5 ms·

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 som

by 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.
  - Perceval 16y ago
    When confronted with uncomfortable truths, most people will resort to the “cultural conditioning” argument. It is fear of the unchangeable that motivates them.
jdrock 16y ago
There are many things fundamentally different between men and women. Sure, some women have traits similar to men and the converse holds as well. Personally, I don't think there is anything actually stopping women from being successful entrepreneurs beyond their own utility functions. Granted, those utility functions are in part a product of the culture in which they develop, but that does not mean something needs to change in the entrepreneur/investor community.
ryanwaggoner 16y ago
Damn, you started out strong and then things fell apart a bit. That's what I get for voting without reading all the way through. 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 Men and women are fundamentally different, and research from a wide variety of fields continues to support that. I find it ridiculous to believe that even though evolution has so completely obviously shaped our bodies differently, the male and female minds are the same, despite mounds of evidence to the contrary, both scientific and experiential. A researcher would be mocked for making the claim that men and women have the exact same body, but since the mind is murkier and not as well understood, it's fine to claim that they're the same. This seems analogous to religious claims of miraculous healing, which always seem to affect something like cancer or headaches or something we can't see or touch. They never restore lost limbs or raise the dead. It's always in intangible areas we don't fully understand, and it seems for now that the belief that men and women aren't fundamentally different in their mental and psychological processes can enjoy the same safe haven. Sorry for the rant, but it's always just struck me as the perfect example of starting with your conclusion (driven by political correctness), and then trying in vain to make the evidence fit the theory. I don't see how any honest researcher could just follow the evidence and determine that men and women are "fundamentally" the same. Now, I agree that the eradication of gender inequality (in the sense of value) as a social norm is a worthy goal, but starting from the foundation of falsehood is the wrong approach.
- dieterrams 16y ago
  You've got this wrong. kaens did not claim that men and women are "fundamentally the same". He's saying, don't assume there are fundamental (crippling) differences. All you've pointed out is that there are indeed fundamental differences of some kinds, but not of the sort kaens was talking about. The inconclusiveness you raise supports his point. Edit: Wow. Downvoted. What on earth for?
  - adw 16y ago
    Amen. There are, obviously, some population differences between men and women; for instance, on average men are taller. Blame the hormones. But people confuse mean and variance, and this is one case where instinctive ignorance of probability is tantamount to sexism. In fact, it's plain rude to do that to people. Okay, an example. Let's say that on average, men are better fighters than women - whether that's societal or innate is neither here nor there, but take it as generally true. It doesn't change the fact that my sister could kick my arse. If I trusted in statistics there, I'd have been wearing my teeth as a necklace by the age of ten. So even if the means are different, the variances are so high that you can't know what the person in front of you, male or female, is good at. What that means is that if you go into something like this with preconceptions based on gender, then you are being unfair to the person in front of you - male or female - by not judging them on who they are and what they can do. And if you fail to allow for the gender roles that society forces people into, then you're closing yourself off to talent. And if you close yourself off to talent you can use, your company deserves to fail. I don't want to be that guy or that company. (This is pretty personal for me, actually; my mother taught me BASIC when I was seven or so. She's a much better programmer than I am.)
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
anamax 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. The vast majority of male humans are not capable of giving birth at any point during their lives. We can argue about the consequences of that fact, but it's hard to believe that there are no consequences. What other facts should not be discussed?
- kaens 16y ago
  I absolutely think that should be discussed. I don't doubt that there are some consequences of that, but I don't think they're nearly as extreme as some people paint them to be. Edit: I don't think that anything should be barred from discussion. Taboo topics are harmful, in my opinion.
  - anamax 16y ago
    > Taboo topics are harmful, in my opinion. You get to argue that point with the person who wrote "I think this idea is harmful."
    - kaens 16y ago
      I wrote that. Whether or not I think an idea, or the implementation of an idea, is harmful has no bearing on whether or not I think it should be barred from discussion.

