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

Leap: An Online Community for Women

blog.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 364 posts

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#261

Post by 5555624 »

ambivalents wrote: post #154
booleandilemma wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A friend was asked out on dates, unsolicited, multiple times by coworkers. I’m a geek and don’t know the first thing about dating, but doesn’t at least one of the parties involved need to receive an unsolicited request? Isn’t that how it works?

> A friend was asked out on dates, unsolicited, multiple times by coworkers. It's a little ambiguous in how this is worded whether the same person asked multiple times, or if it was multiple people each asking once. BUT in the former case especially, if you get turned down for a date please respect the other's wishes and do not keep trying, especially at work. It's not cute or charming, it's just disrespectful.

In turning down someone, make sure to make it clear that you don't want to go out with them. "I'm sorry, I don't date co-workers" or "I'm sorry, I'm not interested" or something similar. If you say, "I'm sorry, I'm busy that night," you may very well get asked again. If you don't make it clear and you get asked again, it may happen again until you make it clear. After the third or fourth time, maybe someone will get the hint; but, it's always better to jus be clear about it.

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#262

Post by woahdudebro »

iovrthoughtthis wrote: post #96
woahdudebro wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I seek to understand the objective standard that allows one type of discrimination while condemning another, perhaps you can provide clarity there? I don't understand the down votes here, I am merely asking for an explanation of the logic used. I'm autistic so I sometimes have trouble understanding things that are obvious to people who are not. Without more data I will have to assume this is exclusively a emotional j…

I'm not sure what you're looking for exists. There's no objective standard, everything is contextual.

If that's the case how do you know you're right?

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#263

Post by harlanji »

cheez wrote: post #173
fruzz wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Work isn't the place to proposition people for a romantic relationship. At all times, but especially when there's a power dynamic. When that happens, along with a gazillion other little things women are disproportionately on the receiving end of, it has the effect of dissuading women from pursuing their career in the industry.

This is wrongheaded. Work is a fine place to find partners because you are likely to be educated similarly and have similar life goals. You have to be mature in how you handle it though. One of the women I probably loved most in my life I met at work.

Marriage creates a legal protection between partners which as far as I know is stronger than the employer/employee relationship, so the company is rational to be uncomfortable with such situations in competitive situations where court is plausible. Part of the big money game is playing by more restricted rules.

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#265

Post by [deleted] »

sydd wrote: post #260
DoreenMichele wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it is a setting where asking is potentially problematic -- like work -- it is best to either broach the subject more delicately or don't ask unless you are confident you know the answer is yes. Just asking cold calling style is not the only option for approaching such things.

> don't ask unless you are confident you know the answer is yes. I don't know about the US, but where I come from you never know that the answer is yes until you ask. Unless you are approaching a prostitute.

[deleted]

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#266

Post by verylittlemeat »

exolymph wrote: post #254
mcintyre1994 wrote: post #206

Honest question, does HN feel unwelcoming or uncomfortable for women? In particular: “I’ve found that some conversations online escalate to shouting matches quickly” do female HN users identify this with HN? Not saying Leap shouldn’t exist or anything, I’m just wondering if HN has these particular issues that I haven’t personally recognised.

I'm a woman and I love HN. I think the vibe here can feel unwelcoming to timid people, and disproportionately more women than men are timid.

Careful, given the current atmosphere of sexual politics I'm not sure it's safe for even a woman to suggest women are more timid than men.

(in the past this would be sarcasm but these days who knows)

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#267

Post by dang »

matt4077 wrote: post #259
dang wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you're being fair to the community here. It's true that such comments exist, and so do many other kinds. Many users share personal experiences. Many express vulnerability. Self-doubt, questions, and comments expanding on others' ideas are highly represented here, and we value them tremendously. I puzzled for years over why people would say things like "90%+ of all comments" that are so obviously (to me)…

I'm sorry if my comment was understood as criticising perceived "aggressiveness", and I agree that the specific complaint about "shouting matches" certainly does not accurately describe HN. Although aggressiveness can be part of what I was talking about, I'd rather use the term "contrariness"–one you have also used on occasion to describe the typical commenter, if I recall correctly. I will also happily admit to be p…

That is for sure quite common! I just did it myself :)

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#268

Post by ravenstine »

ravenstine wrote: post #150
cirgue wrote: post #63

What problem is this intended to solve that isn't solved by moderation policies and forum culture? I ask because I think this is a cool project, but there is also the inescapable fact that at some point men and women will have to work together in engineering environments, and we still have a dearth of environments that foster those interactions.

It solves the same problem that are solved by having different bathrooms for men and women. Men want a place where they can piss and fart away from women, and vise versa. I see nothing unreasonable with a group wanting privacy when it comes to discourse. As long as no double-standards are applied to any group of people wanting own private space, I see no problem.

I'm not sure if it's what I said about bathrooms or the fact that I'm against double-standards, but either one is apparently controversial when supporting privacy and safe spaces. I suppose next week Naziism will be politically correct. This community is unbelievable sometimes.

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#270

Post by dang »

ravenstine wrote: post #268
ravenstine wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It solves the same problem that are solved by having different bathrooms for men and women. Men want a place where they can piss and fart away from women, and vise versa. I see nothing unreasonable with a group wanting privacy when it comes to discourse. As long as no double-standards are applied to any group of people wanting own private space, I see no problem.

I'm not sure if it's what I said about bathrooms or the fact that I'm against double-standards, but either one is apparently controversial when supporting privacy and safe spaces. I suppose next week Naziism will be politically correct. This community is unbelievable sometimes.

Would you please not post unsubstantive comments? It's not always clear why a post gets downvoted, but going on like this is always off topic.
Post reply on HN