8 ms·

XX Combinator

33 points by ssclafani 16y ago

glhaynes 16y ago
Being a techie and the father of a daughter, I'm sympathetic to the cause. But stuff like It would be scheduled and located so that women with families could actively do it. No “3-months in Silicon Valley”. always rubs me the wrong way, whether it "should" or not. I'm a man with a family — in a "coparenting relationship" (kids spend a week with me then a week with mom, repeat) — and am exactly as likely to be able to move to Silicon Valley for a few months as a woman in the same situation would be (i.e. it's impossible). Not that our field doesn't need more diversity; Lord knows it does. EDIT: I want to add that I'm not in any way disparaging this project and I wish it the very best. Just wanted to throw in another perspective. As a straight white male born in the USA I've done quite well in the birth lottery, through no special work or talent of my own. But I think it's important and valuable (for all participants) as we move to a relationship/parenting model of each-couple-works-it-out-for-themselves shared responsibility that we recognize the implications and adapt appropriately. Easier said than done.
- dieterrams 16y ago
  Yeah, if that's an accommodation worth making for women with families, it surely is for men, too, given that they're increasingly sharing parenting responsibilities.
  - mrtron 16y ago
    Of course - which is why I would see it makes sense for differentiating between people with children. It is somehow of more consequence that a mother misses 3 months of a child's life than a father?
ryanelkins 16y ago
I don't think any of the reasons mentioned here for keeping women out is gender specific. It's more hacker vs "idea person" or how I prefer to think of it, those who can code vs those who can't code. This is more about "Y Combinator for non coders" than it is about "Y Combinator for women". This is something I see a lot of - people with some experience that want to start a tech startup but want to hire out some developers to build it for them. Not that there is something inherently wrong with that - there just isn't anything gender specific about it either. The problem, as the author mentioned, is primarily that the number of women taking up coding is disproportionate to the number of men that take up coding. Y Combinator's heavily male population is a reflection of the problem, not a cause.
- Kadin 16y ago
  Agreed. While I wish them luck, I think they're accepting a bunch of terribly flawed premises, about the willingness and ability of women to do the "startup thing". Maybe that's not what the author of the article wants to do (and I'll be honest, it's not really my thing either; I live a very comfortable life on the East Coast), but I think she overgeneralizes a bit, extending her experience out to general truths about women in general. There's no reason why women shouldn't be equally represented among coders. There's no reason why women shouldn't be as eager to get their hands dirty in a startup when they're in their 20s. There's no reason why women ought to feel that they need to take a disproportionate role in parenting, or even feel pressured to have kids at all, if they don't want to. There's definitely room for trying to make starting a business easier, for women and men who aren't in their 20s and don't want to move to Silicon Valley. But we should also be trying to figure out where the 20-something women coder/entrepreneurs are, or how we can create more of them. It's not as though entrepreneurship or staying up all night coding on pizza and Mountain Dew are something where men have a biological advantage; there's no good reason why women shouldn't be equally represented. That they are not is symptomatic of a deep problem in both the tech industry and in the educational system that feeds the industry. Stopgaps are fine, but we need to be looking into the deeper problems at the same time, not just accepting them on premise.
- natgordon 16y ago
  The 35-year old cut-off could be considered gender-specific. I'm a 30-year old female entrepreneur and software developer. I would love to do Y-combinator or other incubator program. I also want to start a family. If I wait for years to have kids, there is a statistically higher risk of infertility. This isn't the case for men. I think the author is correct that women may be more ready to launch a start-up when they're 40.
  - seanalltogether 16y ago
    "I think the author is correct that women may be more ready to launch a start-up when they're 40" I think this is a valid statement. However, the argument then becomes, 'Is it a good business strategy to invest and nurture a pool of 40 year old entrepreneurs?'
kaens 16y ago
I'm sympathetic to a cause here, but I can't help but think that things like this might do more to promote sexism than not. I think the idea that women are somehow less capable of doing the "3-months in Silicon Valley" is harmful. I think that the (not directly) implied idea that it would be easier for men (men with families even) to do the startup dance on a string budget is harmful. I think the idea that women just don't mature into people who are ready to tackle a startup until their 40s is harmful. I think that the idea that men are much more ready to tackle a startup in their 20s is harmful. This whole article smacks of the idea that there is something fundamentally different about men and women and their capabilities at different points in their adult life. I think this idea is harmful. I think these things are harmful, because I'd like to see the eradication of gender inequality as a social norm. I suspect that while said differences may exist at this point in time, that they are cultural rather than physical in nature, and that if the goal is social equality, things like this do little more than reinforce cultural stereotypes about women and men. Don't get me wrong, I'm very aware of the skew towards males in the tech world. There are a lot of reasons for that, almost all -- if not all -- of them cultural. I assume that while only 7 founders have been female, that this isn't happening with 50% of applicants being female. Perhaps doing a Y-Combinator style seed-funding ramen-profitable thing is only really appealing to people who are young. Perhaps we could use something like that for people who are older and have families and can't do the "drop everything for a few months in pursuit of this idea". Perhaps.