by kaens 16y ago

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.
- Perceval 16y ago
  When confronted with uncomfortable truths, most people will resort to the “cultural conditioning” argument. It is fear of the unchangeable that motivates them.

jdrock 16y ago

There are many things fundamentally different between men and women. Sure, some women have traits similar to men and the converse holds as well. Personally, I don't think there is anything actually stopping women from being successful entrepreneurs beyond their own utility functions. Granted, those utility functions are in part a product of the culture in which they develop, but that does not mean something needs to change in the entrepreneur/investor community.

ryanwaggoner 16y ago

Damn, you started out strong and then things fell apart a bit. That's what I get for voting without reading all the way through. 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 Men and women are fundamentally different, and research from a wide variety of fields continues to support that. I find it ridiculous to believe that even though evolution has so completely obviously shaped our bodies differently, the male and female minds are the same, despite mounds of evidence to the contrary, both scientific and experiential. A researcher would be mocked for making the claim that men and women have the exact same body, but since the mind is murkier and not as well understood, it's fine to claim that they're the same. This seems analogous to religious claims of miraculous healing, which always seem to affect something like cancer or headaches or something we can't see or touch. They never restore lost limbs or raise the dead. It's always in intangible areas we don't fully understand, and it seems for now that the belief that men and women aren't fundamentally different in their mental and psychological processes can enjoy the same safe haven. Sorry for the rant, but it's always just struck me as the perfect example of starting with your conclusion (driven by political correctness), and then trying in vain to make the evidence fit the theory. I don't see how any honest researcher could just follow the evidence and determine that men and women are "fundamentally" the same. Now, I agree that the eradication of gender inequality (in the sense of value) as a social norm is a worthy goal, but starting from the foundation of falsehood is the wrong approach.

dieterrams 16y ago
You've got this wrong. kaens did not claim that men and women are "fundamentally the same". He's saying, don't assume there are fundamental (crippling) differences. All you've pointed out is that there are indeed fundamental differences of some kinds, but not of the sort kaens was talking about. The inconclusiveness you raise supports his point. Edit: Wow. Downvoted. What on earth for?
- adw 16y ago
  Amen. There are, obviously, some population differences between men and women; for instance, on average men are taller. Blame the hormones. But people confuse mean and variance, and this is one case where instinctive ignorance of probability is tantamount to sexism. In fact, it's plain rude to do that to people. Okay, an example. Let's say that on average, men are better fighters than women - whether that's societal or innate is neither here nor there, but take it as generally true. It doesn't change the fact that my sister could kick my arse. If I trusted in statistics there, I'd have been wearing my teeth as a necklace by the age of ten. So even if the means are different, the variances are so high that you can't know what the person in front of you, male or female, is good at. What that means is that if you go into something like this with preconceptions based on gender, then you are being unfair to the person in front of you - male or female - by not judging them on who they are and what they can do. And if you fail to allow for the gender roles that society forces people into, then you're closing yourself off to talent. And if you close yourself off to talent you can use, your company deserves to fail. I don't want to be that guy or that company. (This is pretty personal for me, actually; my mother taught me BASIC when I was seven or so. She's a much better programmer than I am.)

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

anamax 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. The vast majority of male humans are not capable of giving birth at any point during their lives. We can argue about the consequences of that fact, but it's hard to believe that there are no consequences. What other facts should not be discussed?

kaens 16y ago
I absolutely think that should be discussed. I don't doubt that there are some consequences of that, but I don't think they're nearly as extreme as some people paint them to be. Edit: I don't think that anything should be barred from discussion. Taboo topics are harmful, in my opinion.
- anamax 16y ago
  > Taboo topics are harmful, in my opinion. You get to argue that point with the person who wrote "I think this idea is harmful."
  - kaens 16y ago
    I wrote that. Whether or not I think an idea, or the implementation of an idea, is harmful has no bearing on whether or not I think it should be barred from discussion.