4 ms·

I read the blog-post, but it does not make clear to me why Jessica chose to offer the money to women only. > " Specifically, she can’t build the first version

I read the blog-post, but it does not make clear to me why Jessica chose to offer the money to women only. > " Specifically, she can’t build the first version of her product and is forced to find a cofounder who can. Because she can't judge technical ability, she'll often choose the wrong person for the job. And in a startup, if you choose the wrong programmer or cofounder and have to replace them, the delay alone can be enough to kill the company. …" I have met a number of people who cannot program, but believe that they have a great idea (only if somebody could just build that app for them …). Even random neighbors who learn that I write mobile apps just sort of assume, that I do not have my own ideas -- and instead, just program somebody else's ideas into life (sort of like I am a typist, but an author of the novel, I am typing -- has to be somebody else). All that gender-bias in recent, US, tech grants does, is re-enforces the stigma that women in US are 'special-needs', as far as it comes to technology. This is not a good stigma to have, and it cannot be broken by appeal to a moral high. As a parent, it is also difficult to explain to my son, why my daughter would qualify for such a generous grant, but he would not... What explanation is there ? As few on this thread, I think there are better way to identify people who born into (or became over time) into a very unfair and disadvantageous environment. And giving those, the extra help, offering them generosity -- is nothing but heart warming. And deserves huge applauds and replication. There are boys and girls from disadvantaged environments, some lost parents to cancer, to car accidents, to wars, to terrorist attacks. Some are in different countries suffering from horrible illnesses (that were caused by environment catastrophes). Some were unlucky to be born to drug abusing parents. --- It does take more work, may be more passion, to reach out to those -- but I think it would better society more.

iliketosleep 8y ago
> As a parent, it is also difficult to explain to my son, why my daughter would qualify for such a generous grant, but he would not... What explanation is there ? There are explanations, but whether they are valid or not is a matter of debate. Here is one possible explanation: Women have faced all kinds of discrimination which has, for the most part, kept them out of the industry. Even if we're not actively discriminating against women now, bias still remains in this male-dominated industry. Therefore, it's necessary to do something in order to bring women back in, and we all have to do our part - in some cases this could mean men making way for women. This is the basic principle of affirmative action policies - it's about doing what we can to correct our historic mistakes. For it to work we must all play our part, and sometimes we must make small sacrifices for the greater good
- philonoist 8y ago
  That is not enough of a reason. Don't punish me for mistakes done by somebody in the past. Punish me for my mistakes alone. "Even if we're not actively discriminating against women now, bias still remains in this male-dominated industry." This rhetoric is just to confuse people. Any non-active discrimination removes the burden on those who are not facing the bias. Period. Getting equality by stepping over other's heads and pushing them down? Sorry, that is not equality. That is oppression. These non-active biases are something women have every right and power to overcome by themselves. They should not be served in platter. They should burden themselves to do so. "Therefore, it's necessary to do something in order to bring women back in, and we all have to do our part - in some cases this could mean men making way for women." Its funny how we write "we all have to do our part" only to not see women sacrifice anything in the end. The word "all" is clever way to escape this sexism against men. Also the word "small" downplays the sacrifices of men in the due process and assumes patronizing attitude in deciding the pains behind such sacrifices don't matter for men. If in order to support your livelihood, I have to kill my hunger, my opportunities, my chances, my support to family then you are part of the problem, not me. "...it's about doing what we can to correct our historic mistakes." Past is past. History remains and can never be corrected. It is the present that we should correct and see to it that there is no further active discrimination. I do think women should stop blaming others and put their efforts to the point of testing their limits instead of insulting men but I am slandered with 'victim blaming'. Ha! These people cannot make the whole world believe their perpetual victimization just so they can steal free affirmative action. Either prove your mettle and talent to get your money or get out. Studies have shown that women move away from STEM, both in studies and career as countries are more gender egalitarian. Countries with less egalitarian societies have more women in STEM[0]. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/countries-with-less-gender-equity-have-more-women-in-stem-huh/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/countries-with-l...
  - dang-pg-dang 8y ago
    That is not enough of a reason. Don't punish me for mistakes done by somebody in the past. Punish me for my mistakes alone. Ok. We're going to systematically remove all of the advantages you've had over others due to systematic discrimination. Your error was in not recognizing that you were trampling your fellow humans; but the good news is, when you feel discriminated against now, you'll know that it's a correction. Nothing against you, specifically.

iliketosleep 8y ago

> As a parent, it is also difficult to explain to my son, why my daughter would qualify for such a generous grant, but he would not... What explanation is there ? There are explanations, but whether they are valid or not is a matter of debate. Here is one possible explanation: Women have faced all kinds of discrimination which has, for the most part, kept them out of the industry. Even if we're not actively discriminating against women now, bias still remains in this male-dominated industry. Therefore, it's necessary to do something in order to bring women back in, and we all have to do our part - in some cases this could mean men making way for women. This is the basic principle of affirmative action policies - it's about doing what we can to correct our historic mistakes. For it to work we must all play our part, and sometimes we must make small sacrifices for the greater good

philonoist 8y ago
That is not enough of a reason. Don't punish me for mistakes done by somebody in the past. Punish me for my mistakes alone. "Even if we're not actively discriminating against women now, bias still remains in this male-dominated industry." This rhetoric is just to confuse people. Any non-active discrimination removes the burden on those who are not facing the bias. Period. Getting equality by stepping over other's heads and pushing them down? Sorry, that is not equality. That is oppression. These non-active biases are something women have every right and power to overcome by themselves. They should not be served in platter. They should burden themselves to do so. "Therefore, it's necessary to do something in order to bring women back in, and we all have to do our part - in some cases this could mean men making way for women." Its funny how we write "we all have to do our part" only to not see women sacrifice anything in the end. The word "all" is clever way to escape this sexism against men. Also the word "small" downplays the sacrifices of men in the due process and assumes patronizing attitude in deciding the pains behind such sacrifices don't matter for men. If in order to support your livelihood, I have to kill my hunger, my opportunities, my chances, my support to family then you are part of the problem, not me. "...it's about doing what we can to correct our historic mistakes." Past is past. History remains and can never be corrected. It is the present that we should correct and see to it that there is no further active discrimination. I do think women should stop blaming others and put their efforts to the point of testing their limits instead of insulting men but I am slandered with 'victim blaming'. Ha! These people cannot make the whole world believe their perpetual victimization just so they can steal free affirmative action. Either prove your mettle and talent to get your money or get out. Studies have shown that women move away from STEM, both in studies and career as countries are more gender egalitarian. Countries with less egalitarian societies have more women in STEM[0]. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/countries-with-less-gender-equity-have-more-women-in-stem-huh/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/countries-with-l...
- dang-pg-dang 8y ago
  That is not enough of a reason. Don't punish me for mistakes done by somebody in the past. Punish me for my mistakes alone. Ok. We're going to systematically remove all of the advantages you've had over others due to systematic discrimination. Your error was in not recognizing that you were trampling your fellow humans; but the good news is, when you feel discriminated against now, you'll know that it's a correction. Nothing against you, specifically.