- mindcrime 16y ago
  This whole article smacks of the idea that there is something fundamentally different about men and women and their capabilities at different points in their adult life. I think this idea is harmful. But what if it's true? I know it's not politically correct to say this, but there are biological differences between men and women, rooted in our different roles in reproduction. Yes, we are more similar than different for the most part, but we shouldn't just gloss over what differences do exist.
  - kaens 16y ago
    It could be true, and if it is then we need to think about equality in a different manner, I suppose. I strongly suspect that the vast majority of the differences are cultural in nature -- in fact I suspect that patterns exposed through culture that are identified as valid by the brains of the people experiencing them are biological differences, but they're not biological differences in the sense of what makes us a species (only that what people hold in their head about themselves and about how they should or shouldn't act, or what is masculine or feminine is stored, at some level, in a biological manner). It really seems to me that the "classical" differences between "males" and "females" were really probably rather useful for a good chunk of humanity's history, and that they're really fairly useless now, and that people are recognizing that. On a related note, gender and sex are a fuzzier topic for most than they were 10 or 20 years ago. I freely admit that I do not know where the line between what part of a persons mindset is nature, and what part is culture lies, nor am I fully aware of of how they interact. Based on what I know, I strongly suspect that the vast majority of most peoples mindsets is based on culture -- based on patterns that they've seen since they were born that their minds recognize as valid (since that seems to be what our brains do). I would suspect that if it was true, to a degree that would make it relevant for this company, that we wouldn't have had huge women's rights movements, and that feminism wouldn't exist. I suppose one could take the view that women and men are still somehow intrinsically predisposed to being better or worse at this or that, but have been able to be annoyed by it by being capable of higher-order abstraction, but I really doubt that that is the case. I also don't think that the species is static -- that is, if there are said intrinsic differences, and our survival situation changes enough to make them redundant or change them, adaptation will happen. There's a large part of me that thinks that "you can't fight biology" is a hell of a cop-out for humans. Eh, it's a can of worms really. I do work with the assumption that gender inequality is vastly more cultural than not. In fact, I work with the assumption that it is - for all practical intents and purposes - entirely cultural. I could be wrong. I don't think I am, and I hope I'm not.
catone 16y ago
If 7 female founder is reflective of the Y Combinator applicant pool, and the only thing YC is doing to structurally to "keep women out" is to favor founders who have coding skills, then the issue appears to be that there aren't enough competent female coders. Rather than a band-aid solution (e.g., creating a separate model of startup incubator that plays the types of jobs women currently do), if we want true gender equality in the tech space we should hit at the root: getting more women interested in tech. So instead of "XX Combinator," how about more programs designed to get young girls interested in science, math, coding, and entrepreneurism -- the supposed ingredients of a successful YC applicant. That is, it seems to me that funding a whole bunch of startups run by people who may not be technically qualified to succeed simply because they're women isn't a great idea. Instead, the better solution is to devise ways to get more women interested in the things necessary to succeed (in this case coding and design skills+) and help them develop those skills. +If you believe the apparent YC philosophy that technically adept founders are better positioned to succeed.
- kaens 16y ago
  I think that what needs to be addressed is the cultural idea that math and programming and "science stuff" is a male thing. On a more abstract level, I think what needs to be addressed is the cultural idea that $FOO or $BAR are a $GENDER thing, especially considering what we're discovering about gender and sexuality. There's plenty of examples of women being pressured to not do X and men being pressured to not do Y because X or Y fall out of what are considered to be normal social behavior for their respective gender or sex. How to address it? I don't know exactly, other than stressing the point, and making a point of not performing that type of implied discrimination yourself. I'm a big fan of meritocracy in this regards -- if I'm looking for coders (or dancers, or drivers, or artists, or bakers, or whatever), I care about what they can and have accomplished, not what they look like or what their sex is. If I ever start my own company, I very well might make the application process (as) entirely anonymous (as possible) to enforce this.
