8 ms·

Sexual Harassment in Silicon Valley

adam_seeliger 9y ago
Fake news.
ralusek 9y ago
"Male founders have to run this emasculating gauntlet too, except that they can’t blame gender discrimination for how dirty they feel at the end of the day." This is something I think about a lot. I am white & I am male, so my race and gender are naturally things that I don't think of very often (and I understand that constitutes a level of privilege). An exercise that I like to do sometimes is just imagine the situation I'm experiencing as if I was female, or as if I was black. If I'm in a meeting and everyone ignores what I'm saying, as a white male, there is no voice in the back of my head saying "it's because I'm female." If I don't get a job, or the interviewer was condescending, there is no voice in my head saying "it's because I'm black." So I entertain these ideas every once in a while, and it's actually amazing how many misfortunes I can quickly associate to being black or being female, that had I actually been black or female I would have ABSOLUTELY attributed to those features. What makes this interesting is that my point isn't to say that a female or person of color won't actually have a different experience, and face real instances of racism and sexism...because they absolutely will. The thing that I DO find interesting is that they basically have no "control" experience by which to measure their victimhood. Once you've taken on the role of a victim, any number of injustices that are just part of human nature can be attributed to whatever you perceive as the source. The end result is a major overestimation of remaining institutional injustices, in my opinion, and the constant reinforcement of this victimhood status is largely responsible for continuing to plant this voice in the head of individuals that is constantly asking "am I being treated this way because I'm ________." The inverse is obviously true in that a white male is very likely to underestimate the injustices encountered by a black person or a female, but I find this to be much less interesting. The reason being that no person is very aware of the injustices we DON'T face, we are acutely aware of the injustices that we DO face. If a black man experiences a 15% increase in injustices vs a white man, the white man is likely underestimate the impact of those of the black man. The black man, however, can rightfully attribute those extra 15% to the fact that he his black, but there is no clear differentiator between those that were truly racial in nature vs those that would have been encountered regardless of race.
- jblow 9y ago
  Many times I have read internet complaints about how sexist and horrible some conference is, and thought, "wait a minute, I have had this exact experience several times -- and I am a white male."
  - gozur88 9y ago
    White men are expected to shrug off shitty behavior on the part of other people, so they do. IMO that makes life a lot less stressful.
    - watwut 9y ago
      Men don't shrug off bad behaviour. They quickly put down those who insulted them and it is accepted as normal.
      - gozur88 9y ago
        Yeah... no. That's just the apex fallacy. Your boss puts you down. Normal guys just shrug it off and think "what an asshole".
    - sgift 9y ago
      > IMO that makes life a lot less stressful. IME shrugging of shitty behavior makes life seem less stressful for a while, but the hidden stress of holding everyone on arms length so they cannot hurt you takes its toll. Sometimes you break down, sometimes you just get cynical and start seeing everyone as an asshole.
    - jblow 9y ago
      It's not even usually "shitty behavior", it's just social interactions that are imperfect for one reason or another. Concrete example: I see a lot of complaints from women about being talked over in conversations at conferences. I used to get talked over a lot too. It seems frequent that there are one or two people in a conversation who will talk over anyone with a less-pushing conversation style. I think most of these people are not doing it on purpose, they just really want to say things and don't properly gauge the social balance of the conversation. Also there are other weird human tendencies happening -- for example, someone habitually wanting to display how smart they are -- which, while being mildly negative, are not negative in a way that involves hostility to others.
tashi 9y ago
The Times describes some founders who put up with unwanted sexual advances because they were desperate to raise money for their startups. There’s an old-fashioned word for what these ladies are doing that I shan’t repeat here. So, women who reject these advances but don't want to object too loudly out of fear of burning bridges or being seen as a troublemaker, are being accused of prostitution. What a fascinating way to smear the victims.
- abraae 9y ago
  Its a despicable situation for sure, but leaving emotion aside, the assertion that the victims are putting up with sexual advances in order to get money appears to be factually correct (in this one case - i.e. seeking investment - not in the case of just trying to do your job). Is it so easy to say that's totally different from prostitution? Of course that leads to the observation that many prostitutes probably feel trapped, and would prefer to have legitimate ways to get the money they need/want.
