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

Y Combinator Female Founders Conference LiveStream

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 288 posts

Re: Y Combinator Female Founders Conference LiveStream

#141

Post by enneff »

staticelf wrote: post #29

I dislike the fact that females get a lot more attention because of their gender. If you want true equality you've to start treating everybody as equals and giving extra space for some just doesn't cut it. I see this all the time in my country (I don't know if this is the case here) but females get a lot more attention in basically all areas of society and I don't think much good can come from that. Well, I guess I'm…

The Swedish male is doing fine. You might not be, personally, but it's not because you're discriminated against. You describe your country as "extremely feministic" as if it's a bad thing, but how can that be when there is still such a strong gender imbalance?

http://qz.com/37036/in-sweden-women-make-up-45-of-parliament...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-18/top-female-swedish-...

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/dec/12/research-lac...

Re: Y Combinator Female Founders Conference LiveStream

#142

Post by enneff »

staticelf wrote: post #102
dandrews wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

staticelf, most of us here want that "true equality" that you refer to. But the unassailable fact of the matter is that we don't have it today. Look around you: assuming you're in IT, unless you work in a truly remarkable place men considerably outnumber women. We (and I mean the egalitarian "we") have to do something about that. I'd welcome your suggestion. But "start treating everybody as equals" is a goal, and not…

Yes I realize that most of the people want that. But I believe that if we try and take the quick route it will over time only make the situation worse. Of course, you are correct in your statement that men outnumber women in the field of IT. But I disagree with the statement that we have to do anything special about that unless that special thing is the golden rule to treat others how you want be treated yourself. I…

> that special thing is the golden rule to treat others how you want be treated yourself.

Unless you have some magical way of forcing everyone to suddenly drop their prejudices, then there is a need for social activism. Sorry if that inconveniences you.

Your entire argument is a straw man. Who are these women being given more than a fair chance?

Bear in mind that the purpose of this "Female Founders" event is to show other women that there are successful women in technology. The idea is to inspire other women to get involved. We don't have "Male Founders" events because almost all "Founders" events would qualify.

Re: Y Combinator Female Founders Conference LiveStream

#143

Post by enneff »

onmydesk wrote: post #51
dandrews wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

staticelf, most of us here want that "true equality" that you refer to. But the unassailable fact of the matter is that we don't have it today. Look around you: assuming you're in IT, unless you work in a truly remarkable place men considerably outnumber women. We (and I mean the egalitarian "we") have to do something about that. I'd welcome your suggestion. But "start treating everybody as equals" is a goal, and not…

"men considerably outnumber women. We (and I mean the egalitarian "we") have to do something about that." Why? What is that evidence of? You assume sexism presumably. Men and women are different and have predispositions to excel in different areas. You know what would be really weird? A 50/50 split. Why is that the definition of correct? Why are so few people rational about this?

> Men and women are different and have predispositions to excel in different areas.

Then how do you explain the radical skew toward gender imbalance that occurred after the field of programming came into being? Back in the 60s and 70s there were many more women in computing research than there are today. This is not because of "predispositions". It is cultural.

Re: Y Combinator Female Founders Conference LiveStream

#144

Post by quanticle »

cube_yellow wrote: post #70
_xo_ wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even assuming you are correct about this - CS is not one of these areas. If you go back a few decades, programming was a much more even leveled field. In the 80s, approximately 50% of all programmers were female. (For numbers see e.g. http://blog.fogcreek.com/girls-go-geek-again/ )

It looks like the average CS guy went from rather alpha to rather beta. So, the solution is for CS guys to start working out and stop playing video games. Creepy is code for unattractive, so if CS guys took much better care of themselves, socially intelligent women wouldn't be rightfully put off from CS in general.

I'm sorry, in what mystical era were CS grads ever "alpha"?

Re: Y Combinator Female Founders Conference LiveStream

#145

Post by MartinCron »

Crake wrote: post #16
namenotrequired wrote: post #3

For those who wouldn't click cause it's "Female Founders" - so far it's been just as inspiring as Startup School (even for me as a man).

I usually don't bother with links to things that are phrased in such a way as to suggest support of segregationist policies. I don't care about women in tech. I care about people in tech.