mrtron 16y ago
I really don't think that equality in genders means that 50% of YC applicants (or any particular career choice) should be women (or men). "I want a Y Combinator for women" is an incredibly ignorant comment. First, it suggests that YC somehow is not suited to women which is insulting to both parties. Secondly it is suggesting that a woman only YC is a step forward - I see it as a leap backwards. And then she goes to speak for women everywhere with statements like "Y Combinator participants are for the most part very young — in their early 20’s. This is not when women would be most inclined. Women who start businesses like to know what they’re doing, and be trained and experienced in it.". That is so ridiculous I feel ignorant for responding to this post.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
btilly 16y ago
What I read is this, "I want a Y-combinator, except where I live, aimed at my gender and with a schedule I can accept. Oh, and please supply the tech talent I need. If things work out I can reward the coders with salary and possibly a CTO position down the road." Need I explain what is wrong with that picture? If you don't see the problems, you might start by reading http://blog.wepay.com/2010/03/5-things-i-%E2%80%9Cknew%E2%80%9D-or-should-have-known-before-starting-a-company-but-didnt-fully-understand-until-now/ http://blog.wepay.com/2010/03/5-things-i-%E2%80%9Cknew%E2%80... and seeing how many critical pieces don't work. Starting with the whole supply/demand issue around technical and non-technical co-founders.
- arijo 16y ago
  Objectifying tech people as reusable and throw away nerds seems to be a recurrent pattern along non-tech folks trying to create a startup.
  - nickpinkston 16y ago
    Though not the successful ones... In Pittsburgh, it seems like everyone, even "old people", repeats the mantra of good hackers being a huge part of success.
- Alex3917 16y ago
  I disagree, I think it's a perfectly legitimate request. I know Tereza personally, and I also went through YC, so trust me when I say that she is definitely more talented than the average YC founder. That being said, she would still benefit greatly from having some additional resources, a community, and a push in the right direction, but the resources and community that YC provides don't quite fit her needs. Don't get me wrong, moving out to silicon valley and eating ramen for three months is a lot of fun. But at the end of the day, YC is still kind of an existential solution to a monetary problem. Which is great, and it's the best thing for a lot of people including me, but there are other people with other needs who are just as capable of being successful given the right environment for them.
  - 16y ago
herdrick 16y ago
It's worth trying; I hope somebody does.
chaostheory 16y ago
Why are entrepreneurs mostly male? I believe this deserves another look: http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm TDLR: "For women throughout history (and prehistory), the odds of reproducing have been pretty good. Later in this talk we will ponder things like, why was it so rare for a hundred women to get together and build a ship and sail off to explore unknown regions, whereas men have fairly regularly done such things? But taking chances like that would be stupid, from the perspective of a biological organism seeking to reproduce. They might drown or be killed by savages or catch a disease. For women, the optimal thing to do is go along with the crowd, be nice, play it safe. The odds are good that men will come along and offer sex and you’ll be able to have babies. All that matters is choosing the best offer. We’re descended from women who played it safe. For men, the outlook was radically different. If you go along with the crowd and play it safe, the odds are you won’t have children. Most men who ever lived did not have descendants who are alive today. Their lines were dead ends. Hence it was necessary to take chances, try new things, be creative, explore other possibilities."
istari 16y ago
The more I watched the Milan fashion show, the more troubled I became that 0% of the models on the catwalks were men. I realized that the men in the IT industry compose a vast, under-served market for high fashion that is being actively and sexually discriminated against by structural factors. Factors which we can overcome with wishful thinking. We need a fashion show. In Silicon Valley. For men. In their thirties and forties. Who can code. On nights and weekends so as not to disturb their working hours. Benevolent designers and fashion models will work with the coders to make this happen in return for equity and possibly paid salaries by sponsors and can convert into CFO (Chief Fashion Officer) positions.
chrischen 16y ago
There is already a y combinator for your gender: y combinator. If the problem is that women don't know how to code, then we should start empowering them to code, not give them money to start a tech business despite that.
friendlyhacker 16y ago
http://news.ycombinator.com/x?fnid=W8lZDdBoHf http://news.ycombinator.com/x?fnid=W8lZDdBoHf
mkramlich 16y ago
this old debate memo to the planet: males and females are different stop thinking, open your eyes and ears and get out in the world. do this for say 20+ years so you get exposed to a lot of reality, enough to overwhelm your theories/thinking, then revisit the issue. one last point: I think universities and colleges are the main vectors for this "males and females are the same with exact same potential, desires, talents, predilections -- but mean old Society is oppressing/distorting them" idea. can't wait to see it die out.