  - xenadu02 9y ago
    > Is it so easy to say that's totally different from prostitution? Indeed it is totally different. I don't understand how a reasonable person could honestly think this. I am not trying to be a jerk, it just seems disingenuous or incredibly ignorant. Are you sure you want your name attached to such a comment? Let's spell this our pedantically: The women we are discussing here were propositioned but turned the offer down. That is the exact opposite of prostitution. If anything being propositioned is a really good sign that you absolutely don't want to be in business with that person in any capacity. They very sensibly didn't tell anyone publicly, file any lawsuits, or press any charges because they didn't want to get blacklisted from the industry. It's the same reason you usually don't sue a landlord or former employer: People google your name, see the lawsuit, then drop your rental application / resume in the recycle bin. You can "win" the case only to end up losing big in the end. Even having a manufactured / fake controversy swirling around you can be damaging. In fact this is the very root of the problem: some men feel entitled to treat women they come across as prostitutes whenever they feel like it. As if being a GP entitles them to offer introductions, favors, or money for sex. (And to be extra pedantic: it is just a shitty if the GP is a woman hitting on a male founder. I can't imagine having someone dangle funding over my head to cheat on my spouse. It definitely tells you about their character though: they will continue to manipulate you to suit their fancy and toss you when they no longer have any need for you.)
49531 9y ago
>The Times describes some founders who put up with unwanted sexual advances because they were desperate to raise money for their startups. There’s an old-fashioned word for what these ladies are doing that I shan’t repeat here. What? I'm not sure I know what "old-fashioned word" the author is talking about... The author then goes on to explain that men have to put up with shitty people to raise money as well. As a man who has dealt with shitty people in an array of business situations I can say that none of my run-ins have included sexual assault. The stories coming to light are not about "unwanted sexual advances" as much as they're about actual assault, or at the very least harassment. The only people who benefit when we are dismissive are the abusers.
- StavrosK 9y ago
  > What? I'm not sure I know what "old-fashioned word" the author is talking about... I think she means "put up" as in "gave in", and the word is "prostitutes", because of course consenting, adult women cannot choose who they have sex with without This Author's Holy Writ. It's just sexism on behalf of the author, it undermines her whole message (which, as far as I can tell, isn't anything in particular?) and strikes me as extremely distasteful.
  - jessaustin 9y ago
    Please don't perpetuate prejudice against prostitutes.
- nextlevelwizard 9y ago
  >As a man who has dealt with shitty people in an array of business situations I can say that none of my run-ins have included sexual assault. I bet everyone here (including you) knowns exactly why this is and no the answer is not "these people just hate/objectify women"
- zaptheimpaler 9y ago
  After the first time someone makes an unwanted sexual advance, you whether you are a man or a woman have the choice to walk away and NOT take their money! From the article - "The only thing more timeless than the abuse of power is the tolerance of abuse by those who most need the money.". Many people want the funding bad enough to keep interacting with unpleasant people and tolerate the abuse and hence ensure it continues.... they do have at least the choice to walk away, same as men, or better yet bring it to public awareness. Yet many choose to take the money and then complain - at that point they have no right to complain, because they have actively perpetuated the cycle of abuse in exchange for money and helped the abuser grow a little more powerful. If any founder desperate for money took money from a terrorist group, we would condemn them for colluding with the enemy, not give them sympathy for how hard it is to get funding. You can't take the bad guys money, knowing full well what it cost you AND complain about it. That is the problem. I explained more in another comment here.
GuiA 9y ago
This post is pure victim blaming that adds nothing of substance to the conversation ("The Times describes some founders who put up with unwanted sexual advances"... clearly the people who have come forward precisely DO NOT put up with the unwanted sexual advances?!?!?!?!). The author should perhaps realize that they are privileged to have never experienced the distresses many have reported, instead of smugly dismissing it with an argument that amounts to "well I'm old and I see no problems here" (EDIT: never mind, turns out the author was born in 1982, not worked in the valley since 1982, which makes her argument just "I'm a random person and I see no problems here", even less forgivable). I have a very hard time understanding what kind of mind, when given the choice to support rich powerful people who abuse their power or women who just would like to get their work done and build a career in a professional environment, chooses to believe and stick by the former. Given that this is on the front page already I expect my post to be heavily disagreed with, but at least people who have experienced discrimination/harassment can see that not all of the HN users think it's their fault.
