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

It's Different for Girls

heidiroizen.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 400 posts

Re: It's Different for Girls

#391

Post by jdmichal »

stcredzero wrote: post #331
wpietri wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Territory is a deeply animal behavior, as is alpha male claiming of mates. So I think that property rights are an elaboration of primate instincts.

The actions probably get initiated a full second before the thought of "property" ever enters anyone's head, if it does at all.

Would you argue that ideas like "family" would not engage at a subconcious level for extremely social animals like humans? If you wouldn't argue against "family" being instinctual, then you can't argue against "mine-ness", since family is by definition something that is "mine" vs "yours".

Re: It's Different for Girls

#392

Post by drumdance »

danudey wrote: post #145
drumdance wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that I'm justifying it, but I wonder if the deal would even have gotten to the closing table if Heidi had been male?

If we assume that it was going to go through if she was receptive to the deal, then it's probably safe to assume that it would have gone through otherwise. It's not good business sense to make a bad business deal just to get someone to touch your junk. If you're working for a large company with lots of money, you either find women yourself or find a way pay for them on the company card.

Oh I agree completely that sexual attraction shouldn't be the reason for a bad deal, but OTOH consider that there are a lot of very attractive women in sales who are able to subtly use that attraction as leverage.

Not that they promise sex or anything remotely that overt, only that a lot of men think with the wrong head and will go out of their way to please an attractive woman. That includes signing a deal they may not sign otherwise.

I don't fault women for this state of affairs.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#393

Post by wpietri »

javert wrote: post #368
wpietri wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have heard a lot of ridiculous arguments about feminism, but this one at least has the virtue of being novel. It's still not very interesting, though. If you were to read as much as a book on feminism, you'd know that there are reasonable answers to these questions.

Can you give me an example of a reasonable answer to this? And if my argument is novel, I'm not sure how a book on feminism could have already answered it.

Sorry, the last line was the novel part. The "what about people of differing levels of privilege" bit is standard and well answered.

No advantage is absolute, and all generalizations describe tendencies. That there is also white privilege or tall privilege doesn't negate that their is male privilege, or prevent people from thinking about it. So as a white guy, there are many circumstances where I get boosts from one, the other, or both that non-white, non-guy people may not get. There are some circumstances where being a fat person costs me, but that doesn't erase the advantages from being male.

Some sorts of feminism focus purely on the male-female issues. That's often fine; the problems, evidence, and solutions are often specific, and there's plenty to deal with. Others view various sorts of prejudice as part of a connected system. You can read about intersectional feminism for more: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Intersectionality

Re: It's Different for Girls

#394

Post by stcredzero »

jdmichal wrote: post #391
stcredzero wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The actions probably get initiated a full second before the thought of "property" ever enters anyone's head, if it does at all.

Would you argue that ideas like "family" would not engage at a subconcious level for extremely social animals like humans? If you wouldn't argue against "family" being instinctual, then you can't argue against "mine-ness", since family is by definition something that is "mine" vs "yours".

Would you argue that ideas like "family" would not engage at a subconscious level for extremely social animals like humans?

I would argue that there is a concept of "relatedness" encoded into Homo sapiens on the instinctive level. The notion of "family" is at least in part a cultural construct on top of that. Also, who said I was arguing against "mine-ness?" I certainly didn't. I'm just highlighting possible unacknowledged/unsupported assumptions in this thread. (Like your apparent assumption of a particular stance on my part.)

Re: It's Different for Girls

#395

Post by stcredzero »

Mz wrote: post #35

It pains and somewhat embarrasses me that I am not recommending calling out bad behavior and shaming the individual or individuals responsible. In a perfect world people would have to account for their behavior. But as an entrepreneur who spent years in a daily battle for existence, I did not feel like I could afford the hit I’d take in exposing these incidents. I agree with her and I blog about such things. I could…

I am still working on trying to blog about other options, not just walking away and not having a shitshow. I struggle with it. My last few posts on the topic have not gotten any attention.

