4 ms·

As a survivor I can say sexual assault is terrible. Before we make any conclusion on the numbers, 88/384=22.9% of the female founders responded and 32.5% were g

As a survivor I can say sexual assault is terrible. Before we make any conclusion on the numbers, 88/384=22.9% of the female founders responded and 32.5% were given the chance to participate. Is the sample representative of the whole? How were the 32.5% of female founders that were given a chance to respond selected? If this is a representative sample then this is a shockingly high percentage of unwanted sexual contact. Also, I wonder if we can get a bit more detail on what situations these happened in and what exactly happened so that we can discuss other reasonable measures we can all participate in.

tyre 8y ago
> Callisto chose to send the survey to the 125 founders who signed up for the YC female founder email list. They choose this group under the assumption that these founders would welcome being reached out to for the survey because they had signed up proactively to this email list.
- asabjorn 8y ago
  Ok, but it is at least a lower bound on reports. At least 4/384=1% reported unwanted sexual contact, 15/384=3.9% quid pro quo and 19/384=4.9% sexual badgering. The real number would be higher if all responded and asked. Were these experiences as part of YC or anytime? Did the survey have a definition of the terms sexual badgering, quid pro quo and unwanted sexual contact that we can look at? Do we know how many men have been accused? Basically, is this a general problem or are there some sexual predators causing most of these terrible experiences.
Obi_Juan_Kenobi 8y ago
The pool is 125, not 384. > we helped Callisto send a survey to 125 of the 384 female founders The pool of 125 was based on who signed up for an email list. > Callisto chose to send the survey to the 125 founders who signed up for the YC female founder email list. They choose this group under the assumption that these founders would welcome being reached out to for the survey because they had signed up proactively to this email list. There's certainly some room for sampling bias, but not nearly as much as you claim. I also strongly disagree that this is shocking: it's difficult to make good estimates, but various surveys are often in excess of 60% for women: http://www.statisticsviews.com/details/feature/10906109/Sexual-Harassment-Statistics-Is-the-Truth-in-the-Numbers.html http://www.statisticsviews.com/details/feature/10906109/Sexu... 20% is below a reasonable minimum estimate: https://fairygodboss.com/articles/sexual-harassment-statistics https://fairygodboss.com/articles/sexual-harassment-statisti... Now, this is a more specific survey, not just any sexual harassment, but these numbers should not be shocking. One of the core messages of the me-too movement is that these numbers should not be shocking, this is the reality, and ignorance of this can contribute to the problem.
- d0mine 8y ago
  It seems you are familiar with the topic, could you clarify what does it mean "unwanted sexual contact"? Does it have to include genitalia? Or an inappropriate touch? any unwanted physical contact? explicit words? inappropriate joke? inappropriate stare? something else?
- asabjorn 8y ago
  Thanks. Still trying to figure out how the terms were defined in the survey to gain an understanding of what the experiences were. Do you know how the survey defined sexual overtures, sexual badgering, sexual coercion, quid-pro-quo and unwanted sexual contact? Does these terms mean different things in the survey? E.g is quid-pro-quo also sexual badgering? is unwanted sexual contact also sexual coercion? Also, do you know if these experiences were when they were part of YC or anytime?
jnovek 8y ago
:-( I am sorry. I don’t know you, but you did not deserve to be sexually assaulted.
- asabjorn 8y ago
  Thanks. It sucked for quite a while, but I’ve forgiven her at this point and I am trying to channel the energy to understand how these things come about so that I can help us all become part of the solution.
  - danaos 8y ago
    > [...]I’ve forgiven her[...] So you were sexually assaulted by a female? Am I missing something?
    - Drdrdrq 8y ago
      Not sure why you're being downvoted, as assaults by females are probably much less common (but not any better). In any case, "her" might also be a gender-neutral form of "him", if I'm not mistaken.
      - leetcrew 8y ago
        I don't think I've ever seen "her" used as a gender-neutral pronoun outside of abstract examples in philosophy papers. GP almost certainly meant to say they were assaulted by a woman. I'm honestly not sure i believe sexual assaults are way less common against men, although men may not recognize them as often. I've had several women behave towards me in ways that they would definitely call sexual assault if the roles were reversed. as for the down votes, look what GP wrote: > So you were sexually assaulted by a female? Am I missing something? this is an incredibly blunt and rude question to ask a victim of sexual assault. it implies that the very notion of the assault even occurring is so baffling as to require double checking that the poster even meant what they said.
        Drdrdrq 8y ago
jacquesm 8y ago
I would take the 22.9% as a reasonable lower bound from now on.
- asabjorn 8y ago
  I agree that we can define a lower bound of reports for the questions asked, and the terms as defined by the survey. The lower bounds are: At least 4/384=1% reported unwanted sexual contact, 15/384=3.9% quid pro quo and 19/384=4.9% sexual badgering. The real number would be higher if all female founders responded or were asked.
  - jacquesm 8y ago
    That's another way of looking at it. I do agree that the balance could shift either way but I suspect that the self selected group has a lower incidence of harassment because they already joined a support structure of sorts, which would allow them to keep each other posted about who to avoid. Of course that is just my belief.
    - asabjorn 8y ago
      It is hard to make assumptions. However, I would hope that there is a correlation between support structures we can and have put in place with a lower incidence rate.
gowld 8y ago
Even if "only" 20% of 32% of 384 people were assaulted, 18 people in this group assualted by educated, wealthy, powerful professionals, that's still horrifically high.

