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

Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

femfosec.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 1001 posts

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#311

Post by Thorentis »

idyio wrote: post #156
jxidjhdhdhdhfhf wrote: post #17

This is kind of the end result we're heading for, where you can only talk candidly with people who are equal or lower than you on the oppression hierarchy. The shitty part is that I'm pretty sure 99% of people are reasonable human beings but the media has to make it seem like that isn't the case so the risk equation changes. Similar to how kids used to roam around the neighborhood but now it's deemed too risky becaus…

> people who are equal or lower than you on the oppression hierarchy This supposed hierarchy of oppression, based on identity characteristics such as race, gender and sexuality, really is the biggest scam going. Almost all of the oppression we see around us can be explained by wealth disparities, corruption, and abuse of power. Yet, identarians insist on shoehorning everything into their flawed worldview. The Black L…

The fact that so many large corporations are eager to throw money at BLM, change their corporate logos to black, etc. while doing nothing tangible to address the real issues, proves to me that the current identity politics narrative is serving the elite very well.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#312

Post by [deleted] »

dijit wrote: post #3

It is absolutely unforgivable that we allow terms such as “mansplaining” to exist and be used unfettered and then on the other had deride their position because ! men not explaining things candidly ! Something has to give. Obviously obnoxious behaviour should be curbed but the usage of mansplaing (and I would argue: the minting of the term when we have an equivalent in “condescending”) I don’t even know what to say.…

[deleted]

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#313

Post by da_big_ghey »

ZitchDog wrote: post #164
cronix wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> where you can only talk candidly with people who are equal or lower than you on the oppression hierarchy Wouldn't someone talking to someone "lower" on the "oppression hierarchy" just be what we basically have today? That sounds like "privilege," or an "imbalanced power dynamic." I think you'll only be able to talk to equals, whatever that is, and by whatever metric is en vogue for that day.

I believe when OP says "lower on the oppression hierarchy" they mean we only talk candidly with those who are as oppressed as us or less. i.e. someone higher on the oppression hierarchy would be more oppressed.

yes, i have been perceiving same as he sayed. my thinking is that this is a bad thing for persons who are having less advantages: if white manager can give forthright feedback to only white persons this is actual bad for black one and maybe will harm the black one more than it help. this is likewise if most in office are feeling less cameraderie with a black for that they are not able speaking so openly and believe they are having to guard tongues. i wonder about these un-intended consecuences.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#314

Post by Thorentis »

blt wrote: post #283
idyio wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> people who are equal or lower than you on the oppression hierarchy This supposed hierarchy of oppression, based on identity characteristics such as race, gender and sexuality, really is the biggest scam going. Almost all of the oppression we see around us can be explained by wealth disparities, corruption, and abuse of power. Yet, identarians insist on shoehorning everything into their flawed worldview. The Black L…

But the Black Lives Matter movement never proclaimed that police brutality only applies to Black people.

The title kinda implies it.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#315

Post by scythe »

It's interesting that Twitter doesn't get more attention here as a center of activity. Apparently, taking down Harvey Weinstein means you can do no wrong. The problem with Twitter isn't just that they get people fired because people say mean things on the Internet. The problem is also that they incite and organize illegal activities like targeted harassment, threatening phone calls and vandalism, as well as the questionably legal tactic of disrupting businesses' operations so they will comply with a mobs' demands.

When 4chan did this, they were investigated by the FBI. Reddit received a lot of flack for its own vigilante brigades after a mistargeted attempt to "catch the Boston bomber", and had to take action (still incomplete) against raiding.

Facebook and Twitter with their multi-billion market caps have just barely begun to wake up to what their platforms are capable of producing. The effects observed with these investors are not exactly unique to tech finance.

I think something like Wikipedia's protected article policy could help. When something becomes problematic, discussion can be limited to confirmed users, who in turn have more to lose by being banned. This allows Twitter to respond before "censorship" is justified.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#316

Post by duckfang »

retrac wrote: post #266
cronix wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> where you can only talk candidly with people who are equal or lower than you on the oppression hierarchy Wouldn't someone talking to someone "lower" on the "oppression hierarchy" just be what we basically have today? That sounds like "privilege," or an "imbalanced power dynamic." I think you'll only be able to talk to equals, whatever that is, and by whatever metric is en vogue for that day.

