Live data from Hacker News

Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

techcrunch.com

91–100 of 205 posts

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#91

I was hoping hackernews would have a better discussion on this topic but I guess not. I think I'm the only person who is infuriated by Penelope Trunk's article in TechCrunch Titled "Stop telling women to do startups" It moves up to the top of HackerNews very quickly, and I'm a little disappointed by the comments in the article. The title is pure nonsense first of all, and while there are maybe two points that I could…

These are the voices I want to hear. Young women actually effected by the debate at hand.

Why encourage women to start startups? 1) Because starting your own company is the hardest and potentially most rewarding career choice available and 2) Because women aren't doing it as frequently as men. It's that simple.

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#92
post #90
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, please no. Not the snide novelty swipe. You don't like something, have the guts to say it straight. But I do think TP was unfair to PT. She's saying things that a lot of strong, smart women I know would agree with. For example: For the most part, women are not complaining about the lack of VC funding in the world. They are complaining about the lack of jobs with flexible hours. That is so true of the women I know…

How often do those women you know interview for tech jobs? Because the flip side of that coin is the prospective employer who asks, "how are you planning to handle child care if you take this job?" It seems like a sentiment that plays directly into one of the places where I've seen discrimination firsthand in our field. It's true, though: my comment was motivated as much by visceral contempt for Penelope Trunk than a…

How often do those women you know interview for tech jobs?

Rarely if ever.

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#93
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now please excuse Thomas while he repeatedly hits refresh on his EVERYTHING stats until he gets his daily dose of narcissism. All comments Copyright © 2009, 2010, 2011 Thomas H. Ptacek, All Rights Reserved.

I would love it if I had EVERYTHING stats I could hit refresh on.

writes down idea

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#94
Here are some interesting statistics from Denmark.

There are 2.5 as many male entrepreneurs as female Companies started by female entrepreneurs do not survive as well a companies started by male after the first 5 years. Female entreperneurs are distributed across industries much less than men The three biggest industries that women acupy accounts for 91% af all companies tarted by women. 1/4 of female entrpreneurs have emploees after 5 years (male 1/3)

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#95
post #80

Her first link ("women earn more than men in their 20s") goes to an article that ascribes the difference to a larger number of women at that age having degrees - ie, all else being equal, women earn less than men for the same job. Her second link ("women choose to downshift") links to an opinion piece that provides no citations for any of its claims. Her third link ("Women are choosing children over startups") links…

I recall an article posted to HN several months ago that echoed her assertions.

It showed that single women in their 20s were earning as much, if not more, than similarly skilled men. But those earnings, relative to men, declined as they started getting married and having children.

So yeah, it would have been nice of her to cite it, but the data is out there.

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#96
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [Women's] natural imperative is to raise children and nurture them This is the 21st century. Are we really still talking about "natural imperatives"? If nothing else, note that women are having fewer and fewer children, later and later - clearly, they are feeling this "natural imperative" less and less. Traditional gender roles are unfair to women wanting to have a career, unfair to men who want to stay home with t…

>This is the 21st century. Are we really still talking about "natural imperatives"? I do think that "imperative" is a little strong. But males are biologically different from females in all species, and in all species this translates into behavioral differences. There's no such thing as a species where males and females don't show behavioral differences, and in particular in regards to mating behavior and reproductio…

The biology argument is an affront to the spirit of entrepreneurialism. There's nothing natural about starting a company. Often it requires ignoring social needs and occasionally one's health. What about the need for sleep? I don't often read comments compelling founders to heed that biological requirement.

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would really love to see some research on this topic, because I would love to know if that is really that different from men. Growing up, I was told many options about what I could do: Founder was never one of them. It wasn't until I took stock and looked around at my corporate career that I decided it wasn't working for me. And that doesn't sound too different from your experience. I want my daughters to have ever…

I think the cleanest experiments here would be those having to do with stereotype threat. For example, women asked to write down their gender (even just with a checkbox) before a math test at the GRE level score significantly worse. Asian women asked to also write down their race are inoculated against this effect. These women are "primed" with their stereotypes and it dramatically influences performance. Even asking…

It seems that if stereotype threat is real, and applies to more circumstances than just an examination, then this is truly compelling evidence that women really are inferior to men (in aggregate, individuals may vary of course).

After all, a man and a woman of equal intrinsic ability may perform just as well under ideal circumstances, but the woman's performance is fragile. If the woman is reminded of her gender at lunch, she might return from lunch and perform "significantly worse".

(This does of course assume equal statistical distributions of intrinsic ability between men and women.)

