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

Female Founders Conference

femalefoundersconference.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 112 posts

Re: Female Founders Conference

#61

Post by gizmo686 »

tomasien wrote: post #37

This thread made me want to cry..... this thread..... oh my god you guys this thread is so awful! Does anyone have ideas about what could be done to educate against the constant same old "If it's just for women, it's sexism, same as if we said something was just for men" crap? I mean this is basically internet discussion canon at this point. As a side note, we COULD have a conference just for men if it was aimed (as…

On a meta-level, I think you are observing the vocal minority bias. As evidence, consider the fact that your comment currently holds the first comment position, suggesting that it received a significant amount of upvotes relative to the other comments. I observe the same effect on other, similar, threads, where the first comment tends to be a response to the overwhelming "If it's just for women, it's sexism, same as if we said something was just for men" you are observing.

Re: Female Founders Conference

#62

Post by kyro »

zequel wrote: post #58
kyro wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've got a question for you. Blacks are incredibly underrepresented in the medical field (13% in the US population, 4% as physicians). Some believe it to be due to the damaging effects of medical experiments conducted on African Americans -- eg. the Tuskegee experiment where many were purposefully left untreated for syphilis despite the existence of a simple treatment (read: penicillin). Other reasons include the lac…

the Tuskegee experiment?? Just no, no no no. I don't think any black person nowadays thinks "Wow, can't go into the medical field because of that experiment that happened 40 years ago!" That's just illogical.

Historical events can cause effects that span multiple generations, effects that can manifest in ways not immediately traceable to the inciting incident. Black kids don't drop out of high school and cite slavery as the reason.

Re: Female Founders Conference

#63

Post by toggle »

mhurron wrote: post #34

Isn't this kind of short notice ... oh wait, my mistake, everyone who is important is already in Southern California.

This does not deserve to get downvoted, you're right in pointing this out. I mean, applications are accepted on February 10th, and then IF you get to go, you have nineteen days to get there? I know a lot of attendees will already be in Silicon Valley, but that's cutting it pretty close for those who need to find a flight.

Re: Female Founders Conference

#64

Post by Crake »

kyro wrote: post #50
Crake wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This thread made me want to cry.... Ah, estrogen privilege.

Who are you? I've read your comments. You claim to know the real reasons why women aren't going into tech, you reply to comments about gender/racial disparity with such simple-minded arrogance and assurance, yet your profile says you're a college student studying EE and physics. You're nothing more than the typical puffed-up ignorant college asshole who thinks he has the world figured out. Wait till all the pubes hav…

Who am I? You told me what I am in your comment, so I guess I'll have to bow to your superior expertise on the matter. Interesting how you think you know all about what sort of person I am without knowing anything about my background, my life experiences, or the circumstances and fields of work that I have/have not encountered sexism in.

SJWs always think they know everything about people who disagree with them, just by the virtue of the fact that the person dared to disagree. Perhaps it is for this reason that you and others of your ideological persuasion seem unable to resort to anything aside from hostile yet awfully generic (and as result--often hilariously inaccurate) personal attacks.

Rude remarks and mistaken assumptions about my genitals aside, no, I am not in the 18-22 year old age range, and haven't been for some time. Sad as it may seem to you, there are indeed people of all ages who believe in egalitarianism.

Re: Female Founders Conference

#65

Post by Crake »

tomasien wrote: post #47
Crake wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This thread made me want to cry.... Ah, estrogen privilege.

I have no idea if this is a joke or not, but I'm a male. 6'5", 210, played college basketball, male who wants to or actually does cry reading HN comments about gender issues. (I don't think my size or athletic ability has anything to do with my maleness, but given the quality of discussion going on here, I figure it may be relevant in some people's minds)

It's a sjw themed joke.

