4 ms·

You're right in a way in that it should be gender neutral. But the problem is there is far more encouragement towards men being entrepreneurs (especially in th

You're right in a way in that it should be gender neutral. But the problem is there is far more encouragement towards men being entrepreneurs (especially in the technology space) while women typically get discouraged to do things outside of the stereotypical "female role". A mechanism to help correct this is to cater more content for women versus men. It won't correct it, it's not perfect and I think we'd all rather not care about gender, race, etc but the reality of today is if you're not a white male you're discouraged in many environments from attempting the same thing.

belorn 12y ago
The problem with that line of thinking is the singular focus on stereotypical male profession, while ignoring gender distribution in highly sought after female professions. It might come as a surprise, but most of the top 10 most sought after professions (based on the applications for university level classes) are female dominated. Men get equally discouraged to do those things outside of the stereotypical "male professions", and there is no mechanism to help correct this. The idea to create male only conferences, universities or network groups for psychologists and veterinaries is seen as a bad joke that no one would ever take seriously, yet those professions has similar or significant worse gender ratios than that for entrepreneurs or technology professionals. I suspect that we would see much less critique of gender equality mechanisms if those mechanisms were equally used in handling both male and female stereotypes. The result otherwise seems only to reinforce the gender stereotype of women as victims, and ignoring the underlying problem of gender stereotypes discouraged people from picking their own destiny.
- BinaryIdiot 12y ago
  You're right and my comment was only directed to the topic at hand which is a stereotypical male profession. Naturally other professions may need a different solution to their problem. Regardless I don't think this is something that is going to be resolved anytime soon.
- Anechoic 12y ago
  The idea to create male only conferences, universities or network groups for psychologists and veterinaries is seen as a bad joke that no one would ever take seriously, That is absolutely false. Yes, there are a number of professions dominated by females (the ones you mention as well as school teachers and nursing) and there are numerous examples of support groups, outreach groups, and scholarship programs that are trying to attract males students and applicants. You are looking for a double standard where none exist.
  - belorn 12y ago
    Conferences are social events so linking to the numerous examples should be an easy task. I could not find male only conferences for psychologists or veterinaries using google. Actually, for any of the top 10 most sought professions, I could not find any examples of support groups, outreach groups, and scholarship programs directed at males. school teachers and nursing has it, but those are not even close to the top 10 list. But feel free to prove me wrong. please link one of those numerous examples.
    - Anechoic 12y ago
      Here's two. Sorry I don't have time to find more right now. In any event, you admit that outreach exists for female-dominated fields, that would appear to go against the notion that [support] groups for other female dominated fields would be "seen as a bad joke that no one would ever take seriously." Veterinary outreach to men (and other minorities): http://www.vtnews.vt.edu/articles/2014/04/041014-vetmed-diversity.html http://www.vtnews.vt.edu/articles/2014/04/041014-vetmed-dive... https://www.vet.purdue.edu/diversity/files/documents/DiversityPlan2.pdf https://www.vet.purdue.edu/diversity/files/documents/Diversi...
      - belorn 12y ago
        We were talking about male-only conferences, and those links are about diversity outreach programs that focus on African-American, Asian, Hispanic, Latino, LGBT and males (listed in that order on both links). The very first successful example they bring up is an African-American woman. There exist diversity programs in almost all professions. What does not exist is conferences, universities or network groups that only allow one group in the name of diversity. The linked example are what people that dislike affirmative action points at as good example of outreach in stark contrast to actions which only invite one group and exclude everyone else from participation. But maybe if you had more time, you could locate all those numerous male-only conferences.
logfromblammo 12y ago
You are assuming that discrimination in favor of males and discrimination in favor of females are like vectors that are parallel and opposite in direction. Under that assumption, overall equality could be achieved by selecting and titrating an appropriate magnitude for your own bias, based on the observed bias in the system. I believe the assumption is flawed. There is a perpendicular component to those vectors, such that any decision to discriminate, at any magnitude, can result in a decrease in fairness for everyone. Thus, the only way to ensure that you are not actually making things worse is to not discriminate based on irrelevant factors like founder gender at all. If you want to show off the experiences of women founders in YC, make your random sample size large enough that several of them will be represented. Narrowing the pool by eliminating one gender or the other is cheating. So adding "here's 40 male founders" would actually just be making it worse. The only way to make it better would be to include a representative sampling of founders, chosen without using gender as a consideration. But the article was motivated by the same premise--that opposing biases can cancel, so that is why it was created with an obvious gender bias. I doubt the intent was malicious, but the results may not be as expected.