I do some work with HIV prevention. Sometimes I give talks where I'm very blunt about the realities of HIV among men who have sex with men. I've watched people immediately shift from mild hostility and discomfort to wholehearted acceptance of what I am saying, when I tell them I'm gay myself. In that circumstance, I think it is clear that my sexual orientation is the basis by which they are judging the authoritativen…

As a bisexual male, I think a good part of disdain about connecting HIV and gay goes to the older naming of the disease: GRID. gay-related immune deficiency

It also dates me, but I had a blood transfusion in 1982. At that time, it was a Russian Roulette if I ended up with HIV blood or not. I didn't. Had I been innfected, I would have ended up like Ryan White.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#317

Post by dahfizz »

semi-extrinsic wrote: post #214
jxidjhdhdhdhfhf wrote: post #17

This is kind of the end result we're heading for, where you can only talk candidly with people who are equal or lower than you on the oppression hierarchy. The shitty part is that I'm pretty sure 99% of people are reasonable human beings but the media has to make it seem like that isn't the case so the risk equation changes. Similar to how kids used to roam around the neighborhood but now it's deemed too risky becaus…

I believe this phenomenon is more like overshoot in an underdamped system than being the end result. Rapid changes always lead to overshoot. I also think the amount of overshoot is proportional to the amount of sexism that was present in a society thirty years ago. I believe Northern Europe has been trending slowly towards gender equality since the 90s, and thus the amount of overshoot here is much less from the rece…

> I also think the amount of overshoot is proportional to the amount of sexism that was present in a society thirty years ago.

What is the mechanism for this? The majority of the "woke" twitter mob is 30 or younger.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#318

Post by robertlagrant »

dalbasal wrote: post #244
buzzerbetrayed wrote: post #41

> I don't have a better word readily available than sexism for trying to talk about patterns like this but when I use the word sexism I appreciate the effort to think of a better word than sexism. My question is, is this even sexism at all? How many men can get publicly denounced as “sexists” and have their life ruined because they didn’t speak carefully enough, before it is simply just “smart” rather than “sexist” t…

>> My question is, is this even sexism at all? There is a danger of getting overly semantic, but also a danger of ignoring the importance of semantics to perspective here. Sex ism as opposed to sex ists . Sexism, using the term as the the GP does, is how they behave towards or speak to her. That's what sexism is regardless of why it is. It affects her or the workplace the same way whether it is because of "exclusiona…

> Sexism, using the term as the the GP does, is how they behave towards or speak to her. That's what sexism is regardless of why it is.

This is incredibly flawed. It can never be behaviour observed in a vacuum. A behaviour's motivation in context is the only thing to observe and - potentially - classify as sexism.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#319

Post by DenisM »

retrac wrote: post #266
cronix wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> where you can only talk candidly with people who are equal or lower than you on the oppression hierarchy Wouldn't someone talking to someone "lower" on the "oppression hierarchy" just be what we basically have today? That sounds like "privilege," or an "imbalanced power dynamic." I think you'll only be able to talk to equals, whatever that is, and by whatever metric is en vogue for that day.

I do some work with HIV prevention. Sometimes I give talks where I'm very blunt about the realities of HIV among men who have sex with men. I've watched people immediately shift from mild hostility and discomfort to wholehearted acceptance of what I am saying, when I tell them I'm gay myself. In that circumstance, I think it is clear that my sexual orientation is the basis by which they are judging the authoritativen…

Quite illustrative. People have referential groups, that’s human nature. One could work with the framework to achieve desired result and hopefully minimize externalities, or one can lament biases and lambast the biased people for extra whatever points.

This is not a dig at you, btw, it seems clear that you’re making the best of the situation.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#320

Post by eevilspock »

c5o49t5b4QN4TU5 wrote: post #249

I’m a white cis male, and I work as a software engineer at a Silicon Valley unicorn. My employer is a perennial darling of the HN crowd, and is likely to continue its rocket ride in the years to come. I’ll be completely candid here: I have some kind of problem with women. This isn’t to say that I don’t like women or don’t want women to succeed. I just don’t want to associate with or be seen around women. I’m sure the…

My knee-jerk reaction was misogyny.

Then, no, you're describing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynophobia

> Gynophobia should not be confused with misogyny, the hatred, contempt for and prejudice against women

Ok. That's sad. Best wishes.

But then, finally, your admitted smugness bothers me, as it reveals a deep lack of empathy for woman and why the culture is necessarily going through these fits and throws.

To what degree is your “live and let live” actually “live and let live or die, it's not my problem”?

Post reply on HN