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

Female Founders Conference

femalefoundersconference.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 112 posts

Re: Female Founders Conference

#81

Post by kyro »

dkhenry wrote: post #59
kyro wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That you take an event like this meant to inspire and empower an underrepresented group and interpret its implication to mean that said group is somehow inferior to the majority is just a remarkable level of mental gymnastics. You are essentially in support of no form of supportive outreach that targets a specific group because the act of targeting alone implies a kind of special assistance for the less capable.

Actually I would be against most forms of target supportive outreach. The one exception would be experiential targeting ( I have no issues with a "First time founders" conference ) I don't subscribe to the notion that the way to fix the imbalance in anything is to treat groups of individuals special. That has never worked through all of history so I don't know why we think it will start working now.

But can't you look at this event in the same light? To women, blacks, etc, entering a given field in which you are underrepresented, you are no different than a first time founder with concerns, reservations, a desire to connect with people similar to you who've achieved success and to learn about the obstacles you may face. The set of factors that may work against a woman getting into tech may differ from that that works against other groups doing the same. There's no harm in addressing these sets of concerns specifically. It seems like a more efficient way.

Re: Female Founders Conference

#82

Post by orthecreedence »

rfnslyr wrote: post #21
dkhenry wrote: post #5

Cool I am going to host the "Male Founders Conference" And no girls are allowed. What are you implicitly stating here? Women aren't good enough to stand toe to toe with male founders so the only way they will ever be able to succeed is if they are given special treatment. Why can't I go to this event and learn from female founders do they have nothing of value to convey to me as a male ?

Why can't people just have their own events for their own people where they feel more comfortable? Maybe that's what it takes for some women, a friendly environment of just women. Let it be.

Yeah take a look at some of the comments here, and it's understandable why there would be a conference geared towards women.

That said, it's not like they're pulling down your pants and checking if you have a dick at the door. Men can go. It's a conference to help women with the challenges they will face specifically as females in the tech industry. If you find this topic interesting, then by all means go: man, woman, or anyone inbetween.

Re: Female Founders Conference

#83

Post by lcc »

adammil wrote: post #55
tomasien wrote: post #37

This thread made me want to cry..... this thread..... oh my god you guys this thread is so awful! Does anyone have ideas about what could be done to educate against the constant same old "If it's just for women, it's sexism, same as if we said something was just for men" crap? I mean this is basically internet discussion canon at this point. As a side note, we COULD have a conference just for men if it was aimed (as…

You can have a female founders conference, whose purpose is to uplift women, and allow men to be there as well. True story: I once attended a "women in tech" style conference as a hiring manager looking for potential recruits, and I won a random drawing for a prize. It was a purse with a company logo on it. Yes, it felt pretty sexist that no one expected a man would be there.

I'm sorry you didn't like the prize, but is it such a stretch that prizes at a women-in-tech conference would be targeted at women in tech?

You might not realize it, but women face a similar issue all the time at conferences/events where "unisex" (really men's) cut t-shirts are given out. These t-shirts are generally quite flattering on men and not-so-flattering on women, so I'd argue they're the woman's equivalent of your purse.

I went to the Grace Hopper conference this year and it was very refreshing to see that every company that gave out t-shirts used female cuts, since those are t-shirts I'll actually wear!

Re: Female Founders Conference

#84

Post by tomasien »

gizmo686 wrote: post #61
tomasien wrote: post #37

This thread made me want to cry..... this thread..... oh my god you guys this thread is so awful! Does anyone have ideas about what could be done to educate against the constant same old "If it's just for women, it's sexism, same as if we said something was just for men" crap? I mean this is basically internet discussion canon at this point. As a side note, we COULD have a conference just for men if it was aimed (as…

On a meta-level, I think you are observing the vocal minority bias. As evidence, consider the fact that your comment currently holds the first comment position, suggesting that it received a significant amount of upvotes relative to the other comments. I observe the same effect on other, similar, threads, where the first comment tends to be a response to the overwhelming "If it's just for women, it's sexism, same as…

There's a lot of factors here, but why would the majority be silent in tech? Is it because they feel like their voice is belittled?

Re: Female Founders Conference

#85

Post by 001sky »

tomasien wrote: post #79
001sky wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This thread made me want to cry..... this thread..... The irony in this manipulative[1] use of language in a topic on sexism is outstanding . Seriously, could you have tried any harder (to fan the flames)[2]? _________________ [1] http://wis-wander.weizmann.ac.il/a-chemical-signal-in-human-... [2] eg, courtesy of google http://www.forbes.com/sites/jennagoudreau/2011/01/11/crying-... Crying At Work, A Woman's Burden T…

Didn't consider it, I'm a man though. That seems relevant. I also can not have achieved any of the chemical benefits of crying because you aren't near me. So... I don't know. I don't even really know what you're trying to say. If you're saying my use of language was extremely strong, you're right - intentionally so because I actually felt like crying and did, in fact, cry a tiny bit after reading these comments. They…

Didn't consider it, I'm a man though.