sauronlord 9y ago
Finally someone points out the situation in another light. These women (and men) that get unwanted sexual advances from the rich and powerful only go public LONG after they can see they will not get money. How many of these men and women are a little "extra" friendly or dress a little more beautifully, or just a little extra flirtatious at the beginning of asking for A LOT OF MONEY? For these so called "scandals" there is not a single text message or conversation thread as evidence or shared publically. I'm not saying it doesn't exist, I'm just saying that an outsider reading the conversation thread would realize it's a lot more nuanced than a lot of alleges victoms are proclaiming. The truth is usually messier than the lie.
FussyZeus 9y ago
How did this make front page of HN? This adds literally nothing to the discussion apart from rehashing arguments that were old hat in 2008, by an author who openly admits they are part of the privileged group largely responsible for the problem, complete with an oh so classy “well I can’t SAY it, but you know what I mean” as if sideways implying garbage opinions is somehow morally superior to having garbage opinions. Is this satire?
- nextlevelwizard 9y ago
  Maybe people are getting sick and tired of this constant bashing of "privileged" men (especially white men) and this is welcomed opinion. It's good that bad people are exposed, but when the opinion starts to shift more and more towards grouping all "privileged" people in same group (like you are doing in this very post) it is only creating a bigger problem by making gender and race the primary thing that defines a person instead of their character.
  - FussyZeus 9y ago
    The idea that nationalism will save industry is a welcome opinion in rural America right now (speaking as a white male in rural America) but a welcome opinion does not equal (and in fact, rarely does equal) a CORRECT idea. White men need to not take this shit personally which believe me, I understand is incredibly hard to do but the fact is that people like me were born into a system designed by people like me, for people like me, and even though I've had my share of rough times, I can't then go and claim that racism and sexism are over because I overcame them and I've seen women do the same thing. Just because one room is saved does not mean the rest of the house is therefore no longer on fire and we can all go home. There is still work to do, and "good enough" for 51% of the population, is just not good enough. Now if you want to make the case that an opinion or idea that makes you feel good is inherently as legitimate as one backed by numerous anecdotal accounts, solid demographic data, and downward trends in the industry then you're free to die on that hill, but I will not be doing so.
- cbsmith 9y ago
  Yeah,.. I keep wanting to believe it is satire, but i'm missing the usual cues.
glangdale 9y ago
It's nice that she decides to call women who didn't report unwanted sexual advances "prostitutes" without having the guts to actually say that for the record.
propter_hoc 9y ago
Ah yes, I remember this person. She started an unlicensed Bitcoin-based derivatives exchange where the public could bet on the success of startups, and was fined and shut down by the SEC (not before posting an ill-advised rant first: https://archive.is/DOVJZ https://archive.is/DOVJZ). Previous HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9642186 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9642186 Edit: I appreciate the questions of the relevance of this fact. My perspective was that Ms. Ou appears to consider Silicon Valley / the startup world a place where the usual rules do not, or perhaps should not apply. I should have been more explicit about this in my original post.
- beefsack 9y ago
  Is this relevant to the linked article and general topic?
- rosser 9y ago
  Ad hominem much? EDIT: Particularly ironic, given your username.
  - savanaly 9y ago
    Ad hominem? That's an awesome thing to have on one's resume.
- 0xbear 9y ago
  That actually sounds pretty badass to me. Legally naive, but cool idea and execution. Kudos to Elaine.
naiveattack 9y ago
This discussion should be about empowering women. Not about painting people who've made mistakes with a brush. Not about placing blame. If a friend / family member of yours, a woman you cared about, was in a situation where she was being harassed by someone with a cheque in his hand, what would you want her to do?
chasing 9y ago