tyre 8y ago

> Callisto chose to send the survey to the 125 founders who signed up for the YC female founder email list. They choose this group under the assumption that these founders would welcome being reached out to for the survey because they had signed up proactively to this email list.

asabjorn 8y ago
Ok, but it is at least a lower bound on reports. At least 4/384=1% reported unwanted sexual contact, 15/384=3.9% quid pro quo and 19/384=4.9% sexual badgering. The real number would be higher if all responded and asked. Were these experiences as part of YC or anytime? Did the survey have a definition of the terms sexual badgering, quid pro quo and unwanted sexual contact that we can look at? Do we know how many men have been accused? Basically, is this a general problem or are there some sexual predators causing most of these terrible experiences.

Obi_Juan_Kenobi 8y ago

The pool is 125, not 384. > we helped Callisto send a survey to 125 of the 384 female founders The pool of 125 was based on who signed up for an email list. > Callisto chose to send the survey to the 125 founders who signed up for the YC female founder email list. They choose this group under the assumption that these founders would welcome being reached out to for the survey because they had signed up proactively to this email list. There's certainly some room for sampling bias, but not nearly as much as you claim. I also strongly disagree that this is shocking: it's difficult to make good estimates, but various surveys are often in excess of 60% for women: http://www.statisticsviews.com/details/feature/10906109/Sexual-Harassment-Statistics-Is-the-Truth-in-the-Numbers.html http://www.statisticsviews.com/details/feature/10906109/Sexu... 20% is below a reasonable minimum estimate: https://fairygodboss.com/articles/sexual-harassment-statistics https://fairygodboss.com/articles/sexual-harassment-statisti... Now, this is a more specific survey, not just any sexual harassment, but these numbers should not be shocking. One of the core messages of the me-too movement is that these numbers should not be shocking, this is the reality, and ignorance of this can contribute to the problem.

d0mine 8y ago
It seems you are familiar with the topic, could you clarify what does it mean "unwanted sexual contact"? Does it have to include genitalia? Or an inappropriate touch? any unwanted physical contact? explicit words? inappropriate joke? inappropriate stare? something else?
asabjorn 8y ago
Thanks. Still trying to figure out how the terms were defined in the survey to gain an understanding of what the experiences were. Do you know how the survey defined sexual overtures, sexual badgering, sexual coercion, quid-pro-quo and unwanted sexual contact? Does these terms mean different things in the survey? E.g is quid-pro-quo also sexual badgering? is unwanted sexual contact also sexual coercion? Also, do you know if these experiences were when they were part of YC or anytime?

jnovek 8y ago

:-( I am sorry. I don’t know you, but you did not deserve to be sexually assaulted.

asabjorn 8y ago
Thanks. It sucked for quite a while, but I’ve forgiven her at this point and I am trying to channel the energy to understand how these things come about so that I can help us all become part of the solution.
- danaos 8y ago
  > [...]I’ve forgiven her[...] So you were sexually assaulted by a female? Am I missing something?
  - Drdrdrq 8y ago
    Not sure why you're being downvoted, as assaults by females are probably much less common (but not any better). In any case, "her" might also be a gender-neutral form of "him", if I'm not mistaken.
    - leetcrew 8y ago
      I don't think I've ever seen "her" used as a gender-neutral pronoun outside of abstract examples in philosophy papers. GP almost certainly meant to say they were assaulted by a woman. I'm honestly not sure i believe sexual assaults are way less common against men, although men may not recognize them as often. I've had several women behave towards me in ways that they would definitely call sexual assault if the roles were reversed. as for the down votes, look what GP wrote: > So you were sexually assaulted by a female? Am I missing something? this is an incredibly blunt and rude question to ask a victim of sexual assault. it implies that the very notion of the assault even occurring is so baffling as to require double checking that the poster even meant what they said.
      - Drdrdrq 8y ago

jacquesm 8y ago

I would take the 22.9% as a reasonable lower bound from now on.

asabjorn 8y ago
I agree that we can define a lower bound of reports for the questions asked, and the terms as defined by the survey. The lower bounds are: At least 4/384=1% reported unwanted sexual contact, 15/384=3.9% quid pro quo and 19/384=4.9% sexual badgering. The real number would be higher if all female founders responded or were asked.
- jacquesm 8y ago
  That's another way of looking at it. I do agree that the balance could shift either way but I suspect that the self selected group has a lower incidence of harassment because they already joined a support structure of sorts, which would allow them to keep each other posted about who to avoid. Of course that is just my belief.
  - asabjorn 8y ago
    It is hard to make assumptions. However, I would hope that there is a correlation between support structures we can and have put in place with a lower incidence rate.

gowld 8y ago

Even if "only" 20% of 32% of 384 people were assaulted, 18 people in this group assualted by educated, wealthy, powerful professionals, that's still horrifically high.