belorn 12y ago

The problem with that line of thinking is the singular focus on stereotypical male profession, while ignoring gender distribution in highly sought after female professions. It might come as a surprise, but most of the top 10 most sought after professions (based on the applications for university level classes) are female dominated. Men get equally discouraged to do those things outside of the stereotypical "male professions", and there is no mechanism to help correct this. The idea to create male only conferences, universities or network groups for psychologists and veterinaries is seen as a bad joke that no one would ever take seriously, yet those professions has similar or significant worse gender ratios than that for entrepreneurs or technology professionals. I suspect that we would see much less critique of gender equality mechanisms if those mechanisms were equally used in handling both male and female stereotypes. The result otherwise seems only to reinforce the gender stereotype of women as victims, and ignoring the underlying problem of gender stereotypes discouraged people from picking their own destiny.

BinaryIdiot 12y ago
You're right and my comment was only directed to the topic at hand which is a stereotypical male profession. Naturally other professions may need a different solution to their problem. Regardless I don't think this is something that is going to be resolved anytime soon.
Anechoic 12y ago
The idea to create male only conferences, universities or network groups for psychologists and veterinaries is seen as a bad joke that no one would ever take seriously, That is absolutely false. Yes, there are a number of professions dominated by females (the ones you mention as well as school teachers and nursing) and there are numerous examples of support groups, outreach groups, and scholarship programs that are trying to attract males students and applicants. You are looking for a double standard where none exist.
- belorn 12y ago
  Conferences are social events so linking to the numerous examples should be an easy task. I could not find male only conferences for psychologists or veterinaries using google. Actually, for any of the top 10 most sought professions, I could not find any examples of support groups, outreach groups, and scholarship programs directed at males. school teachers and nursing has it, but those are not even close to the top 10 list. But feel free to prove me wrong. please link one of those numerous examples.
  - Anechoic 12y ago
    Here's two. Sorry I don't have time to find more right now. In any event, you admit that outreach exists for female-dominated fields, that would appear to go against the notion that [support] groups for other female dominated fields would be "seen as a bad joke that no one would ever take seriously." Veterinary outreach to men (and other minorities): http://www.vtnews.vt.edu/articles/2014/04/041014-vetmed-diversity.html http://www.vtnews.vt.edu/articles/2014/04/041014-vetmed-dive... https://www.vet.purdue.edu/diversity/files/documents/DiversityPlan2.pdf https://www.vet.purdue.edu/diversity/files/documents/Diversi...
    - belorn 12y ago
      We were talking about male-only conferences, and those links are about diversity outreach programs that focus on African-American, Asian, Hispanic, Latino, LGBT and males (listed in that order on both links). The very first successful example they bring up is an African-American woman. There exist diversity programs in almost all professions. What does not exist is conferences, universities or network groups that only allow one group in the name of diversity. The linked example are what people that dislike affirmative action points at as good example of outreach in stark contrast to actions which only invite one group and exclude everyone else from participation. But maybe if you had more time, you could locate all those numerous male-only conferences.

logfromblammo 12y ago

You are assuming that discrimination in favor of males and discrimination in favor of females are like vectors that are parallel and opposite in direction. Under that assumption, overall equality could be achieved by selecting and titrating an appropriate magnitude for your own bias, based on the observed bias in the system. I believe the assumption is flawed. There is a perpendicular component to those vectors, such that any decision to discriminate, at any magnitude, can result in a decrease in fairness for everyone. Thus, the only way to ensure that you are not actually making things worse is to not discriminate based on irrelevant factors like founder gender at all. If you want to show off the experiences of women founders in YC, make your random sample size large enough that several of them will be represented. Narrowing the pool by eliminating one gender or the other is cheating. So adding "here's 40 male founders" would actually just be making it worse. The only way to make it better would be to include a representative sampling of founders, chosen without using gender as a consideration. But the article was motivated by the same premise--that opposing biases can cancel, so that is why it was created with an obvious gender bias. I doubt the intent was malicious, but the results may not be as expected.