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

281–290 of 364 posts

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#281

Post by bmelton »

probably_wrong wrote: post #214
tptacek wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gender discrimination is obviously not illegal. How do you think rec sports leagues or support groups work?

Gender is a protected class, so "it's (not) illegal" in either direction is a bit of a blanket statement. So let me try and be more precise. In some states, AFAIK the "women-only gym" is allowed, but in others it isn't. The point, if I remember correctly, is "exercise requires such compromising clothes and positions, that the right to personal privacy trumps the right to not be discriminated based on gender". And eve…

IANAL, but:

> Gender is a protected class

Which means that businesses doing public accommodation are restricted from discriminating, but 'private clubs' (such as the Boy Scouts), who have a narrowly tailored interest that is benefitted by discrimination against a protected class is generally allowed (subject to variances within state law).

For example, a group for men who have been sexually molested by men would likely be considered presumptively lawful, but a group for men who also happen to be car salesmen would likely not be.

There are a number of details that need to be considered as well, as (loosely) prescribed by _Rotary Club of Duarte[1]_, such as exclusivity (it can't be publicly available to be overheard), and purpose (already covered), but if neither conditions are met, and a state law prohibits such discrimination, then it meets (at least) a rational basis standard.

[1] - https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/481/537

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#282

Post by Fishkins »

booleandilemma wrote: post #117
fruzz wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish your experience was unique. A colleague was groped. She didn't report it. It would have likely diminished her future prospects. A friend was asked out on dates, unsolicited, multiple times by coworkers. She just had to laugh it off. Women at a previous employment reported not being taken as seriously as men in meetings, and being passed over for promotions in favour of less qualified men. A friend repor…

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?

The request usually won't be _explicitly_ solicited, but there are other cues you can pick up on (ie flirting). Of course people can read general friendliness as romantic interest (or vice versa), but you can have at least a decent guess whether someone will be interested in going on a date with you. In some contexts it doesn't hurt to ask when you're unsure, but at work it's better to err on the side of caution (doubly so if there's any power difference between your positions).

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#283

Post by JoeAltmaier »

bmelton wrote: post #281
probably_wrong wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gender is a protected class, so "it's (not) illegal" in either direction is a bit of a blanket statement. So let me try and be more precise. In some states, AFAIK the "women-only gym" is allowed, but in others it isn't. The point, if I remember correctly, is "exercise requires such compromising clothes and positions, that the right to personal privacy trumps the right to not be discriminated based on gender". And eve…

IANAL, but: > Gender is a protected class Which means that businesses doing public accommodation are restricted from discriminating, but 'private clubs' (such as the Boy Scouts), who have a narrowly tailored interest that is benefitted by discrimination against a protected class is generally allowed (subject to variances within state law). For example, a group for men who have been sexually molested by men would like…

btw BSA now admits girls too. So maybe not the best example.

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#284

Post by TheAdamAndChe »

DannyBee wrote: post #149
TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are you saying the solution to "hey, women feel isolated in the tech industry" is to say "Well, let's figure out how to include men too"? No, my solution to a sense of isolation is instead to find ways for women to no longer feel isolated within their field. A great example with the other sex would be male nurses. Male nurses are definitely the minority in their field, yet they manage to not feel isolated overall.…

"If women feel isolated, we should try to find out why and correct that instead of just sticking them with other isolated women." Certainly you realize they may feel isolated because you are not sticking them with other women? What is wrong with doing something like this until they generally feel less isolated, then moving on to something else? IE Why is it unreasonable for this to be a step along the path?

> Certainly you realize they may feel isolated because you are not sticking them with other women?

This is possible. I do not know.

> What is wrong with doing something like this until they generally feel less isolated, then moving on to something else?

What I'm afraid will happen by taking this route(though I do not know that this will happen) is that this will divert energy that would have gone into converting work cultures to improve the interaction between men and women and shift that energy into an external forum that doesn't affect their real employment conditions in the slightest.

I'm also afraid of the optics of a double standard. If women can have women-only groups while men can't socially get away with having men-only groups at the same time that the number of women grows in the field, then that may make seemingly displaced men very angry.

I could be wrong. If you see a reason why this doesn't make sense, please let me know.

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#285

Post by bmelton »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #283
bmelton wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IANAL, but: > Gender is a protected class Which means that businesses doing public accommodation are restricted from discriminating, but 'private clubs' (such as the Boy Scouts), who have a narrowly tailored interest that is benefitted by discrimination against a protected class is generally allowed (subject to variances within state law). For example, a group for men who have been sexually molested by men would like…

btw BSA now admits girls too. So maybe not the best example.

Which, IIRC, they decided to do of their own accord, after having won suits around discrimination (e.g., _Dale_) Whether the point is mooted or not is up for discussion, but whether they have the right to discriminate is settled, according to the Supreme Court. They clearly do.

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#287

Post by gravypod »

cbcowans wrote: post #2

Hi! I'm the creator of Leap. Glad to answer questions here.

What would happen if a man lied to gain access to the community, became a respected member of the community, and was eventually discovered to be a man? Would that person be banned from the forum?

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#288

Post by jancsika »

fortythirteen wrote: post #180
fruzz wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those experiences are awful. I do not dispute that there are male victims, including in the workplace. I absolutely agree that "People shouldn't do this to other People". That said, women as a group are disproportionately on the receiving end of improper workplace behaviour overwhelmingly perpetrated by men. And you can't address that dynamic without first acknowledging that it exists and putting words to it. And so,…

> That said, women as a group are disproportionately on the receiving end of improper workplace behaviour overwhelmingly perpetrated by men. Yes, that is definitely the case in places where men outnumber women in positions of power, which is still most businesses. I can tell you, from first hand experience, that when that dynamic is flipped, men, perhaps equally as often, become the more objectified party. IMO this i…

> IMO this is an issue of human nature and power dynamics, not the genetic proclivities of any one sex or gender identity.

I think that notion is irrelevant to the problem.

It's the nature of SSD to get corrupted. It's the nature of the internet to be unreliable. Yet many companies in Silicon Valley build robust and reliable services atop those fundamental starting points. "Oh, I'm using an SSD, guess my repo will just become corrupted," is not something you hear technologists utter.

However, it's apparently accepted as natural that employees of some Silicon Valley companies might say to themselves, "Oh, I just turned down that project manager's sexual advances, guess I can't work on that project in my future." That can only happen if the company has no interest in addressing those kinds of problems. I know that sounds flippant, but GNU/Linux was built largely upon the initial work of Linus and Richard-- two developers who apparently wanted and had zero social interaction with one another. So even from a narrow productivity standpoint, it's insane to ignore those problems and throw that value out the window.

Re: Leap: An Online Community for Women

#289

Post by to_bpr »

tptacek wrote: post #228
tudorw wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

me too, i'd hate to think this precedent would allow the creation of men only forums

You are already welcome to create a man-only forum.

>You are already welcome to create a man-only forum.

Any man taking such an action in 2018 would likely lose their career over it.

Post reply on HN