Here's the deal: People looking for investments in their businesses are not panhandlers. They are not begging. They do not deserve to have any abuse tossed their way. They are people working in a business environment trying to create a mutually-beneficial arrangement. They are professionals, as are their investors. > The Times describes some founders who put up with unwanted sexual advances because they were desperate to raise money for their startups. There’s an old-fashioned word for what these ladies are doing that I shan’t repeat here. This is wildly offensive and just stupid beyond all belief. A woman who has a start-up she's trying to raise money for is a WHORE if she puts up with unwanted sexual advances from investors? Or is Elaine Ou saying that a woman who has a start-up is a WHORE because women who go "begging" for money deserve to be treated like sex objects? Am I misreading that? I must be. Please help.
- bsder 9y ago
  > A woman who has a start-up she's trying to raise money for is a WHORE if she puts up with unwanted sexual advances from investors? She is saying that if you put up with this kind of behavior rather than cutting it off, you are part of the problem. To be fair, this goes for men, too. I have had the "joy" of turning down funding because the person involved was such a jackass. Fortunately, he wasn't offering a huge sum of money. Add another zero, and my partner and I would probably have been in a major argument. And two zeros and I probably would have swallowed my pride. I acknowledge that I can be bought--I just hope my price is high enough to make it worth it. I really don't envy women in this environment. Lots of people running VC funds really like to throw the power imbalance around even towards men. Adding sexual dynamics to the mix has to be ferociously toxic--think about the abuse of Hooter's waitresses and then dial the restraint to zero.
ryandamm 9y ago
The title misrepresents the universality of the author's perspective. More plainly: this is HN clickbait. Ignore, please, read on at your peril.
teekert 9y ago
I think it is insane that you get so down voted. You have an opinion and voice it respectfully. I think there certainly are women that scream sexism as soon as things don't go their way and there are women who have sex for job related benefits (and there are men too although that is less easy for them). There are also black people that scream racism as soon as things don't go their way. Why is it so bad to explore this a bit intellectually? This open hostility to anyone challenging claims of rampant sexual harassment is crazy imho. It's killing civilized and intelligent discourse on the matter. The number of people shocked by your comment is too damn high.
- dang 9y ago
  You act as though the dynamics of internet flamewars weren't painfully well-known and obvious. If you want "civilized and intelligent discourse", posting like this is certainly not the way to obtain it. We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14741492 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14741492 and marked it off-topic.
d--b 9y ago
She says "it's not that bad" and then goes on to explain that abusive behavior happens because of the capital raising dynamics. So in fact the abuse is happening... It's understandable for a woman to come out and say "look it's not that bad", because it's true that in a majority of cases, women in tech are treated fine and the media shouldn't make the tech environment look like it's a giant college dorm. But, at the same time, it is true that some pockets of college dorm culture still exist. And because the tech culture is so homogenous (geeky male college grads) and isolated, extreme and abusive behavior towards those outside the culture arise more easily. Media attention is necessary so that the people who evolve in that culture day in day out can have a reality check.
greggman 9y ago
Random Non sequitur: I love Black Mirror but for the most part it concentrates on possible negative consequences of future tech. Episode S01E03 in particular concentrated on the possible negative consequences of having always on eye based video cameras that record your life 24/7 (or at least while your eyes are open). That reality doesn't seem too far away. 5 to 15 years? Maybe not implanted eyes by then but some fashionable version of Snapchat Spectacles. If that world ever comes to pass what would be the positive consequences if any. Would it solve most sexual harassment issues since in that world most sexual harassment would be recorded? How often would it be clear sexual harassment vs individual interpretation? While on the topic of individual interpretation you might find this season of The Heart interesting. http://www.theheartradio.org/no-episodes/ http://www.theheartradio.org/no-episodes/
bsmith2020 9y ago
I think the OP author meant to say that women who give in to this sexual propositions are encouraging powerful men to repeat that behavior. Guys don't take the risk (and as we can see with all the firings, it's risky behavior) of propositioning women in a business situation unless they have found it to sometimes works. So a subset of female entrepreneurs (probably a minority, but a very influential one in terms of alpha male behavior), along with the alpha males, are ruining entrepreneurship for the chaste entrepreneurs. The chaste entrepreneurs are entitled to call women who get startup funding in this way, and thereby encourage the sexual harassment of many innocent female entrepreneurs, whores.

