4 ms·
Plenty of male-led businesses also turned out to be scams, and yet no one goes 'that guy looks sharp, but he is male so seems suspicious'. Which only proofs how
by FranzFerdiNaN 26d ago
Plenty of male-led businesses also turned out to be scams, and yet no one goes 'that guy looks sharp, but he is male so seems suspicious'. Which only proofs how deep sexism is rooted.
- mvdwoord 26d agoNo one markets ‘male founder’ as a reason to trust the business. Once gender is framed as a virtue, people start asking whether that claim actually means anything.
- Applejinx 26d agoThe government does! At least right now in the United States. And yeah, I think it's reasonable for people to start asking.
- xyzelement 25d agoIs there an example of this that you could reference?
- xyzelement 26d agoThe point is that anything subject to hype is also at a greater risk of being a scam. If we were desperate for red-headed founders then the risk of any given red-head riding the wave of hype rather than substance is higher than at baseline. That's the point being made. Your comment about male led misses it because there's currently no hype about male led. Though I can see it coming back.
- manphone 26d agoThat’s only true in the public Zeitgeist, there is a huge preference among portions of the workforce for male leadership stated or unstated. This is not a good thing. I literally worked with a guy who was about to quit because a woman would boss him around and she was about 10,000 times as qualified as he was
- Mainan_Tagonist 26d agothen again, how good a manager would she have made if she was bossing around colleagues to the point of them quitting? Management is not just about qualification, it's also about the human aspect. I have seen enough toxic femineity at work to say it is actually a thing, on par with toxic masculinity.
- benzible 26d agoOr perhaps this guy perceived normal, appropriate management that he would have been perfectly fine with had it come from a man as “bossy” when it came from a woman.
- Mainan_Tagonist 26d agoor perhaps she was just a toxic colleague, with tons of experience in a narrow field that he did not have and making colleagues leave was just her thing. Vote me down all you want, women are just as capable as men in every way, including the wrong, toxic ones
- manphone 26d agoAll of you misread would and put your own spin on it. She wasn’t even hired yet, and he had never met her.
- micromacrofoot 26d ago[flagged]
- tmtvl 26d agoThing is, SBF, Tate, and Paul aren't old (well, depends on your frame of reference I suppose); so even discriminating on age wouldn't help you much.
- micromacrofoot 26d agoindeed one could find exceptions to every rule
- theopsimist 26d agoYou a vc?
- 3748488448 26d agoheh
- azan_ 26d agoThen you are sexist and racist, nothing to be proud of!
- micromacrofoot 26d agofunny that no one said that to the parent comment that blindly speculated that holmes caused more sexism simply for being a woman yet bring up the ruling class and that gets called out for sexism despite the endless string of fraud cases covered by those demographics
- azan_ 26d agoI’m sure that if parent comment said that he doesn’t trust black women he’d get called out.
- Eddy_Viscosity2 26d agoScamming as a male can actually improve your reputation. Donald Trump is currently the president of the united states despite years of ripping people off. If Bernie Madoff could run as a republican senator, I'd given him decent odds to win.
- philipallstar 26d ago> If Bernie Madoff could run as a republican senator, I'd given him decent odds to win. And yet somehow he - a man - is in jail. A jail built by men, condemned by a justice system designed by men to lock bad men up.
- Aaargh20318 26d agoBecause Madoff scammed rich people. You can get away with a lot if you scam the poor. Not so much when you target the wealthy.
- philipallstar 26d agoThat makes no sense within the topic of conversation.
- shermantanktop 26d agoHere’s how I think it makes sense: accountability for unethical behavior arrives via more or less direct routes depending on who you are. The more you look like a high-status leader, the longer it will take, and the more likely it arrives as a fine or a suspended sentence followed by an eventual redemption story published in the New Yorker or equivalent. But targeting other high-status people ejects you from the white glove treatment.
- philipallstar 26d agoI don't think it's that simple. If Bernie Sanders were an unknown, but had stabbed Iryna Zarutska on video and walked off saying he got that white girl, I'm pretty sure he would've still gone to jail and been subject to the death penalty. It's more than high-status people generally don't do that sort of thing, because you probably didn't get where you were if you were that unintelligent, violent, and impulsive. In fact, in that exact case the chap who did it was treated far too leniently by the justice system and they've un-"Progressived" the law in some ways to make it so he would never be able to do that again. Which is progress. Or at least the undoing of Progress.
- philipallstar 26d ago> Which only proofs how deep sexism is rooted. Only if you're determined to look for it. No one promotes companies, or gives special grants, or runs special funding groups, or special networking breakfasts, for men. It's only for women. Women are currently viewed as intrinsically a good thing to run a company, and it's a problem if your company has fewer than 50% women. It's all about identity and not competence. She rode that wave. Men ride other waves, but specifically not that one. Unless you count trans women in sports. Or Tim Walz.
- Grombobulous 26d agoI regret engaging, comment removed.
