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

81–90 of 1001 posts

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#81

Post by Jabbles »

throwaway_-_-_- wrote: post #18

Creating a throwaway for obvious reasons. I'm not an investor but someone who is in a position to make key decisions about peoples' careers and give advice, and I do have a bit of a trick I use for this. There was one black female mentee who I noticed was timid in taking credit for her work. I had recently attended a diversity panel where someone in a similar role as me said that in a similar situation, and her advic…

"what does that mean?" I couldn't come up with an answer for that

This seems to fit the definition of cargo cult.

You clearly had good intentions, but you can't go around saying phrases without being able to back them up. This should be familiar to you from technical situations - consider: "prefer composition over inheritance" - reasonable advice, but be prepared to explain yourself, not just parrot it.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#82

Post by simonbarker87 »

> I’m not going to suggest a solution to the problem of men clamming up.

I find this a little frustrating, they’ve noticed a pattern of behaviour that concerns them in an area they are clearly invested in - yet they have no thoughts or suggestions on how to address this? Is it possible they are not offering such thoughts because of the same issue they have highlighted in the article?

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#83

Post by ativzzz »

ImprobableTruth wrote: post #64
steve_g wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Think about what a white man would do" seems completely ambiguous to me. It's not a clear way to communicate. It would be better to follow up "I see you're hesitating to take credit for your work" with specific examples of what she might be able to say. Or you could give examples of behavior that people she knows have exhibited. Even if "what a white man would do" wasn't emotionally charged (and it is), it's not a g…

No matter how dumb it is, in what way is it ambiguous? How could you possibly interpret it in any other way than 'be more confident/less hesitant in taking credit'?

Clearly, the black female employee didn't interpret it that way, so your ability to empathize may be lacking.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#84

Post by dang »

sputr wrote: post #67
kumarm wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now you know how the other side felt all along :). Seriously, we are now asked to treat everyone with respect and that is a problem? Edit: No I don't mean eye for eye. I am merely pointing out, this is a male dominant industry where women didn't even have a chance for a long time. The moment we face little uneasiness, we are complaining and throwing temper tantrums.

You wrote 2 sentences and still managed to contradict yourself. Either parent and 'other side' have been both victimised (by him now knowing how they felt) or parent isn't a victim but since you claim he is experiancing what 'the other side' did neither were they. Maybe try listening for a change.

> Maybe try listening for a change.

Please omit personal swipes from your HN posts, no matter how wrong another comment is or you feel it is.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#85

Post by phkahler »

cbdumas wrote: post #23

I don't think the author needed to bring "false accusation" into the picture here, and in fact it weakens the point. I think male investor saying to a female CEO that her male colleague is better suited to the CEO role would be taken, ipso facto, as sexism. No falsehoods need enter the picture.

But in this case it would be a false accusation. That's kind of the entire point - he's afraid to give honest feedback out of fear of a false accusation.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#86

Post by asjldkfin »

worik wrote: post #71
mattlondon wrote: post #15

Anecdotal but my office is ultra -woke. There are endless internal emails about whatever-week, or veterans-this, or LBGTQ+-that etc etc. People have been hounded out and either quit or been fired for fairly minor "infractions" of the groupthink (...and also some people have rightly been fired for actual inappropriate behaviour). And guess what all this talk about "toxic masculinity" and generally vilifying all men le…

Not good. Some of us have felt like that for thirty years. Once apon a time there were a group of people who swaggered through life saying whatever popped into their brains whom ever it offended or belittled. They engaged in metaphorical, but brutal, wrestling matches not just with each other but with any body who crossed their paths. Now life is very hard for them. Should have happened thirty years ago. Has it gone…

My problem with "woke culture" is that it's constantly fighting an imaginary enemy, some abstract concept that's been conjured up.

I hazard to say this post is a good example of the problem.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#87

Post by karpierz »

ImprobableTruth wrote: post #64
steve_g wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Think about what a white man would do" seems completely ambiguous to me. It's not a clear way to communicate. It would be better to follow up "I see you're hesitating to take credit for your work" with specific examples of what she might be able to say. Or you could give examples of behavior that people she knows have exhibited. Even if "what a white man would do" wasn't emotionally charged (and it is), it's not a g…

No matter how dumb it is, in what way is it ambiguous? How could you possibly interpret it in any other way than 'be more confident/less hesitant in taking credit'?

There are some pretty clear alternate interpretations:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26613528

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#88

Post by TLightful »

na85 wrote: post #76
efficax wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny I work in a similar workplace and don't find that "all men" are vilified, or that being conscientious about the impact my words and actions have on marginalized people has any negative impact on my behavior. Maybe it's a you problem

>Funny I work in a similar workplace and don't find that "all men" are vilified, or that being conscientious about the impact my words and actions have on marginalized people has any negative impact on my behavior. Maybe it's a you problem This is a great example. The Elect tolerate nothing less than full throated support of the cause/outrage du jour, and anyone taking a moderate position is branded a problem, just a…

Advice, be cool, understanding ... and maybe you wouldn't be appear to be a d0uche.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

#89

Post by cronix »

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…

> 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.

Post reply on HN