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

The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

modelviewculture.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 258 posts

Re: The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

#71

Post by adrianm »

ericabiz wrote: post #14

The situation described at the tradeshow in this article has also happened to me, repeatedly and consistently. The difference? I AM technical. I just also happen to be a woman. I love the tech industry. I've been in it professionally since 1997, and I've run tech startups as a CEO for the past 13 years. And if there's one thing I can count on, it's the consistent, pervasive assumption that I'm not technical. I hate g…

I'm inclined to agree with much of what you said, but I don't think sexism is always at fault here. If I were that person who struck up a conversation with your fiance, I know I would personally find it difficult to make the "first move" in initiating a conversation with you.

Is it because I'm sexist? No! I'm not a very extroverted or social person and I find it personally very difficult to make initial contact with anyone I don't already know. Given that I'm already talking to your fiance, we can infer that something or someone has broken the ice and hence we are engaged in a conversation.

If you were the person with whom the ice was broken with first, it would be your fiance who would be seemingly "snubbed" by me, unless introduced explicitly by yourself. Maybe non-extroverts, shy, or just socially awkward individuals need to wear a public service announcement or something to make this clear to everyone.

"Disclaimer: I'm not sexist; I'm just socially awkward. Please break the ice and say hello to me!"

I'd also like to add, for your consideration, that some people are better at one-on-ones than navigating the social jungle that is multi-person conversations. I have no idea how to engage multiple persons at once outside of the context of a formal or informal presentation of some sort. This could be that the topics of conversation that I usually engage in with others are not usually of the anecdotal variety, which I imagine are amenable to group conversation, where others can more easily "participate" passively.

Finally, I'd like to point out that I think your social party experiment as you framed it will always generate results that are biased toward your assumption. Just because a phenomena has been observed to exist (in this case the phenomena, according to your testimony, is "men in a technical environment are more inclined to strike up technical conversations with men to the exclusion of the women also present") does not actually tell us anything about -why- this is so.

You can come up with any number of anecdotally reasonable hypotheses, but until you actually test these hypotheses in a well defined and scientific manner with an experiment designed to eliminate all of the potential biases, your experiment is no better (rhetorically speaking) at proving anything than a sexist diatribe along the lines of "why my ex-{girlfriend or wife}'s {anecdotally negative conduct} proves women are {some universal claim about all women}".

Re: The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

#72

Post by geoka9 »

me2i81 wrote: post #43
huherto wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a guess. May be they are trying not to appear to be hitting on you. Paraphrasing you ..."Being a man around women is like walking through a maze with minefields at every turn and never knowing which one you'll hit."

I'm not sure where you got that. Treat people professionally and there's no "minefield."

> I'm not sure where you got that.

Simple. The grand parent herself says that it's unusual for a male to make eye contact with her at a conference, except when somebody is trying to hit on her.

Re: The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

#73

Post by jrs99 »

jv22222 wrote: post #23
ericabiz wrote: post #14

The situation described at the tradeshow in this article has also happened to me, repeatedly and consistently. The difference? I AM technical. I just also happen to be a woman. I love the tech industry. I've been in it professionally since 1997, and I've run tech startups as a CEO for the past 13 years. And if there's one thing I can count on, it's the consistent, pervasive assumption that I'm not technical. I hate g…

My thought is that it's not because they mean to be rude. It's because they pattern match. I've noticed when folks see the same pattern over and over it's difficult to see outside it. My friends wife is an F16 fighter pilot. I was surprised to find that out. Truth is I should not have been surprised, but it went against the patterns I'm used to seeing. I wonder if that's at play here?

it's not rude at all. I'm a hardcore male knitter and it will always surprise some people when I show up to a meetup for the first time with my yarn and needles. I'm sure it's not mind-blowing, but it's definitely a "Hey, oh, a guy showed up."

The same was true for Bill Gates. If you read his biography, when he was really young, people didn't even shake his hand when they met to talk. They didn't find out he was the CEO until like an hour into the meeting. And when they did, they were surprised.