33 points by ssclafani 16y ago

Being a techie and the father of a daughter, I'm sympathetic to the cause. But stuff like It would be scheduled and located so that women with families could actively do it. No “3-months in Silicon Valley”. always rubs me the wrong way, whether it "should" or not. I'm a man with a family — in a "coparenting relationship" (kids spend a week with me then a week with mom, repeat) — and am exactly as likely to be able to move to Silicon Valley for a few months as a woman in the same situation would be (i.e. it's impossible). Not that our field doesn't need more diversity; Lord knows it does. EDIT: I want to add that I'm not in any way disparaging this project and I wish it the very best. Just wanted to throw in another perspective. As a straight white male born in the USA I've done quite well in the birth lottery, through no special work or talent of my own. But I think it's important and valuable (for all participants) as we move to a relationship/parenting model of each-couple-works-it-out-for-themselves shared responsibility that we recognize the implications and adapt appropriately. Easier said than done.

dieterrams 16y ago
Yeah, if that's an accommodation worth making for women with families, it surely is for men, too, given that they're increasingly sharing parenting responsibilities.
- mrtron 16y ago
  Of course - which is why I would see it makes sense for differentiating between people with children. It is somehow of more consequence that a mother misses 3 months of a child's life than a father?

ryanelkins 16y ago

I don't think any of the reasons mentioned here for keeping women out is gender specific. It's more hacker vs "idea person" or how I prefer to think of it, those who can code vs those who can't code. This is more about "Y Combinator for non coders" than it is about "Y Combinator for women". This is something I see a lot of - people with some experience that want to start a tech startup but want to hire out some developers to build it for them. Not that there is something inherently wrong with that - there just isn't anything gender specific about it either. The problem, as the author mentioned, is primarily that the number of women taking up coding is disproportionate to the number of men that take up coding. Y Combinator's heavily male population is a reflection of the problem, not a cause.

Kadin 16y ago
Agreed. While I wish them luck, I think they're accepting a bunch of terribly flawed premises, about the willingness and ability of women to do the "startup thing". Maybe that's not what the author of the article wants to do (and I'll be honest, it's not really my thing either; I live a very comfortable life on the East Coast), but I think she overgeneralizes a bit, extending her experience out to general truths about women in general. There's no reason why women shouldn't be equally represented among coders. There's no reason why women shouldn't be as eager to get their hands dirty in a startup when they're in their 20s. There's no reason why women ought to feel that they need to take a disproportionate role in parenting, or even feel pressured to have kids at all, if they don't want to. There's definitely room for trying to make starting a business easier, for women and men who aren't in their 20s and don't want to move to Silicon Valley. But we should also be trying to figure out where the 20-something women coder/entrepreneurs are, or how we can create more of them. It's not as though entrepreneurship or staying up all night coding on pizza and Mountain Dew are something where men have a biological advantage; there's no good reason why women shouldn't be equally represented. That they are not is symptomatic of a deep problem in both the tech industry and in the educational system that feeds the industry. Stopgaps are fine, but we need to be looking into the deeper problems at the same time, not just accepting them on premise.
natgordon 16y ago
The 35-year old cut-off could be considered gender-specific. I'm a 30-year old female entrepreneur and software developer. I would love to do Y-combinator or other incubator program. I also want to start a family. If I wait for years to have kids, there is a statistically higher risk of infertility. This isn't the case for men. I think the author is correct that women may be more ready to launch a start-up when they're 40.
- seanalltogether 16y ago
  "I think the author is correct that women may be more ready to launch a start-up when they're 40" I think this is a valid statement. However, the argument then becomes, 'Is it a good business strategy to invest and nurture a pool of 40 year old entrepreneurs?'

kaens 16y ago

I'm sympathetic to a cause here, but I can't help but think that things like this might do more to promote sexism than not. I think the idea that women are somehow less capable of doing the "3-months in Silicon Valley" is harmful. I think that the (not directly) implied idea that it would be easier for men (men with families even) to do the startup dance on a string budget is harmful. I think the idea that women just don't mature into people who are ready to tackle a startup until their 40s is harmful. I think that the idea that men are much more ready to tackle a startup in their 20s is harmful. This whole article smacks of the idea that there is something fundamentally different about men and women and their capabilities at different points in their adult life. I think this idea is harmful. I think these things are harmful, because I'd like to see the eradication of gender inequality as a social norm. I suspect that while said differences may exist at this point in time, that they are cultural rather than physical in nature, and that if the goal is social equality, things like this do little more than reinforce cultural stereotypes about women and men. Don't get me wrong, I'm very aware of the skew towards males in the tech world. There are a lot of reasons for that, almost all -- if not all -- of them cultural. I assume that while only 7 founders have been female, that this isn't happening with 50% of applicants being female. Perhaps doing a Y-Combinator style seed-funding ramen-profitable thing is only really appealing to people who are young. Perhaps we could use something like that for people who are older and have families and can't do the "drop everything for a few months in pursuit of this idea". Perhaps.