Fake news.

"Male founders have to run this emasculating gauntlet too, except that they can’t blame gender discrimination for how dirty they feel at the end of the day." This is something I think about a lot. I am white & I am male, so my race and gender are naturally things that I don't think of very often (and I understand that constitutes a level of privilege). An exercise that I like to do sometimes is just imagine the situation I'm experiencing as if I was female, or as if I was black. If I'm in a meeting and everyone ignores what I'm saying, as a white male, there is no voice in the back of my head saying "it's because I'm female." If I don't get a job, or the interviewer was condescending, there is no voice in my head saying "it's because I'm black." So I entertain these ideas every once in a while, and it's actually amazing how many misfortunes I can quickly associate to being black or being female, that had I actually been black or female I would have ABSOLUTELY attributed to those features. What makes this interesting is that my point isn't to say that a female or person of color won't actually have a different experience, and face real instances of racism and sexism...because they absolutely will. The thing that I DO find interesting is that they basically have no "control" experience by which to measure their victimhood. Once you've taken on the role of a victim, any number of injustices that are just part of human nature can be attributed to whatever you perceive as the source. The end result is a major overestimation of remaining institutional injustices, in my opinion, and the constant reinforcement of this victimhood status is largely responsible for continuing to plant this voice in the head of individuals that is constantly asking "am I being treated this way because I'm ________." The inverse is obviously true in that a white male is very likely to underestimate the injustices encountered by a black person or a female, but I find this to be much less interesting. The reason being that no person is very aware of the injustices we DON'T face, we are acutely aware of the injustices that we DO face. If a black man experiences a 15% increase in injustices vs a white man, the white man is likely underestimate the impact of those of the black man. The black man, however, can rightfully attribute those extra 15% to the fact that he his black, but there is no clear differentiator between those that were truly racial in nature vs those that would have been encountered regardless of race.

jblow 9y ago
Many times I have read internet complaints about how sexist and horrible some conference is, and thought, "wait a minute, I have had this exact experience several times -- and I am a white male."
- gozur88 9y ago
  White men are expected to shrug off shitty behavior on the part of other people, so they do. IMO that makes life a lot less stressful.
  - watwut 9y ago
    Men don't shrug off bad behaviour. They quickly put down those who insulted them and it is accepted as normal.
    - gozur88 9y ago
      Yeah... no. That's just the apex fallacy. Your boss puts you down. Normal guys just shrug it off and think "what an asshole".
  - sgift 9y ago
    > IMO that makes life a lot less stressful. IME shrugging of shitty behavior makes life seem less stressful for a while, but the hidden stress of holding everyone on arms length so they cannot hurt you takes its toll. Sometimes you break down, sometimes you just get cynical and start seeing everyone as an asshole.
  - jblow 9y ago
    It's not even usually "shitty behavior", it's just social interactions that are imperfect for one reason or another. Concrete example: I see a lot of complaints from women about being talked over in conversations at conferences. I used to get talked over a lot too. It seems frequent that there are one or two people in a conversation who will talk over anyone with a less-pushing conversation style. I think most of these people are not doing it on purpose, they just really want to say things and don't properly gauge the social balance of the conversation. Also there are other weird human tendencies happening -- for example, someone habitually wanting to display how smart they are -- which, while being mildly negative, are not negative in a way that involves hostility to others.

tashi 9y ago

The Times describes some founders who put up with unwanted sexual advances because they were desperate to raise money for their startups. There’s an old-fashioned word for what these ladies are doing that I shan’t repeat here. So, women who reject these advances but don't want to object too loudly out of fear of burning bridges or being seen as a troublemaker, are being accused of prostitution. What a fascinating way to smear the victims.