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#98
I love the assumption that the men currently in startups have female partners who would want to reverse roles. Most have female partners who would prefer to stay home or work for an established company, so the actual effect of those men staying home would be a smaller talent pool. That is, unless she's trying to tell men who they should marry as well as how they should run their careers. Nothing she suggests would actually lead to the change she supposedly wants. The best way to get more women in startups is to let them see supportive role models . . . most often, their fathers.

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#99
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now please excuse Thomas while he repeatedly hits refresh on his EVERYTHING stats until he gets his daily dose of narcissism. All comments Copyright © 2009, 2010, 2011 Thomas H. Ptacek, All Rights Reserved.

No, please no. Not the snide novelty swipe. You don't like something, have the guts to say it straight. But I do think TP was unfair to PT. She's saying things that a lot of strong, smart women I know would agree with. For example: For the most part, women are not complaining about the lack of VC funding in the world. They are complaining about the lack of jobs with flexible hours. That is so true of the women I know…

To be honest, it its merely personal. I don't like Thomas, even if he can be a good laugh sometimes.

Edit: There we go folks, all it takes was a personal dig and those upvotes cascade into downvotes ;)

Re: Stop Telling Women To Do Startups

#100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the cleanest experiments here would be those having to do with stereotype threat. For example, women asked to write down their gender (even just with a checkbox) before a math test at the GRE level score significantly worse. Asian women asked to also write down their race are inoculated against this effect. These women are "primed" with their stereotypes and it dramatically influences performance. Even asking…

It seems that if stereotype threat is real, and applies to more circumstances than just an examination, then this is truly compelling evidence that women really are inferior to men (in aggregate, individuals may vary of course). After all, a man and a woman of equal intrinsic ability may perform just as well under ideal circumstances, but the woman's performance is fragile. If the woman is reminded of her gender at l…

That doesn't follow at all; and is phrased in a completely insensitive way. If you want to have a civilized conversation, stop that.

Boys/Men are also susceptible to stereotype threat. The priming with race is well known. They are also especially susceptible if they are primed with an "immutable talent" over "hard work = success" lesson, and then undertake a very difficult task. Boys struggle with this, and perform much worse in the next test, just as girls do.

Or an even more vivid example: Jane Elliott's Blue Eyes/Brown Eyes test:

"Steven Armstrong was the first child to arrive in Elliott’s classroom on that day, asking why "that King" (referring to Martin Luther King Jr.) was murdered the day before. After the rest of the class arrived, Elliott asked them what the children knew about blacks. The children responded with various racial stereotypes such as ignorance, unemployment, and common labels to those of Native Americans or Blacks. She then asked these children if they would like to try an exercise to feel what it was like to be treated the way a colored person is treated in America, mentioning that it would be interesting if there was segregation based on eye color instead of skin color. The children enthusiastically agreed to try the exercise.[1]

On that day, she designated the blue-eyed children as the superior group. Elliott provided brown fabric collars and asked the blue-eyed students to wrap them around the necks of their brown-eyed peers as a method of easily identifying the minority group. She gave the blue-eyed children extra privileges, such as second helpings at lunch, access to the new jungle gym, and five extra minutes at recess.[citation needed] The blue-eyed children sat in the front of the classroom, and the brown-eyed children were sent to sit the back rows. The blue-eyed children were encouraged to play only with other blue-eyes and to ignore those with brown eyes. Elliott would not allow brown-eyed and blue-eyed children to drink from the same water fountain, and often chastised the brown-eyed students when they did not follow the experiment's rules or made mistakes. She often exemplified the differences between the two groups by singling out students, and would use negative aspects of brown-eyed children to emphasize. Elliott observed that the students' reaction to the discrimination exercise showed immediate changes in their personalities and interaction with each other as early as the first 15 minutes.

At first, there was resistance among the students in the minority group to the idea that blue-eyed children were better than brown-eyed children. To counter this, Elliott used pseudo-scientific explanations for her actions by stating that the melanin responsible for making blue-eyed children also was linked to their higher intelligence and learning ability. Shortly thereafter, this initial resistance fell away. Those who were deemed “superior” became arrogant, bossy and otherwise unpleasant to their “inferior” classmates. Their grades also improved, doing mathematical and reading tasks that seemed outside their ability before. The “inferior” classmates also transformed – into timid and subservient children, including those who had previously been dominant in the class. These children’s academic performance suffered, even with tasks that had been simple before.

The following day, Elliott reversed the exercise, making the brown-eyed children superior. While the brown-eyed children did taunt the blue-eyed in ways similar to what had occurred the previous day, Elliott reports it was much less intense. At 2:30 on that Wednesday, Elliott told the blue-eyed children to take off their collars and the children cried and hugged one another. To reflect on the experience, she had the children write letters to Coretta Scott King and write compositions about the experience.[1]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Elliott

Post reply on HN