mindcrime 16y ago
This whole article smacks of the idea that there is something fundamentally different about men and women and their capabilities at different points in their adult life. I think this idea is harmful. But what if it's true? I know it's not politically correct to say this, but there are biological differences between men and women, rooted in our different roles in reproduction. Yes, we are more similar than different for the most part, but we shouldn't just gloss over what differences do exist.
- kaens 16y ago
  It could be true, and if it is then we need to think about equality in a different manner, I suppose. I strongly suspect that the vast majority of the differences are cultural in nature -- in fact I suspect that patterns exposed through culture that are identified as valid by the brains of the people experiencing them are biological differences, but they're not biological differences in the sense of what makes us a species (only that what people hold in their head about themselves and about how they should or shouldn't act, or what is masculine or feminine is stored, at some level, in a biological manner). It really seems to me that the "classical" differences between "males" and "females" were really probably rather useful for a good chunk of humanity's history, and that they're really fairly useless now, and that people are recognizing that. On a related note, gender and sex are a fuzzier topic for most than they were 10 or 20 years ago. I freely admit that I do not know where the line between what part of a persons mindset is nature, and what part is culture lies, nor am I fully aware of of how they interact. Based on what I know, I strongly suspect that the vast majority of most peoples mindsets is based on culture -- based on patterns that they've seen since they were born that their minds recognize as valid (since that seems to be what our brains do). I would suspect that if it was true, to a degree that would make it relevant for this company, that we wouldn't have had huge women's rights movements, and that feminism wouldn't exist. I suppose one could take the view that women and men are still somehow intrinsically predisposed to being better or worse at this or that, but have been able to be annoyed by it by being capable of higher-order abstraction, but I really doubt that that is the case. I also don't think that the species is static -- that is, if there are said intrinsic differences, and our survival situation changes enough to make them redundant or change them, adaptation will happen. There's a large part of me that thinks that "you can't fight biology" is a hell of a cop-out for humans. Eh, it's a can of worms really. I do work with the assumption that gender inequality is vastly more cultural than not. In fact, I work with the assumption that it is - for all practical intents and purposes - entirely cultural. I could be wrong. I don't think I am, and I hope I'm not.

catone 16y ago

If 7 female founder is reflective of the Y Combinator applicant pool, and the only thing YC is doing to structurally to "keep women out" is to favor founders who have coding skills, then the issue appears to be that there aren't enough competent female coders. Rather than a band-aid solution (e.g., creating a separate model of startup incubator that plays the types of jobs women currently do), if we want true gender equality in the tech space we should hit at the root: getting more women interested in tech. So instead of "XX Combinator," how about more programs designed to get young girls interested in science, math, coding, and entrepreneurism -- the supposed ingredients of a successful YC applicant. That is, it seems to me that funding a whole bunch of startups run by people who may not be technically qualified to succeed simply because they're women isn't a great idea. Instead, the better solution is to devise ways to get more women interested in the things necessary to succeed (in this case coding and design skills+) and help them develop those skills. +If you believe the apparent YC philosophy that technically adept founders are better positioned to succeed.

kaens 16y ago
I think that what needs to be addressed is the cultural idea that math and programming and "science stuff" is a male thing. On a more abstract level, I think what needs to be addressed is the cultural idea that $FOO or $BAR are a $GENDER thing, especially considering what we're discovering about gender and sexuality. There's plenty of examples of women being pressured to not do X and men being pressured to not do Y because X or Y fall out of what are considered to be normal social behavior for their respective gender or sex. How to address it? I don't know exactly, other than stressing the point, and making a point of not performing that type of implied discrimination yourself. I'm a big fan of meritocracy in this regards -- if I'm looking for coders (or dancers, or drivers, or artists, or bakers, or whatever), I care about what they can and have accomplished, not what they look like or what their sex is. If I ever start my own company, I very well might make the application process (as) entirely anonymous (as possible) to enforce this.

