Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

okay, noted

People don’t talk candidly most of the time now to those lower on the hierarchy. In many Corp environments, almost no one talks candidly to anyone - too many minefields.

You’d generally only talk candidly to those who were not just peers, but you already had a deep seated existing rapport with and trust. Friends?

Everyone else gets the politically safe story that is supposed to be told. I’ve seen it in action, and it makes me sad because it becomes fundamentally corrosive.

And if you think for some people that doesn’t include the right kind of outrage discussion or telling the right stories to the visible oppressed minority they’re mentoring so they can get the right checkbox when they hopefully get considered for SVP (or as plan B, their mentee does) - I’ve also got a bridge to sell you.

I don't know where all this "only massive suffering builds strength" stuff comes from.

I'm pretty sure this is analogous to the way you build up muscle: you don't try to squat 300 lbs, tear your hip flexors, and destroy your knees on day one. In fact, repeated injury makes you weaker.

Most social groups do have a mechanism to softly introduce low intensity conflict as play (which may help with emotional strength). Practically any group has escalating banter with escalating intimacy, for instance, permitting growth of emotional resilience in a progressive manner.

I was never bullied in school and I'm generally quite socially comfortable in many situations.

It's more like reverse sexism here. I totally get the behaviour here. You simply don't want to be on the receiving end of potential backlash when you're just trying to help someone. The calculus being you feel as if you might make a genuine remark only to receive a response interpreting said remark as the product of sexism e.g "out of persons A and B, I think B should run the company" where A is a woman and B is a man is simply far too likely to be met with "well of course a man would pick another man" than "it seems they carefully evaluated the attributes and qualities of A and B and B is likely better suited". The former response is itself sexist as it's basing assumptions about the decision on attributes of gender first and foremost, hence it's a sort of reverse sexism if you will. And the man's move here is sexist also in the regard that his calculus of the reverse sexism response is also based on the assumption that this dynamic exists and presents a real danger and it's all based primarily on gender too.

Sexism all the way down on both sides.

I've come to understand in life through experience there are a very thorny class of problems that I don't know of a proper name for, but have formulated my own concept of the "non-native speakers dilemma". It goes as follows:

You're on a bus and while listening to two strangers conversing you realise you can't quite understand what they're talking about. As a native speaker you feel perfectly confident that you know the language and you are simply missing context shared only by the individuals talking and hence it isn't possible for you to understand the conversation, and not because you don't know the language. If you are a non-native speaker, and depending on your level, you often start to doubt your abilities, and can never be fully sure if you simply don't understand because you're missing context that's not possible for you to obtain or there are gaps in your language skills that still need to be filled.

I had this realisation on the bus about a decade ago when learning Japanese. But I've often thought back to it in certain situations and these kind in particular seem to crop up a lot.

One example I overheard was a female engineer talking to another female non-engineer outside their workplace just about their experiences in their jobs. I heard the female engineer remark something along the lines of "the Architect often shoots down my ideas because I'm female".

I sat thinking to myself... That's interesting because the architect shoots down my ideas too (different workplace, so I don't _know_ her situation) but it's certainly not because I'm female, because I'm not female, but it's probably because I'm an intermediate level Dev with lots to learn and the idea has some flaws in it that he can see that I can't.

In this case I'm a "native speaker" so to speak, so I can be perfectly confident my thinking is accurate with respect to the reason why it's getting rejected. The female engineer is the so called "non-native speaker" where this pernicious dynamic exists making it nigh on impossible to confident that your assessment is accurate.

Curious if that metaphor makes sense to others, or if others ever noticed the same thing?

If only there could be some legal way protections like this would prevent companies from firing people from pure speculation and accusation alone...

The ironic thing is that this social behavior is what drives corporate culture to stronger conservativism.