abraae 9y ago
Its a despicable situation for sure, but leaving emotion aside, the assertion that the victims are putting up with sexual advances in order to get money appears to be factually correct (in this one case - i.e. seeking investment - not in the case of just trying to do your job). Is it so easy to say that's totally different from prostitution? Of course that leads to the observation that many prostitutes probably feel trapped, and would prefer to have legitimate ways to get the money they need/want.
- xenadu02 9y ago
  > Is it so easy to say that's totally different from prostitution? Indeed it is totally different. I don't understand how a reasonable person could honestly think this. I am not trying to be a jerk, it just seems disingenuous or incredibly ignorant. Are you sure you want your name attached to such a comment? Let's spell this our pedantically: The women we are discussing here were propositioned but turned the offer down. That is the exact opposite of prostitution. If anything being propositioned is a really good sign that you absolutely don't want to be in business with that person in any capacity. They very sensibly didn't tell anyone publicly, file any lawsuits, or press any charges because they didn't want to get blacklisted from the industry. It's the same reason you usually don't sue a landlord or former employer: People google your name, see the lawsuit, then drop your rental application / resume in the recycle bin. You can "win" the case only to end up losing big in the end. Even having a manufactured / fake controversy swirling around you can be damaging. In fact this is the very root of the problem: some men feel entitled to treat women they come across as prostitutes whenever they feel like it. As if being a GP entitles them to offer introductions, favors, or money for sex. (And to be extra pedantic: it is just a shitty if the GP is a woman hitting on a male founder. I can't imagine having someone dangle funding over my head to cheat on my spouse. It definitely tells you about their character though: they will continue to manipulate you to suit their fancy and toss you when they no longer have any need for you.)

49531 9y ago

>The Times describes some founders who put up with unwanted sexual advances because they were desperate to raise money for their startups. There’s an old-fashioned word for what these ladies are doing that I shan’t repeat here. What? I'm not sure I know what "old-fashioned word" the author is talking about... The author then goes on to explain that men have to put up with shitty people to raise money as well. As a man who has dealt with shitty people in an array of business situations I can say that none of my run-ins have included sexual assault. The stories coming to light are not about "unwanted sexual advances" as much as they're about actual assault, or at the very least harassment. The only people who benefit when we are dismissive are the abusers.

StavrosK 9y ago
> What? I'm not sure I know what "old-fashioned word" the author is talking about... I think she means "put up" as in "gave in", and the word is "prostitutes", because of course consenting, adult women cannot choose who they have sex with without This Author's Holy Writ. It's just sexism on behalf of the author, it undermines her whole message (which, as far as I can tell, isn't anything in particular?) and strikes me as extremely distasteful.
- jessaustin 9y ago
  Please don't perpetuate prejudice against prostitutes.
nextlevelwizard 9y ago
>As a man who has dealt with shitty people in an array of business situations I can say that none of my run-ins have included sexual assault. I bet everyone here (including you) knowns exactly why this is and no the answer is not "these people just hate/objectify women"
zaptheimpaler 9y ago
After the first time someone makes an unwanted sexual advance, you whether you are a man or a woman have the choice to walk away and NOT take their money! From the article - "The only thing more timeless than the abuse of power is the tolerance of abuse by those who most need the money.". Many people want the funding bad enough to keep interacting with unpleasant people and tolerate the abuse and hence ensure it continues.... they do have at least the choice to walk away, same as men, or better yet bring it to public awareness. Yet many choose to take the money and then complain - at that point they have no right to complain, because they have actively perpetuated the cycle of abuse in exchange for money and helped the abuser grow a little more powerful. If any founder desperate for money took money from a terrorist group, we would condemn them for colluding with the enemy, not give them sympathy for how hard it is to get funding. You can't take the bad guys money, knowing full well what it cost you AND complain about it. That is the problem. I explained more in another comment here.

GuiA 9y ago

This post is pure victim blaming that adds nothing of substance to the conversation ("The Times describes some founders who put up with unwanted sexual advances"... clearly the people who have come forward precisely DO NOT put up with the unwanted sexual advances?!?!?!?!). The author should perhaps realize that they are privileged to have never experienced the distresses many have reported, instead of smugly dismissing it with an argument that amounts to "well I'm old and I see no problems here" (EDIT: never mind, turns out the author was born in 1982, not worked in the valley since 1982, which makes her argument just "I'm a random person and I see no problems here", even less forgivable). I have a very hard time understanding what kind of mind, when given the choice to support rich powerful people who abuse their power or women who just would like to get their work done and build a career in a professional environment, chooses to believe and stick by the former. Given that this is on the front page already I expect my post to be heavily disagreed with, but at least people who have experienced discrimination/harassment can see that not all of the HN users think it's their fault.