..phrased in such a way as to suggest support of segregationist policies

If that's what you think, then you have a pretty shallow understanding of the issue. That's OK. People have shallow understanding of all sorts of things. Maybe you should keep quiet about it instead of embarrassing yourself, though?

Re: Y Combinator Female Founders Conference LiveStream

#146

Post by spaceborn »

danilocampos wrote: post #50
Crake wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I usually don't bother with links to things that are phrased in such a way as to suggest support of segregationist policies. I don't care about women in tech. I care about people in tech.

> I don't care about women in tech. I've noticed. When you collect a few more life experiences, perhaps get a decade of career under your belt, you'll learn how toxic it is when monocultures form. You'll learn about the blind spots. The exclusion. The lack of productive conflict from varying ideas. And perhaps at that point you'll learn why "caring about people in tech" means caring that no people feel actively exclu…

How incredibly rude and condescending. Is there some good reason you chose not to include his whole statement in your quote?

If you have to misrepresent the views of those you disagree with in order to argue your own point, it might be the case that your own argument has no value.

Re: Y Combinator Female Founders Conference LiveStream

#147

Post by danilocampos »

Crake wrote: post #110
danilocampos wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't care about women in tech. I've noticed. When you collect a few more life experiences, perhaps get a decade of career under your belt, you'll learn how toxic it is when monocultures form. You'll learn about the blind spots. The exclusion. The lack of productive conflict from varying ideas. And perhaps at that point you'll learn why "caring about people in tech" means caring that no people feel actively exclu…

Oh geez, what was I thinking, you're totally right. You've convinced me, I'll shut up and check my white cishet male shitlord privilege. >You'll learn about the blind spots. The exclusion. >you'll learn how toxic it is when monocultures form >The lack of productive conflict Said the SJW to the minority, with absolutely no self-awareness at all.

I think you'll find /r/mensrights is on another website. I am sure they will welcome you there.

Re: Y Combinator Female Founders Conference LiveStream

#148

Post by paulhauggis »

argumentum wrote: post #135
Crake wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I usually don't bother with links to things that are phrased in such a way as to suggest support of segregationist policies. I don't care about women in tech. I care about people in tech.

Let me flip your argument around. If you truly care about people in tech, you should applaud any well-meaning effort to get more people excited about tech, such as this, irrespective of how the event is phrased. That this particular event is geared towards women doesn't prevent other events targeted to other groups: a conference for older founders, for example. Moreover events geared towards underrepresented groups h…

"If you truly care about people in tech, you should applaud any well-meaning effort to get more people excited about tech, such as this, irrespective of how the event is phrased."

What if it was phrased "whites in tech". Would you be okay with it?

Re: Y Combinator Female Founders Conference LiveStream

#149

Post by GFK_of_xmaspast »

GFK_of_xmaspast wrote: post #121
dandrews wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Careful with that. You saw what happened to Larry Summers, right? Seriously, I take your point about the differences between men and women. I saw the news tidbit a few weeks ago about the study on toddlers and the toys they prefer. I'm willing to treat those studies objectively. Yet in the case I cited, fewer than three percent of attendees at a technical conference were women. "Predispositions to excel" or not, that…

You saw there was a study in the AMS Notices a few years after the fact that said 'actually Larry Summers is full of shit, here's the data,' right?

Getting downvoted for this, so I'll just drop some facts here: http://www.ams.org/notices/201201/rtx120100010p.pdf

Re: Y Combinator Female Founders Conference LiveStream

#150

Post by spaceborn »

MartinCron wrote: post #145
Crake wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I usually don't bother with links to things that are phrased in such a way as to suggest support of segregationist policies. I don't care about women in tech. I care about people in tech.

..phrased in such a way as to suggest support of segregationist policies If that's what you think, then you have a pretty shallow understanding of the issue. That's OK. People have shallow understanding of all sorts of things. Maybe you should keep quiet about it instead of embarrassing yourself, though?

Perhaps you should elaborate on your own deep understanding of the subject rather than simply alluding to it.

Why is it that SJW types are so quick to insult and demean anyone who disagrees with them? It's very unpleasant. Your beliefs are not the forgone conclusion you treat them as.

Post reply on HN