- philipallstar 26d agoEDIT: luckily I quoted the things I was replying to, because the above poster drastically edited his/her post, just resorting finally to namecalling. > Even this “trans women in sports” issue you brought up for no reason is deeply rooted misogyny in action. As soon as someone becomes a woman they are a second-class citizen. Claiming this does not make it so. I said nothing misogynistic. You can't just claim this any more and expect people to believe you, because who would lie about a thing like that? People now know that someone such as yourself would definitely lie, and so they will check for themselves. You need evidence. > Case in point: there has been zero outrage about trans men. If you looked at a trans man you’d never suggest that a person who looks like this [1] should compete in women’s sports. You’d probably never even realize they were trans unless you were specifically told. That's because a lot of the aim of society is to protect women, in various ways. So men who claim to be women who can beat women in women-only sports competitions, or can go in their changing rooms or bathrooms means women are not being afforded the protections we have tried to give them. That's why we have different bathrooms, changing rooms, and sports contests in the first place. No one cares about a woman entering a men's sporting contest, because a) she almost certainly will never get anywhere and b) if she did, it would be an amazing achievement, and would be men losing out, which very few people would care about. > Just so you are factually and scientifically informed, when trans women transition, they are taking hormone replacement therapy that blocks testosterone. It tends to make them significantly worse at sports as a result. No, you are misinforming here. They don't have to do anything. "Self ID" exists. That's why a male rapist claiming to be a woman got put in a woman's prison in Scotland[0]. Also, for those who do take hormones, hormones don't help with lung capacity, size, Q angle, bone density, and all the many other things that make men better at sport. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isla_Bryson_case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isla_Bryson_case
- JuniperMesos 26d agoNo one thinks that the number of males participating in business is too low, and that it is socially-beneficial and morally-important to promote male-run businesses.
- OroPla 26d agoIt's just pattern recognition at work. None of the male-led scams have "being male" as a talking point trying to sell the scam, so it's about as notable as a scam founder wearing black shoes. But now "female led" has entered the conversation as something to recognize a scam by. Whenever it comes up again this memory will lit up and make people wary.
- catchnear4321 26d agoThe patterns did not form themselves. It’s rarely “just pattern recognition at work.”
- amiga386 26d agoScammers/predators/grifters/sociopaths will adopt any disguise and say whatever needs to be said that gets the mark to fall for it. Are priests the pinnacle of trust in your society? You now get a lot of scammers pretending to be (or actually becoming) priests. Are sagely tech leaders announcing the latest new thing on their thought-leadership blogs the way to get investment money? You now have 99% of LinkedIn's membership. Is there a push to reduce qualifications in order to bring in people who don't historically enter your profession? No matter how kind or society-changing you're being, scammers will see that you're doing that, and will abuse that mercilessly. They likewise bilk people who oppose that ideology, and will gladly present themselves as collecting for disadvantaged white boys, before running off with the money. Anything that turns your brain off, whether it's tugging your heartstrings, endorsing your ideology, whatever, scammers are ready to take advantage. You don't have to harden your hearts, but you do have to engage your brain and apply suitable skepticism and scrutiny of their claims.
- catchnear4321 26d agoAppreciate you taking the time to engage, unlike those that eye rolled and down voted. (They don’t like admitting their participation in pattern formation it would seem.)
- lelanthran 26d ago
- deleted 26d ago[deleted]
- Hilliard_Ohiooo 26d ago[dead]
- Gravityloss 26d agohttps://xkcd.com/385/ https://xkcd.com/385/ This sort of thing is really hard to avoid. If you've ever spent time as somehow very different in a social setting, you can see this happening all the time. Even in positive ways.
- lelanthran 26d ago> Plenty of male-led businesses also turned out to be scams, and yet no one goes 'that guy looks sharp, but he is male so seems suspicious'. The scam was sold on her gender ("successful female entrepreneur"), so unfortunately it's going to be part of the heuristic. Male-led scams aren't sold on the gender of the scammer; gender is completely ignored (No one describes those as "a successful male entrepreneur"). Unfortunately, the gender sale was a big part of the scam. I'm looking at many male-led scams, and they did not sell it based on the gender of the scammer. > Which only proofs how deep sexism is rooted. No, it only proves that you have ideology deeply rooted. I believe you see sexism everywhere. The type of person you just want to say "oookay, huh, is sexism here, in the room with us?"
- kelseyfrog 26d agoI'd hesitate to jump to the conclusion that Holmes had editorial control over the way journalists portrayed her. The idea that a 'young woman overcoming the odds' story sells more than 'young man overcoming the odds' doesn't take any leaps of faith to explain. That doesn't mean that Holmes didn't benefit from such coverage, she obviously did, but to call it part of the scam as if it was under her control seems a bit far fetched.
- FireBeyond 25d agoIf you read a lot of the in depth reporting, and what came up at trial, Holmes and Bagwani themselves and their PR team pushed it heavily. The media lapped it up but she was fully "leaned in".
- expedition32 25d agoIt wouldn't have worked if we lived in a world were start ups being led by women was normal and investors didn't think with their dicks. But alas.
- lelanthran 25d agoIt wouldn't have worked if people weren't biased in favour of women.