There is literally nothing bad that could come of this, and I'm totally serious. I'm sure the women that attend will benefit hugely. I may get the missus to watch the stream. Been trying to ignite her entrepreneurial spirit!
Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
151–160 of 295 posts
Re: Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
#152I'm against these, because I'm against gender discrimination. Gender discrimination means that one gender is treated differently from another. It's also interesting to know whether transwomen will be allowed. Some radical feminists only accept 'born as women' to their conferences. And if transwomen are accepted, what's their definition of that.
jeez what's with all of these MRAs coming out everywhere when somebody tries to do something for women? this shit happens every single time
Re: Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
Feminists fighting against trans women is a fairly well known phenomenon. Feminist and transphobic are hardly mutually exclusive worldviews. Edit: dug up a few pointer links: http://www.transadvocate.com/unpacking-transphobia-in-femini... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transphobia#Transphobia_in_fem... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_views_on_transgenderi... http://lmgtfy.com/?q=transphobia+feminism
> self-identified feminist as opposed to what? Certified feminist?
You can be a human, you can be someone with the flu, but you can't really "be" a feminist, or any other political "ist", being that there's no agreed-upon definition of the word. So it's more productive to talk in terms of people "identified as" X.
Re: Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there any label that people apply to themselves or others that successfully filters out the lunatic fringe from reasonable people? I'm not afraid to call myself a feminist (even though that puts me in the same camp as some crazy people) in the same way that I'm not afraid to call myself a hacker or a man or a parent or an urban farmer.
> Is there any label that people apply to themselves or others that successfully filters out the lunatic fringe from reasonable people? I don’t know, it probably has to do with the visibility of these fringe groups and your position in the spectrum described by the label. I am sure there are lunatic social democrats somewhere, I have just not yet met them, and I am also positive that there are lunatic liberal democra…
The only reason "lunatic" feminists seem more visible is because people feel compelled to point out the most extreme views of "lunatic" feminists every single time there is a discussion of feminism.
It would be like if every time a science article was posted on HN you had multiple people pointing out that all science is crazy because some lunatics used to think eugenics was a good idea.
Seriously, pick any thread on HN vaguely related to feminism and you will find multiple people claiming that feminism is a worthless lunatic ideology not based on reality. And 99% of them use outdated theory (just as eugenics is outdated) and complete misrepresentations to back up their claims. For example saying things like:
"oh, wait, one of the leading feminists (Alice Schwarzer) is strongly opposing any legalisation of prostitution"
When in fact her position is nowhere close to that:
"She views prostitution as violence against women and favors laws like those in Sweden, where the sale of sexual services is legal but their purchase is not. (See also: Prostitution in Germany.)"
It's pretty ridiculous to claim that feminism seems crazy because fringe feminists are simply more public, when you are directly and purposefully contributing to making them more public in a pretty transparent attempt to discredit feminism.
Re: Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
#155I'm assuming some HNers are soon to arrive saying things like "why does it matter that a founder is a female?", "why make an excluding event? isn't it sexism all the same", "imagine if someone make a 'male founders conference'?" I would like to ask you to think for a moment, before raising this concerns (I am not bothering here to debate with haters, only with those who are genuinely concerned that this might sexism…
> This is no such case for female founders. Here we have a much simples issue: stigmatization.
I disagree. I might be in the minority but in the places I've worked in tech no one cares - at least as far as I can tell - what your gender is, it's how well you do the job.
What I do see a lot of is women who are capable but not interested in STEM. Not because of some kind of social stigma, they just don't care about it. My mother studied mathematics and eventually switched to sociology because she was more interested in how people interact - math was easy for her, which was the primary reason she went to school for it. My wife is very intelligent and analytical but could not care less about computing.
There are legitimate physical differences between men and women (men on average have more upper body strength, for example) that are not caused by social stigmas. Isn't it reasonable to think there might be some mental differences as well? Perhaps the average man is less risk-averse than the average woman and therefore is more likely to enter a risky business venture. It's not some kind of discrimination or societal pressure or a learned behavior, it's just human nature.
That said - I live in a bit of a bubble. Of course there are places out there where women are discriminated against for this kind of thing, and I totally understand why conferences like this exist (I have no problem with them). But it's worth considering that sometimes it's not just a discrimination issue and must be corrected
Re: Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have never heard of such a thing in a conference context, but I have seen it come up in others. And I don't think it's helpful to label such exclusion "hate", as it typically comes from women who feel that self-identifying as female is not sufficient to qualify one to be called a woman. But it's a very complex and interesting issue, not worth bringing up here, as you note. It's brought up here to stir the pot, I se…
I agree that it's largely to stir the pot in this case, but as a gender-dysphoric bisexual male I am curious where the line would be drawn. I'm fairly sure Jessica will just apply common sense though and would put me somewhere below full (trans-)women but above cisgendered men as far as priority goes, which would make sense. Not that I'd be able to attend either way though; even though I would very much love to.
You were born male and so have not experienced female socialization and experiences throughout your life. You have what is often called "male privilege." I'm not comfortable with my "gender" either (who is?) but I don't plan on taking up space at the conference.
Re: Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
#157I'm assuming some HNers are soon to arrive saying things like "why does it matter that a founder is a female?", "why make an excluding event? isn't it sexism all the same", "imagine if someone make a 'male founders conference'?" I would like to ask you to think for a moment, before raising this concerns (I am not bothering here to debate with haters, only with those who are genuinely concerned that this might sexism…
HN readers in these gender discussions are so outright condescending, hateful, and knowingly, deliberately unreasonable-- not to mention "othering"-- it makes me consider never coming to this website ever again.
Thank you for being a voice of reason, even though doing so can be incredibly frustrating in its fruitlessness sometimes.
Re: Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
#158I'm against these, because I'm against gender discrimination. Gender discrimination means that one gender is treated differently from another. It's also interesting to know whether transwomen will be allowed. Some radical feminists only accept 'born as women' to their conferences. And if transwomen are accepted, what's their definition of that.
" I'm against gender discrimination " Do you believe that no gender discrimination in favour of men occurs in the rest of the industry? Are you against any particular act of discrimination that you happen to witness, or are you stating a preference for a system in which no discrimination occurs? (I, too, am against gender discrimination, which is why I am for these.)
"Discrimination" is a red herring. We practice discrimination all the time, it can be a good thing. Using it like it's a dirty word is insulting to the intelligence of the organizers here.
Re: Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
#159I'm against these, because I'm against gender discrimination. Gender discrimination means that one gender is treated differently from another. It's also interesting to know whether transwomen will be allowed. Some radical feminists only accept 'born as women' to their conferences. And if transwomen are accepted, what's their definition of that.
jeez what's with all of these MRAs coming out everywhere when somebody tries to do something for women? this shit happens every single time
Men always become very nervous when women try to have their own spaces, talk amongst themselves, organize into groups, etc. It's like reality can't pass the Bechdel Test.
Re: Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)
#160The problem -- and the reason they are popular -- with identity events like these are that they give lots of people except the most talented women a cop out:
Sexist males - "See, women can't hack it as founders in the real world. They need extra help."
Non-sexist males - "Whew. I'll support this event and stop second guessing myself whenever I choose to fund a male-led organization."
Mediocre females - "Sweet. Now I can get recognition even though a don't deserve it"
Talented females - "Crap. Now everyone assumes I have this position just because I'm a woman"
Maybe I'm just a naive idealist. I still believe that on average people's individual greed causes then to hire the best people no matter their sex.