You seem to dismiss the plausibility/utility of feigned empathy.[1]

Headline> Babies do fake cry to get attention according to research

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/10577825/Bab...

[1] Nothing personal, just connecting the dots.

Re: Female Founders Conference

#86

Post by jacobtracey »

Crake wrote: post #77
kyro wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for editing your profile. Anyway, you've put more thought and words in this one reply than you have in most of your recent ones in response to racial/gender/socioeconomic disparity. You've mocked the OP for crying (which was a "hilariously inaccurate personal attack" that's a joke now, apparently), and you've responded to my and others' comments with simple-minded quips. I'd have kept your age a secret.

Eh, same info, tidier writing. I'd forgotten about it for a while. Man, SJWs really take anything involving the word "privilege" seriously, even when it's obvious sarcasm. Anyone have any theories as to why their sense of humor is so underdeveloped?

White/male/cigender privilege is having a sense of humour and not being butthurt constantly, didn't ya know?

Re: Female Founders Conference

#87

Post by [deleted] »

mcantelon wrote: post #74
kyro wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High tuition is one reason, yes, but it isn't the entire story. Check out: - http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/medical-... - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2575862/ - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9395587

Interesting. In the abstracts of the two studies of the issue that you link to, one highlights financial concerns and the other ignores this factor.

[deleted]

Re: Female Founders Conference

#88

Post by tomasien »

001sky wrote: post #85
tomasien wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't consider it, I'm a man though. That seems relevant. I also can not have achieved any of the chemical benefits of crying because you aren't near me. So... I don't know. I don't even really know what you're trying to say. If you're saying my use of language was extremely strong, you're right - intentionally so because I actually felt like crying and did, in fact, cry a tiny bit after reading these comments. They…

Didn't consider it, I'm a man though. You seem to dismiss the plausibility/utility of feigned empathy.[1] Headline> Babies do fake cry to get attention according to research http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/10577825/Bab... [1] Nothing personal, just connecting the dots.

Sure, just clarifying. I figured it was relevant to my mindset.

Re: Female Founders Conference

#89

Post by orthecreedence »

Crake wrote: post #38
wellboy wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you kindly s tfu please? Women do simply have it much harder than men in tech and if you even criticize them for trying to build a community, you do a lot of harm to the whole industry and will scare away even more women from becoming interested in tech. With statements like yours, you are making sure that the gender divide becomes bigger and bigger and that people become very sensitive and insecure when discus…

Feminists are probably the #1 force for scaring away women from tech. If you say something is true enough times (All men might rape you! Programmers all hate women!), especially from a position of power and political influence, people will start to believe it. Encouraging and (in some cases, like donglegate) inducing both an atmosphere of fear and paranoia in and towards women is incredibly detrimental towards the ge…

Normally I'd keep walking but, respectfully, I think you need to shut the hell up.

> All men might rape you!

Nobody says this. Nobody. There's this leftover artifact of overreach from feminists in the 90s that makes people think feminism is about castrating men and putting them in little cages until mating season, but most feminists don't think like this and certainly not most women.

> Programmers all hate women!

This wasn't feminism, this is the NYT spreading their usual ignorant filth about the tech industry.

> in some cases, like donglegate

Yes, that was ridiculous. That doesn't mean all women in tech are touchy and going to explode if you say "thrust" or "spurt" or whatever the hell else other words have double meanings.

> women don't really have it hard at all in tech

Are you a woman? If so, your experiences may have been great so far...good for you! If not, shut the hell up because you don't know what you're talking about: whether or not being a woman in tech is difficult or not isn't for you to say because you are not a woman in tech.

Re: Female Founders Conference

#90

Post by cbr »

lcc wrote: post #83
adammil wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can have a female founders conference, whose purpose is to uplift women, and allow men to be there as well. True story: I once attended a "women in tech" style conference as a hiring manager looking for potential recruits, and I won a random drawing for a prize. It was a purse with a company logo on it. Yes, it felt pretty sexist that no one expected a man would be there.

I'm sorry you didn't like the prize, but is it such a stretch that prizes at a women-in-tech conference would be targeted at women in tech? You might not realize it, but women face a similar issue all the time at conferences/events where "unisex" (really men's) cut t-shirts are given out. These t-shirts are generally quite flattering on men and not-so-flattering on women, so I'd argue they're the woman's equivalent o…

I agree with the substance of your post, but "quite flattering" pushes a bit far.
Post reply on HN