Re: The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

#74

Post by melindajb »

balls187 wrote: post #65
melindajb wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

oh because claiming a bullshit voodoo science as argument was so earth shattering? seriously. especially coming from someone with "balls" in the name. read the link. Love it, i'm now not being allowed to reply. I love how it's ok for guys on hacker news to denigrate and insult women and minorities but if we say, look stop it, you're all suddenly begging for rationality. NOTHING about pattern matching is rational. So…

> all the links to reply to any comment are now gone. would you like a screen shot? Hrm...sure it's not that you're trying to reply to a new comment (there is a delay before you can reply) I understand your point. Unfortunately the way you made it makes you come across as an irrational individual. https://www.google.com/search?q=fbi+profiling&ie=utf-8&oe=ut... > especially coming from someone with "balls" in the name…

Now that I have the access to reply again.

Suggesting that it's ok to accept that automatically thinking a woman at a trade show is not an engineer is simply irrational. We are humans and with that comes the ability to override animal thinking. Dare I say, I expect the person to have that thought to override it, think rationally, and say something other than what most of them do? And is asking for that somehow in and of itself irrational? Look, having heard these bullshit arguments hundreds of times, I am right tired of having them. We've been discussing this issue long enough that the people who keep doing this, need to not be tolerated. We need to stop expecting those without power to always be the ones to take the high road.

Anger is a valid and rational response to continued discrimination. To say otherwise comes dangerously close to tone policing.

Re: The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

#75

Post by wpietri »

jv22222 wrote: post #23
ericabiz wrote: post #14

The situation described at the tradeshow in this article has also happened to me, repeatedly and consistently. The difference? I AM technical. I just also happen to be a woman. I love the tech industry. I've been in it professionally since 1997, and I've run tech startups as a CEO for the past 13 years. And if there's one thing I can count on, it's the consistent, pervasive assumption that I'm not technical. I hate g…

My thought is that it's not because they mean to be rude. It's because they pattern match. I've noticed when folks see the same pattern over and over it's difficult to see outside it. My friends wife is an F16 fighter pilot. I was surprised to find that out. Truth is I should not have been surprised, but it went against the patterns I'm used to seeing. I wonder if that's at play here?

> My thought is that it's not because they mean to be rude. It's because they pattern match. I've noticed when folks see the same pattern over and over it's difficult to see outside it.

Most rude people don't mean to be rude. They're just thoughtless. That doesn't make their behavior less rude.

For example, the zillion people who, upon learning I'm a computer guy, bust out their computer questions and put me on the spot to diagnose and possibly fix their issues. Are they just pattern matching? Sure. But are they also being thoughtless and self-centered? Definitely.

The problem isn't the pattern matching. Anything with neurons does that. It's the lack of consideration about how other people will feel.

Re: The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

#76

Post by melindajb »

balls187 wrote: post #29
asharpe wrote: post #22

Taking aside the blatant sexism (kudos - we need more people raising this issue), there is a significant 'rolism' in the tech community. I have worked on the business/product side of tech for more than 10 years. What you say is inherently true of too many 'developers' and their views. It harks back to a belief of "Build it and they will come" that pervades the industry (and yes, I do know the actual quote is "Build i…

I agree with you to a point, devs would benefit with understanding "the other side of the house" and that sales, marketing, and administration are all important aspects of building a healthy business. We have different roles to play in the success of an organization; at different times each role has different values, but as people we're all valuable. Of course your side of the house is always out of the office by 5p…

that kind of response is exactly what i'm referring to above. I'm a non technical founder and I work literally side by side the same hours as my technical co founder. Maybe at different times, because he's a night owl and a lot of business and marketing stuff can't be done at 3am hopped up on red bull. But the same time. And there was a line of former coworker engineers for the co founder position, so he's not an outlier.

