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

101–110 of 112 posts

Re: Female Founders Conference

#101

Post by iskander »

zequel wrote: post #58
kyro wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've got a question for you. Blacks are incredibly underrepresented in the medical field (13% in the US population, 4% as physicians). Some believe it to be due to the damaging effects of medical experiments conducted on African Americans -- eg. the Tuskegee experiment where many were purposefully left untreated for syphilis despite the existence of a simple treatment (read: penicillin). Other reasons include the lac…

the Tuskegee experiment?? Just no, no no no. I don't think any black person nowadays thinks "Wow, can't go into the medical field because of that experiment that happened 40 years ago!" That's just illogical.

I just started working at a research hospital. One problem I've heard mentioned from several people is the difficulty of getting black patients to participate in studies or even consent to having their biological samples used for research. If you think this is "illogical", then you're probably (1) don't belong to a lower status group in American society and (2) haven't read much about the history of medical experimentation. Tuskegee wasn't an isolated incident, before the advent of modern consent & ethics standard, medical experimentation in the US preyed on the lower rungs of society.

Some examples:

* Holmeburg prison: http://www.amazon.com/Acres-Skin-Experiments-Holmesburg-Pris...

* Development of modern gynecology through live experiments on slaves: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Marion_Sims#Medical_experime...

* Whole-body radiation exposure experiment in the 60s: http://articles.latimes.com/2007/oct/06/local/me-saenger6

* Immortalized cell line from Henrietta Lacks without her permission or that of her family: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrietta_Lacks

and, of course, there was eugenics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States#C...

Re: Female Founders Conference

#102

Post by alukima »

msandford wrote: post #100
alukima wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope that gender/race/sexual orientation/anything specific events will fade away eventually. But right now there's still a lot of casual sexism in tech that goes well beyond the well meant joke. I've worked in the adult industry, gaming and lighter tech(IT) before transitioning to development. Prior to entering the dev job market I wrote off women who complained about the tech industry as whiny or overly sensitive.…

>On one of my very first interviews the CEO told me women aren't math minded so he was going to >skip some of the questions for me. On another interview I was asked why "he should take on the >liability of hiring a female programmer". Those are a couple of pretty shitty interviews to be sure. I'm curious how many interview you've had for dev positions and if they're all bad like that with these being the worst exampl…

I should have made it clear that it's is certainly not the majority. My very first interviews were the bad ones and I was referred to the "skipping math questions" guy by a close friend. There was some other minor shit but I felt like it was caused more by awkwardness than sexism. After my troubles I started heavily screening companies I accepted interviews at. So this was 2/8 in person interviews but that's very high because of my pickiness. I probably did 20 or so phone interviews and either chose not to take it further or wasn't invited to continue.

I also run a very large meetup group (around 4000 people) that is nearly 100% tech workers. In four years and hundreds of meetups I've only met a handful of guys that have issues with women in tech. But like I've said, the ones that really believe there's something different about women that make them not care about hard work/intellectual pursuits/math/whatever are just so hateful that they stick with you.

I ended up joining two wonderful companies that were totally accepting and I felt 100% comfortable around everyone at all times. I got a contract to hire gig at Scripted but before the hire date I got an offer from ThoughtWorks from an earlier interview. I can't even describe how wonderful they both are.

I think that it's an ugly cycle right now. It's hard for me to talk about the experiences I've had because without adding a ton of qualifiers it can sound like I am blaming more than those few specific people. Which obviously puts people on the defensive which only leads to worse situations.

I'm jet lagged and rambling, hope this gives you a little more insight.

Re: Female Founders Conference

#103

Post by MartinCron »

mkdir wrote: post #91
MartinCron wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 At this point, you have to believe that comments like this (along with the "why no programs to get more male teachers?" gem) are pure trolling and not people trying to express…

It looks like you've spent the last few months ignoring all but the worst arguments against your position. That sort of insularity doesn't help you understand the other side. > I mean, do these guys think that they are such brilliant thinkers that they are the first ever to try apply symmetry to an asymmetrical context? You need to read more charitably, because I can safely say that everyone recognizes the asymmetry.…

You're close. I have spent the last few months feeling outrage in response to unoriginal drivel. I am not saying that every position different from mine is drivel, I am just ridiculing the ridiculous.

Re: Female Founders Conference

#104

Post by znowi »

This escalated quickly. From a creative interpretation of the interview, to a lengthy plea from pg defending his honor, and now a whole conference for women. I myself have nothing against such a forum, but the way it came about to be is ridiculous and insincere. It's a result of an overreaction and over-attempt to save a reputation. It's not really about female founders, it's about pg and allegations of sexism.

Re: Female Founders Conference

#105

Post by kartikkumar »

Crake wrote: post #73
kartikkumar wrote: post #45

Interestingly, although the event description clearly asks: "Are you a woman interested in starting a startup?", if you click through to the application, it actually asks you for your gender. Is that because YC would still like to know now many men want to be present at the event? Is it because men are allowed, but they're not advertising it? Or will they simply inform all men that applied that regretfully their appl…

And for trans people who don't conform to the gender binary, no option whatsoever: there's only "male" and "female" as an option. Now, I'm not asking for that crazy xe and xir stuff, but if you're going to go to a conference where their main claim to fame is being gender themed, you should be able to put down "other" or "prefer not to specify" (the latter of which may be preferred even by some people who are firmly o…

Yes, particularly relevant in the Bay Area, where gender discussions are mainstream. I lived in the student co-op system in Berkeley, and it was then for the first time that I really started to appreciate the meaning of "other" as a gender option. I guess YC and SV companies are not yet ready to be that "open-minded"?

Re: Female Founders Conference

#106

Post by wellboy »

Crake wrote: post #67
wellboy wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> women don't really have it hard at all in tech + affirmative action I'm sorry, but the facts are all against what you were saying. I've read numerous stories about female programmers having a hard time fitting in at work, facing prejudice all the time etc. Same about female tech-founders. You might be right in the business world or more "female-like" industries such as fashion, but definitely not in tech.

>the facts are all against what you were saying This would probably be more convincing if actually you provided any, instead of just vaguely referencing anecdotes. Without it, you have just an opinion, not an argument.

Yeah sorry, I think you have a lot of basics missing so it would take several years and experiencing the world lots more for you to understand it.

Re: Female Founders Conference

#107

Post by Crake »

wellboy wrote: post #106
Crake wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>the facts are all against what you were saying This would probably be more convincing if actually you provided any, instead of just vaguely referencing anecdotes. Without it, you have just an opinion, not an argument.

Yeah sorry, I think you have a lot of basics missing so it would take several years and experiencing the world lots more for you to understand it.

Ah, more anecdotes. Of course.

Re: Female Founders Conference

#108

Post by danellis »

PopsiclePete wrote: post #27
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 ?

Sheesh. Somebody feels threatened. Let them be, seriously. We have enough "Ruby-on-rails super-star douche-wad with tits and porn jokes on his slides" events for overgrown man-children, let there be something for women that doesn't make them feel awkward or weird. We already have a problem with this industry being a boys-only club, no need to get your panties in a bunch over this.

What do you mean to say by suggesting that a man is wearing "panties"? It reads like you're suggesting he is acting like a woman by getting upset, which makes your position very unclear.

Re: Female Founders Conference

#109

Post by danellis »

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.

As a man, I wonder what makes me assumed to be so unfriendly to women.
Post reply on HN