mrtron 16y ago

I really don't think that equality in genders means that 50% of YC applicants (or any particular career choice) should be women (or men). "I want a Y Combinator for women" is an incredibly ignorant comment. First, it suggests that YC somehow is not suited to women which is insulting to both parties. Secondly it is suggesting that a woman only YC is a step forward - I see it as a leap backwards. And then she goes to speak for women everywhere with statements like "Y Combinator participants are for the most part very young — in their early 20’s. This is not when women would be most inclined. Women who start businesses like to know what they’re doing, and be trained and experienced in it.". That is so ridiculous I feel ignorant for responding to this post.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

btilly 16y ago

What I read is this, "I want a Y-combinator, except where I live, aimed at my gender and with a schedule I can accept. Oh, and please supply the tech talent I need. If things work out I can reward the coders with salary and possibly a CTO position down the road." Need I explain what is wrong with that picture? If you don't see the problems, you might start by reading http://blog.wepay.com/2010/03/5-things-i-%E2%80%9Cknew%E2%80%9D-or-should-have-known-before-starting-a-company-but-didnt-fully-understand-until-now/ http://blog.wepay.com/2010/03/5-things-i-%E2%80%9Cknew%E2%80... and seeing how many critical pieces don't work. Starting with the whole supply/demand issue around technical and non-technical co-founders.

arijo 16y ago
Objectifying tech people as reusable and throw away nerds seems to be a recurrent pattern along non-tech folks trying to create a startup.
- nickpinkston 16y ago
  Though not the successful ones... In Pittsburgh, it seems like everyone, even "old people", repeats the mantra of good hackers being a huge part of success.
Alex3917 16y ago
I disagree, I think it's a perfectly legitimate request. I know Tereza personally, and I also went through YC, so trust me when I say that she is definitely more talented than the average YC founder. That being said, she would still benefit greatly from having some additional resources, a community, and a push in the right direction, but the resources and community that YC provides don't quite fit her needs. Don't get me wrong, moving out to silicon valley and eating ramen for three months is a lot of fun. But at the end of the day, YC is still kind of an existential solution to a monetary problem. Which is great, and it's the best thing for a lot of people including me, but there are other people with other needs who are just as capable of being successful given the right environment for them.
- 16y ago

herdrick 16y ago

It's worth trying; I hope somebody does.

chaostheory 16y ago

Why are entrepreneurs mostly male? I believe this deserves another look: http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm TDLR: "For women throughout history (and prehistory), the odds of reproducing have been pretty good. Later in this talk we will ponder things like, why was it so rare for a hundred women to get together and build a ship and sail off to explore unknown regions, whereas men have fairly regularly done such things? But taking chances like that would be stupid, from the perspective of a biological organism seeking to reproduce. They might drown or be killed by savages or catch a disease. For women, the optimal thing to do is go along with the crowd, be nice, play it safe. The odds are good that men will come along and offer sex and you’ll be able to have babies. All that matters is choosing the best offer. We’re descended from women who played it safe. For men, the outlook was radically different. If you go along with the crowd and play it safe, the odds are you won’t have children. Most men who ever lived did not have descendants who are alive today. Their lines were dead ends. Hence it was necessary to take chances, try new things, be creative, explore other possibilities."

istari 16y ago

The more I watched the Milan fashion show, the more troubled I became that 0% of the models on the catwalks were men. I realized that the men in the IT industry compose a vast, under-served market for high fashion that is being actively and sexually discriminated against by structural factors. Factors which we can overcome with wishful thinking. We need a fashion show. In Silicon Valley. For men. In their thirties and forties. Who can code. On nights and weekends so as not to disturb their working hours. Benevolent designers and fashion models will work with the coders to make this happen in return for equity and possibly paid salaries by sponsors and can convert into CFO (Chief Fashion Officer) positions.

chrischen 16y ago

There is already a y combinator for your gender: y combinator. If the problem is that women don't know how to code, then we should start empowering them to code, not give them money to start a tech business despite that.

friendlyhacker 16y ago

http://news.ycombinator.com/x?fnid=W8lZDdBoHf http://news.ycombinator.com/x?fnid=W8lZDdBoHf

mkramlich 16y ago

this old debate memo to the planet: males and females are different stop thinking, open your eyes and ears and get out in the world. do this for say 20+ years so you get exposed to a lot of reality, enough to overwhelm your theories/thinking, then revisit the issue. one last point: I think universities and colleges are the main vectors for this "males and females are the same with exact same potential, desires, talents, predilections -- but mean old Society is oppressing/distorting them" idea. can't wait to see it die out.