Re: Female Founders Conference

#66

Post by jmelesky »

dkhenry wrote: post #5

Cool I am going to host the "Male Founders Conference" And no girls are allowed. What are you implicitly stating here? Women aren't good enough to stand toe to toe with male founders so the only way they will ever be able to succeed is if they are given special treatment. Why can't I go to this event and learn from female founders do they have nothing of value to convey to me as a male ?

> What are you implicitly stating here?

Good question. Actually, let's ask more simply "what are you stating here?"

> Women aren't good enough to stand toe to toe with male founders so the only way they will ever be able to succeed is if they are given special treatment.

It seems unlikely that's what they're stating. What other possible interpretations could there be? Or do you sincerely believe that the organizers of this conference are denigrating women? If so, how do you go about warning your female founder friends that this conference is denigrating them?

Re: Female Founders Conference

#67

Post by Crake »

wellboy wrote: post #60
Crake wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feminists are probably the #1 force for scaring away women from tech. If you say something is true enough times (All men might rape you! Programmers all hate women!), especially from a position of power and political influence, people will start to believe it. Encouraging and (in some cases, like donglegate) inducing both an atmosphere of fear and paranoia in and towards women is incredibly detrimental towards the ge…

> women don't really have it hard at all in tech + affirmative action I'm sorry, but the facts are all against what you were saying. I've read numerous stories about female programmers having a hard time fitting in at work, facing prejudice all the time etc. Same about female tech-founders. You might be right in the business world or more "female-like" industries such as fashion, but definitely not in tech.

>the facts are all against what you were saying

This would probably be more convincing if actually you provided any, instead of just vaguely referencing anecdotes. Without it, you have just an opinion, not an argument.

Re: Female Founders Conference

#68

Post by 001sky »

tomasien wrote: post #37

This thread made me want to cry..... this thread..... oh my god you guys this thread is so awful! Does anyone have ideas about what could be done to educate against the constant same old "If it's just for women, it's sexism, same as if we said something was just for men" crap? I mean this is basically internet discussion canon at this point. As a side note, we COULD have a conference just for men if it was aimed (as…

This thread made me want to cry..... this thread.....

The irony in this manipulative[1] use of language in a topic on sexism is outstanding.

Seriously, could you have tried any harder (to fan the flames)[2]?

_________________

[1] http://wis-wander.weizmann.ac.il/a-chemical-signal-in-human-...

[2] eg, courtesy of google

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jennagoudreau/2011/01/11/crying-...

Crying At Work, A Woman's Burden

There are few situations where crying is “acceptable.” The worst offenses, she found, are crying in a public meeting or because of work stress, like a looming deadline or coworker disagreement, because it is considered disruptive and weak. Crying in a private performance evaluation is also considered unprofessional and often manipulative.

The only exception to criticism is crying due to a personal loss like death or divorce, and even that has its limits. “If the crying is excessive–repeated or prolonged, rather than a single episode–it could be considered unstable or weak,”

My question to you is what were you thinking in this choice of language?

Re: Female Founders Conference

#69

Post by poorelise »

kyro wrote: post #50
Crake wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This thread made me want to cry.... Ah, estrogen privilege.

Who are you? I've read your comments. You claim to know the real reasons why women aren't going into tech, you reply to comments about gender/racial disparity with such simple-minded arrogance and assurance, yet your profile says you're a college student studying EE and physics. You're nothing more than the typical puffed-up ignorant college asshole who thinks he has the world figured out. Wait till all the pubes hav…

Who are you?

Re: Female Founders Conference

#70

Post by Crake »

yetanotherphd wrote: post #53

I think that women are often put off by the nasty, aggressive vibe in tech. No one wants to go into an industry where they will get sworn at, or have snide remarks made at them. Here are some examples just from this thread: >you're pretty fucking ignorant and stubborn and just dickish on the whole. >no need to get your panties in a bunch over this. >Could you kindly s tfu please?

You do realize the language being employed in your examples is from the side arguing in favor of the gender segregation themed conference, not against it, right?
Post reply on HN