I've scanned this thread and the other [1] and my reaction is this. In the Western world we are free to assemble in groups of like minded interests - publicly a

I've scanned this thread and the other [1] and my reaction is this. In the Western world we are free to assemble in groups of like minded interests - publicly and privately. If private organisations wish to have conferences or meetings aimed specifically at certain groups then that is their right, as is the case with YC's FFC. It's YC's money, they can spend it how they like, and decide who gets to attend or not. I see plenty of veiled and not so veiled accusations of positive discrimination, but you forget YC/pg already "discriminates" against sole founder startups. He also pretty much insists you move to SF if you accept a place on his/their startup treadmill. Annoying? Discrimination? Yes/No/Maybe, but it's his company, and I guess statistically for him sole/remote founders are much harder and costlier to work with than startups who are local and have 2+ founders. That's YC's choice as a private company operating in an interference free capitalist democracy such as the US. I might, if I was bloody minded, take issue at government trying to fund and run these Special Interest Group meetings without demanding an equivalent "man only" conference. But to be honest I don't, for various common sense reasons, and the obvious fact that in industry the number of males sitting at the top tables of companies far outweigh the number of women. The recent thirty to forty years of equality enshrined in law does not eradicate hundreds of years of inequality, we still have years of work to do with regards to gender and race equality. I think what the "outraged" HN crowd (which I liken to the UK Daily Mail "outraged of Little Upper Bottomly" types) forgets is that these special interest group conferences don't affect existing hiring practices. I'm heavily involved in hiring staff for our company, I do the technical screening calls and assess how well a candidate might or might not fit with our company, staff and goals. I don't really care if the person I'm hiring is in a "special interest group" and has been attending or promoting "Women Only" conferences or classes, all I care about is hiring staff based on the merits of skill, ability and commitment. There is a huge amount of "Reductio ad absurdum" in both these threads (and please note I am not accusing anyone of sexism), but I really wish some members of our community would try to gain a bit of perspective. Privately run conferences, focusing on particular gender or social groups are not the same as active positive discrimination (which I am vehemently against) when it comes to hiring/promotion in the workplace. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097326 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097326