5 ms·

"or every story you hear about investors behaving badly," Specifically with investors, how are you going to legislate against how someone feels about investing

"or every story you hear about investors behaving badly," Specifically with investors, how are you going to legislate against how someone feels about investing their own money? If they don't want to invest in a woman company, it's their right. "Why do I have to go to gender-specific investors? Our company is pretty gender agnostic, at this point." Investors are very fickle with their money. The gender-specific investor might have a higher rate of investing in women founded companies. You may not like this, but it may give you a higher chance. There are also investors that are biased against the type of company you have. Some refuse to invest in social networking companies. "When you’re a single mother, says Sheri Atwood, founder of SupportPay, it’s even tougher to be taken seriously" I don't think it's because you are a woman. An investor might think that you don't have the time and energy to spend 100% on your company, which is true if you have a child at home with nobody else but you. "They saw that my being a woman and my age was an asset" So you spend an entire article talking about how you don't want to be discriminated against because you are a woman..and then conclude that you only got an investment because you are a woman?! How about..they liked your product/company idea and you and think you will succeed?Investors talk money. They want to see an ROI. "Now, we’re in a time where someone says something horribly racist" Now we are in a time where you accidentally say something that is construed as racist, and the Twitter mob gets you fired. The Mozilla CEO even had to step down because he donated a few hundred dollars to a campaign he believed in 10 years ago. If I would have gotten someone fired at a christian owned company for donating to a pro-gay marriage fund, there would be outrage. It's outrageous to me that free speech is being eroded every day and the same people that write articles like this about discrimination support it, because it coincides with their beliefs.

sp332 12y ago
No one mentioned legislation. This is a cultural problem, not a legal problem.
justinpaulson 12y ago
> It's outrageous to me that free speech is being eroded every day and the same people that write articles like this about discrimination support it, because it coincides with their beliefs. Free speech is a right given by the government. It does not have anything to do with your employer firing you for making a racist remark. How have any of your examples expressed an erosion of freedom of speech? I see no mention of the government arresting anyone for their comments.
- streptomycin 12y ago
  Free speech is a right given by the government. That's not all it is. When you say "free speech" you mean "free speech with regards to government censorship", but many other people just mean "free speech" in general. Like, the ability to freely speak about something without being harshly punished for that speech, regardless of who does the punishing.
  - JoeAltmaier 12y ago
    Ok, but there is no civil right to that kind.
  - justinpaulson 12y ago
    If people mean "the ability to freely speak about something without being harshly punished for that speech, regardless of who does the punishing" when they say "free speech" then they have no idea what they are talking about, and they should be corrected. Such a thing does not exist, and it makes no sense. You can not expect to freely bad-mouth your employer or make remarks that go against an organization's beliefs without any repercussions from the employer or organization.
    - streptomycin 12y ago
      That's not what I meant to imply. I think the problem is that I wrote "something" and you are interpreting it as "literally everything". Do I have the freedom to tell my boss to go fuck himself without facing any consequence? Of course not. That doesn't mean there is no such concept as "free speech". I have the freedom to partake in many types of speech without fearing substantial retribution. Some forms of speech are restricted by the government, others are restricted by other things.
      - justinpaulson 12y ago
        There is a concept of "free speech" and it has nothing to do with your employer. It is a freedom guaranteed against violation from the government. That is all. Any other use of the term is inaccurate. If you mean to say employers should let you speak your mind, then say that, but don't equate it to "Free speech" because it is something totally different. And you DO have the freedom to tell your boss to go fuck himself. The government will not stop you and therefore you are free to do that. But, your boss has the freedom to fire you for saying that as well. You are misunderstanding what free speech, and freedom in general, is.
runj__ 12y ago
It's your right to invest in whatever you want, also to not do so, doesn't make it less wrong to do so because of a founders gender/race/something else that shouldn't matter. Part of free speech is also pointing out that people that are wrong are wrong. Shining light on a problem is not the same as demanding legislation.
- Zuider 12y ago
  Who needs legislation when you can dial a twitter mob?
pdabbadabba 12y ago
> Specifically with investors, how are you going to legislate against how someone feels about investing their own money? If they don't want to invest in a woman company, it's their right. I have the same intuition, but I'm not sure why. After all, you might have said the same thing about an employer who doesn't want to spend his own money on a woman's salary, etc. (And, of course, many have.) But that hasn't stopped us from passing and enforcing employment discrimination laws. I think that focusing on the investor's right to spend his money as he pleases is not the most fruitful way of analyzing the problem. It is undisputed that he has that "right," but history has illustrated that this right can/should be made to yield to overriding social ills. Does the situation of female tech founders compare to the broader problem of employment discrimination? My tentative answer is that it does in terms of pervasiveness, but may not have such a widespread and pernicious effect on the lives of all women that we should be comfortable interfering in private investment decisions in order to combat it.
PhasmaFelis 12y ago
> Specifically with investors, how are you going to legislate against how someone feels about investing their own money? If they don't want to invest in a woman company, it's their right. Who said anything about legislation? There's this bizarre equivalency that gets pulled out in these discussions where people seem to believe that anything legal must be moral and vice versa, and thus if I say something is morally wrong I must want it banned. People say and do a lot of shitty things that are (and should be) protected as free speech. That doesn't mean we should either ignore them or try to get them illegalized. The solution is to drag their shitty behavior into the light and let people see that it's a problem. As you've doubtless been informed many times, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from the social consequences of speech.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