Re: The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

#77

Post by vezzy-fnord »

zorpner wrote: post #66
jv22222 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the post you linked to... "So pattern recognition is a useless heuristic made up by a group of rich white men as a way to quantify something" If that statement isn't racist, biased, and, well, just quite mean really, then I'm not sure what is.

I always hesitate to post this on HN, because it almost never goes well, but here it is: Racism (sexism/classism/etc) is not about race (sex/class/etc). It's about power. For this reason alone (let alone all the other good ones), there is no symmetry in these biases (e.g. the false equivalence of misogyny and misandry).

This is a sly redefinition of racism that largely fails to withstand scrutiny: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Prejudice_plus_power

Re: The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

#78

Post by Thirdegree »

galago wrote: post #28
ericabiz wrote: post #14

The situation described at the tradeshow in this article has also happened to me, repeatedly and consistently. The difference? I AM technical. I just also happen to be a woman. I love the tech industry. I've been in it professionally since 1997, and I've run tech startups as a CEO for the past 13 years. And if there's one thing I can count on, it's the consistent, pervasive assumption that I'm not technical. I hate g…

There seems to be a big horrible cycle here. I attended VMWorld last year in San Francisco and was shocked by how many booths were staffed by attractive women who where just hired as like, temps or something. They were aggressively friendly and seemed to have the single task of getting my contact information as a sales lead. Their knowledge of the products was generally no deeper than what was printed on the promotio…

'Perhaps "booth babes" are part of a successful sales strategy and I'm an outlier.'

Not according to Spencer Chen.

http://techcrunch.com/2014/01/13/booth-babes-dont-convert/

Re: The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

#79

Post by rodly »

ericabiz wrote: post #14

The situation described at the tradeshow in this article has also happened to me, repeatedly and consistently. The difference? I AM technical. I just also happen to be a woman. I love the tech industry. I've been in it professionally since 1997, and I've run tech startups as a CEO for the past 13 years. And if there's one thing I can count on, it's the consistent, pervasive assumption that I'm not technical. I hate g…

Find a field that has been woman-dominated for the last 50 years. Now put a man in that field, who is rather successful (like yourself in technology), and you will get the exact same result in the contexts you describe. I'm sick of this paradox where men and women are equal and yet men (and only men) are capable of making this mistake. It's simple pattern matching, and when the pattern tells you one thing and it's actually the other you're now a giant sexist pig. Now if a guy ignores you for more than a few seconds at one of these events then I agree, the guy needs to wake up, it's 2014.

Also complaining about getting hit on? Really? A person finds you attractive and wants to talk to you. What a monster.

"But I hate that my physical appearance and gender connotes so many (invalid and ridiculous) assumptions."

What is ridiculous about an assumption that is 95% correct in today's world? Perhaps it will be a ridiculous assumption in 5 years, and definitely 10, but it's not far-fetched to run into guys at these events who don't interact with women ever in their day-to-day work lives.

Re: The Myth of the Non-Technical Startup Employee

#80

Post by wpietri »

gatsby wrote: post #20

Are these really commonly held beliefs? --You only take a job in business operations if you aren’t smart enough to be an engineer (or designer, or product manager, or…) --If your role isn’t technical, you don’t actually understand the product. I don't think many people actually say or believe this. Maybe these were common thoughts in 1999, but as an SF-based ops guy, I've never heard this. In fact, I would argue that…

I don't think they're commonly stated beliefs. I think that people commonly behave as if they believe those things, though.

My first technical job was working for my university. I learned early on that the admin people were the backbone of the place. They were smart, competent, and hardworking, and a lot of people treated them like furniture. They were used to it, but I found it rage-inducing.

I've definitely seen a lot of stuff like that here. A number of times I've had words with fellow engineers who apparently thought they were too good to get their hands dirty. I've had engineering managers explicitly tell me that engineers were too expensive or important a resource to do anything but code. It doesn't take a lot of that for an implicit caste system to develop.

Post reply on HN