sauronlord 9y ago

Finally someone points out the situation in another light. These women (and men) that get unwanted sexual advances from the rich and powerful only go public LONG after they can see they will not get money. How many of these men and women are a little "extra" friendly or dress a little more beautifully, or just a little extra flirtatious at the beginning of asking for A LOT OF MONEY? For these so called "scandals" there is not a single text message or conversation thread as evidence or shared publically. I'm not saying it doesn't exist, I'm just saying that an outsider reading the conversation thread would realize it's a lot more nuanced than a lot of alleges victoms are proclaiming. The truth is usually messier than the lie.

FussyZeus 9y ago

How did this make front page of HN? This adds literally nothing to the discussion apart from rehashing arguments that were old hat in 2008, by an author who openly admits they are part of the privileged group largely responsible for the problem, complete with an oh so classy “well I can’t SAY it, but you know what I mean” as if sideways implying garbage opinions is somehow morally superior to having garbage opinions. Is this satire?

nextlevelwizard 9y ago
Maybe people are getting sick and tired of this constant bashing of "privileged" men (especially white men) and this is welcomed opinion. It's good that bad people are exposed, but when the opinion starts to shift more and more towards grouping all "privileged" people in same group (like you are doing in this very post) it is only creating a bigger problem by making gender and race the primary thing that defines a person instead of their character.
- FussyZeus 9y ago
  The idea that nationalism will save industry is a welcome opinion in rural America right now (speaking as a white male in rural America) but a welcome opinion does not equal (and in fact, rarely does equal) a CORRECT idea. White men need to not take this shit personally which believe me, I understand is incredibly hard to do but the fact is that people like me were born into a system designed by people like me, for people like me, and even though I've had my share of rough times, I can't then go and claim that racism and sexism are over because I overcame them and I've seen women do the same thing. Just because one room is saved does not mean the rest of the house is therefore no longer on fire and we can all go home. There is still work to do, and "good enough" for 51% of the population, is just not good enough. Now if you want to make the case that an opinion or idea that makes you feel good is inherently as legitimate as one backed by numerous anecdotal accounts, solid demographic data, and downward trends in the industry then you're free to die on that hill, but I will not be doing so.
cbsmith 9y ago
Yeah,.. I keep wanting to believe it is satire, but i'm missing the usual cues.

glangdale 9y ago

It's nice that she decides to call women who didn't report unwanted sexual advances "prostitutes" without having the guts to actually say that for the record.

propter_hoc 9y ago

Ah yes, I remember this person. She started an unlicensed Bitcoin-based derivatives exchange where the public could bet on the success of startups, and was fined and shut down by the SEC (not before posting an ill-advised rant first: https://archive.is/DOVJZ https://archive.is/DOVJZ). Previous HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9642186 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9642186 Edit: I appreciate the questions of the relevance of this fact. My perspective was that Ms. Ou appears to consider Silicon Valley / the startup world a place where the usual rules do not, or perhaps should not apply. I should have been more explicit about this in my original post.

beefsack 9y ago
Is this relevant to the linked article and general topic?
rosser 9y ago
Ad hominem much? EDIT: Particularly ironic, given your username.
- savanaly 9y ago
  Ad hominem? That's an awesome thing to have on one's resume.
0xbear 9y ago
That actually sounds pretty badass to me. Legally naive, but cool idea and execution. Kudos to Elaine.

naiveattack 9y ago

This discussion should be about empowering women. Not about painting people who've made mistakes with a brush. Not about placing blame. If a friend / family member of yours, a woman you cared about, was in a situation where she was being harassed by someone with a cheque in his hand, what would you want her to do?