sp332 12y ago

No one mentioned legislation. This is a cultural problem, not a legal problem.

justinpaulson 12y ago

> It's outrageous to me that free speech is being eroded every day and the same people that write articles like this about discrimination support it, because it coincides with their beliefs. Free speech is a right given by the government. It does not have anything to do with your employer firing you for making a racist remark. How have any of your examples expressed an erosion of freedom of speech? I see no mention of the government arresting anyone for their comments.

streptomycin 12y ago
Free speech is a right given by the government. That's not all it is. When you say "free speech" you mean "free speech with regards to government censorship", but many other people just mean "free speech" in general. Like, the ability to freely speak about something without being harshly punished for that speech, regardless of who does the punishing.
- JoeAltmaier 12y ago
  Ok, but there is no civil right to that kind.
- justinpaulson 12y ago
  If people mean "the ability to freely speak about something without being harshly punished for that speech, regardless of who does the punishing" when they say "free speech" then they have no idea what they are talking about, and they should be corrected. Such a thing does not exist, and it makes no sense. You can not expect to freely bad-mouth your employer or make remarks that go against an organization's beliefs without any repercussions from the employer or organization.
  - streptomycin 12y ago
    That's not what I meant to imply. I think the problem is that I wrote "something" and you are interpreting it as "literally everything". Do I have the freedom to tell my boss to go fuck himself without facing any consequence? Of course not. That doesn't mean there is no such concept as "free speech". I have the freedom to partake in many types of speech without fearing substantial retribution. Some forms of speech are restricted by the government, others are restricted by other things.
    - justinpaulson 12y ago
      There is a concept of "free speech" and it has nothing to do with your employer. It is a freedom guaranteed against violation from the government. That is all. Any other use of the term is inaccurate. If you mean to say employers should let you speak your mind, then say that, but don't equate it to "Free speech" because it is something totally different. And you DO have the freedom to tell your boss to go fuck himself. The government will not stop you and therefore you are free to do that. But, your boss has the freedom to fire you for saying that as well. You are misunderstanding what free speech, and freedom in general, is.

runj__ 12y ago

It's your right to invest in whatever you want, also to not do so, doesn't make it less wrong to do so because of a founders gender/race/something else that shouldn't matter. Part of free speech is also pointing out that people that are wrong are wrong. Shining light on a problem is not the same as demanding legislation.

Zuider 12y ago
Who needs legislation when you can dial a twitter mob?

pdabbadabba 12y ago

> Specifically with investors, how are you going to legislate against how someone feels about investing their own money? If they don't want to invest in a woman company, it's their right. I have the same intuition, but I'm not sure why. After all, you might have said the same thing about an employer who doesn't want to spend his own money on a woman's salary, etc. (And, of course, many have.) But that hasn't stopped us from passing and enforcing employment discrimination laws. I think that focusing on the investor's right to spend his money as he pleases is not the most fruitful way of analyzing the problem. It is undisputed that he has that "right," but history has illustrated that this right can/should be made to yield to overriding social ills. Does the situation of female tech founders compare to the broader problem of employment discrimination? My tentative answer is that it does in terms of pervasiveness, but may not have such a widespread and pernicious effect on the lives of all women that we should be comfortable interfering in private investment decisions in order to combat it.

PhasmaFelis 12y ago

> Specifically with investors, how are you going to legislate against how someone feels about investing their own money? If they don't want to invest in a woman company, it's their right. Who said anything about legislation? There's this bizarre equivalency that gets pulled out in these discussions where people seem to believe that anything legal must be moral and vice versa, and thus if I say something is morally wrong I must want it banned. People say and do a lot of shitty things that are (and should be) protected as free speech. That doesn't mean we should either ignore them or try to get them illegalized. The solution is to drag their shitty behavior into the light and let people see that it's a problem. As you've doubtless been informed many times, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from the social consequences of speech.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]