling' statistics. I think that the glass ce…

You can find studies on this. Treated as a group women are more likely to trade things like extra time off and flexible hours for salary.

It's very rational when you consider that it's consistently been shown that women are more likely (notice I said likely) to place a higher value on non-monetary compensation.

Post reply on HN