chasing 9y ago

Here's the deal: People looking for investments in their businesses are not panhandlers. They are not begging. They do not deserve to have any abuse tossed their way. They are people working in a business environment trying to create a mutually-beneficial arrangement. They are professionals, as are their investors. > The Times describes some founders who put up with unwanted sexual advances because they were desperate to raise money for their startups. There’s an old-fashioned word for what these ladies are doing that I shan’t repeat here. This is wildly offensive and just stupid beyond all belief. A woman who has a start-up she's trying to raise money for is a WHORE if she puts up with unwanted sexual advances from investors? Or is Elaine Ou saying that a woman who has a start-up is a WHORE because women who go "begging" for money deserve to be treated like sex objects? Am I misreading that? I must be. Please help.

bsder 9y ago
> A woman who has a start-up she's trying to raise money for is a WHORE if she puts up with unwanted sexual advances from investors? She is saying that if you put up with this kind of behavior rather than cutting it off, you are part of the problem. To be fair, this goes for men, too. I have had the "joy" of turning down funding because the person involved was such a jackass. Fortunately, he wasn't offering a huge sum of money. Add another zero, and my partner and I would probably have been in a major argument. And two zeros and I probably would have swallowed my pride. I acknowledge that I can be bought--I just hope my price is high enough to make it worth it. I really don't envy women in this environment. Lots of people running VC funds really like to throw the power imbalance around even towards men. Adding sexual dynamics to the mix has to be ferociously toxic--think about the abuse of Hooter's waitresses and then dial the restraint to zero.

ryandamm 9y ago

The title misrepresents the universality of the author's perspective. More plainly: this is HN clickbait. Ignore, please, read on at your peril.

teekert 9y ago

I think it is insane that you get so down voted. You have an opinion and voice it respectfully. I think there certainly are women that scream sexism as soon as things don't go their way and there are women who have sex for job related benefits (and there are men too although that is less easy for them). There are also black people that scream racism as soon as things don't go their way. Why is it so bad to explore this a bit intellectually? This open hostility to anyone challenging claims of rampant sexual harassment is crazy imho. It's killing civilized and intelligent discourse on the matter. The number of people shocked by your comment is too damn high.

dang 9y ago
You act as though the dynamics of internet flamewars weren't painfully well-known and obvious. If you want "civilized and intelligent discourse", posting like this is certainly not the way to obtain it. We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14741492 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14741492 and marked it off-topic.

d--b 9y ago

She says "it's not that bad" and then goes on to explain that abusive behavior happens because of the capital raising dynamics. So in fact the abuse is happening... It's understandable for a woman to come out and say "look it's not that bad", because it's true that in a majority of cases, women in tech are treated fine and the media shouldn't make the tech environment look like it's a giant college dorm. But, at the same time, it is true that some pockets of college dorm culture still exist. And because the tech culture is so homogenous (geeky male college grads) and isolated, extreme and abusive behavior towards those outside the culture arise more easily. Media attention is necessary so that the people who evolve in that culture day in day out can have a reality check.

greggman 9y ago

Random Non sequitur: I love Black Mirror but for the most part it concentrates on possible negative consequences of future tech. Episode S01E03 in particular concentrated on the possible negative consequences of having always on eye based video cameras that record your life 24/7 (or at least while your eyes are open). That reality doesn't seem too far away. 5 to 15 years? Maybe not implanted eyes by then but some fashionable version of Snapchat Spectacles. If that world ever comes to pass what would be the positive consequences if any. Would it solve most sexual harassment issues since in that world most sexual harassment would be recorded? How often would it be clear sexual harassment vs individual interpretation? While on the topic of individual interpretation you might find this season of The Heart interesting. http://www.theheartradio.org/no-episodes/ http://www.theheartradio.org/no-episodes/

bsmith2020 9y ago

I think the OP author meant to say that women who give in to this sexual propositions are encouraging powerful men to repeat that behavior. Guys don't take the risk (and as we can see with all the firings, it's risky behavior) of propositioning women in a business situation unless they have found it to sometimes works. So a subset of female entrepreneurs (probably a minority, but a very influential one in terms of alpha male behavior), along with the alpha males, are ruining entrepreneurship for the chaste entrepreneurs. The chaste entrepreneurs are entitled to call women who get startup funding in this way, and thereby encourage the sexual harassment of many innocent female entrepreneurs, whores.