I would maintain that her blogging about her experience is "not just walking away" and is "not having a sideshow." The feminist movement produced tremendous cultural benefits through "consciousness raising" and I think consciousness raising worthy of the name is a good thing as any truth revealing self-examination is. Unfortunately, some of what happened under that rubric has devolved into labeling and name calling. (Granted, this could be an effect of the most strident voices being the least valuable.) The population as a whole has to be actively brought into such consciousness raising for it to benefit society as a whole. Also, I don't think that it can happen under something called "feminism" in a manner that's non-sexist any more than "mankind" can represent all of Homo sapiens in a non-sexist manner. I think there are some valid points raised by "Men's Rights" activists, but I see so much angry and anti-intellectual nonsense from under that banner. I wish there were an egalitarian movement.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#396

Post by mercurial »

mafribe wrote: post #389
mercurial wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, today, Paul, I'd like some of this "terrible reading comprehension" you have so prominently on the menu (I mean, reading both an article and a testimony about actual discrimination, and then saying it's a "lifestyle choice", it's either that or something so much beyond bad faith, it's positively Luciferan). Additionally, I'd like a healthy serving of victim blaming, because I too subscribe to the idea that any…

Your post doesn't contain an argument regarding my claim that beauty is to a substantial degree a life-style choice. The style of your post is typical for white-knights who, in my considerable experience, reflexively hit-out against any man who doesn't defer to the feminist/misandric party-line that woman must not be held responsible, that women have only rights, no responsibilities. The great Africa-American philoso…

> Your post doesn't contain an argument regarding my claim that beauty is to a substantial degree a life-style choice.

I'm not debating this point because it is completely irrelevant. Your argument boils down to "if a woman is attractive, it's perfectly legitimate for her to suffer from discrimination, because she is privileged". There is a word for that, it's "misogyny" (as if your "white knight" dig wasn't sufficient). Women have the right to makeup and skirts, and they have the right to not have strangers grab their hand and put it on their dick. Of course, you're free to disagree with this statement, and you'll find a number of countries, particularly in the Middle-East, agreeing with your views, but that's not what I consider a part of modern western values.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#398

Post by _tlf7 »

Mz wrote: post #193
_tlf7 wrote: post #189

I'm a woman who is new to hacker news. I've been told I have to be on this thing if I ever want to apply for YC. I don't know if I'll ever do that but I don't want to ruin that opportunity. I've been reading through all these comments and a lot of them make me sick to my stomach. Articles that surround women in the work force interest me because my startup is in this space, but at what cost of my sanity do I have to…

I just tweeted you with a link to my blog because it was the only contact info in your profile. HN used to be a lot rougher. I probably have the second highest karma of any openly female member. I used to get badly raked over the coals. I think a) yeah, there is room for improvement on HN b) I have been in even worse sexist business/professional situations, so it took me a while to connect the dots and realize it was…

thank you! I got your tweet-like I said, I'm new to this but I do want to dive into this community. Really appreciate your help!

Re: It's Different for Girls

#399

Post by _tlf7 »

tptacek wrote: post #238
_tlf7 wrote: post #189

I'm a woman who is new to hacker news. I've been told I have to be on this thing if I ever want to apply for YC. I don't know if I'll ever do that but I don't want to ruin that opportunity. I've been reading through all these comments and a lot of them make me sick to my stomach. Articles that surround women in the work force interest me because my startup is in this space, but at what cost of my sanity do I have to…

Something about this topic makes the Internet creepers come out of the woodwork. It seems to be much easier for them to get a charge out of gender-based stories than, say, Java type system debates. What I can tell you as someone who has spent altogether too much time on HN is that for the most part, the people writing the worst comments on these threads are drive-by anonymous trolls, and not serious members of the co…

thanks for this- incredibly encouraging!

Re: It's Different for Girls

#400

Post by _tlf7 »

dang wrote: post #204
_tlf7 wrote: post #189

I'm a woman who is new to hacker news. I've been told I have to be on this thing if I ever want to apply for YC. I don't know if I'll ever do that but I don't want to ruin that opportunity. I've been reading through all these comments and a lot of them make me sick to my stomach. Articles that surround women in the work force interest me because my startup is in this space, but at what cost of my sanity do I have to…

I'm very sorry. Many of these comments have made me sick to my stomach, too. And also ashamed. (I'm one of the moderators of HN.) You don't have to be active on HN to apply for YC. There's a technical requirement to have an account, just because YC's software systems were built that way, but there's definitely no requirement beyond that. I hope you'll participate, but if this has been your introduction to the "commun…

thanks for this info. Still new to this site and I'd like to be more active in the community but it's good to know it's not a strict requirement.
Post reply on HN