Why Aren't There More Female Entrepreneurs?(bothsid.es)
bothsid.es
Why Aren't There More Female Entrepreneurs?
http://bothsid.es/G5Y
4 comments
[deleted]
I think the article you're referring to is called "Is There Anything Good About Men", and has been submitted to Hacker News multiple times. Even though it doesn't have anything to do with technology it's one of the most insightful articles I've found here.
Here's a link to the article: http://denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm
(Note, I think this location copied the article from http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm, but I find the formatting on the first link is a bit nicer and easier to read)
If you want to browse the comments on previous submissions to HN, you can just follow the links on HNSearch: http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=anything+go...
Here's a link to the article: http://denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm
(Note, I think this location copied the article from http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm, but I find the formatting on the first link is a bit nicer and easier to read)
If you want to browse the comments on previous submissions to HN, you can just follow the links on HNSearch: http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=anything+go...
Perhaps part of the problem is that, if you are the rare female wanna-be entrepreneur like I am, most of your co-founder possibilities are male. In an ideal world, this would not matter. But in practice, it can be a problem. For example, a coworker and I met up outside of work several times to see if he and I could successfully build some sort of project together outside of our main jobs. I was 26 and female. He was older and had a family. Something about hanging out outside of work together in the evenings without our spouses was just ... awkward. His wife was supposedly fine with it, but I have to wonder if she really was. There was a whole layer of weirdness about it that just wouldn't have existed if we'd been the same sex. It didn't work out in the end, but for reasons other than the social awkwardness. Still, the unusual nature of our relationship didn't help matters. I think that if I were to start a company, it would probably have to be with another woman.
Interestingly, the author of the blog post also says (in the comments) that he will not have 1-on-1 dinners with women because he doesn't want to make his wife uncomfortable!
Suster is playing catch with a bottle of nitroglycerin and doesn't see the danger.
It's DANGEROUS. I know: She DIED.
Warm advice to all concerned, girls, women, fathers, husbands, etc.:
Take it easy. Don't push it. At the first sign of problems, BACK UP.
Yes, there is an E. Fromm statement:
"Men and women deserve equal respect as persons but are not the same."
He continues with an explanation: During the French Revolution, Western Civilization got the idea that any difference was a threat of injustice and, thus, worked to eliminate as many differences as possible.
But, I warn you and urge you to assume:
Mother Nature was there long, long before Mark Suster, feminism, etc. and has deep defenses we do not want to encounter.
Or in simple terms, women who were really good at what men were good at are mostly not our ancestors.
What was good for Mark Suster's mother and Fred Wilson's wife and some other women I can list need NOT hold for your sister, wife, or daughter.
If your wife wants to spend time with your daughter talking and reading about people, being sensitive, sympathetic, and empathetic, trying hard to fit in and get praise, acceptance, and approval, building emotional intelligence, etc. and your daughter wants to play with dolls, help her mother with 'women's work', have vicarious emotional experiences reading stories about people, be pretty, meek, and sweet and avoid technical and mechanical topics, football, baseball, and basketball, then LET IT BE.
If she wants to major in art history, performing arts, theater, literature, the psychology and sociology of child development, etc. instead of mathematics, physical science, engineering, or business, then encourage her in her wishes and let it be.
Sure, she is likely on a path to a career with low pay and will need a good husband to take care of her. Right. Sorry 'bout that.
But, trust me, that's better than having her pursue some direction in 'men's work' where she keeps failing and finally dies trying.
It's not nice to try to fool Mother Nature. Warning: Don't try.
The goals of feminism and 'equality' go way back. There has long been 'tension' there. Don't expect the tension to go away. But, still, don't assume that the goals of feminism and 'equality' are available for your sister, wife, or daughter.
The assumption that women are just like men and can do just what men do except for the most obvious physiological differences just represents a potentially fatal lack of understanding about women. Sorry 'bout that.
In particular, in much of K-12, the girls, especially when the teachers are women, in academic performance commonly knock the socks off the boys. And in some fields in college, the young women retain some strong advantages over young men. But do not assume that even the very best performances in K-12 and college, e.g., Valedictorian, 'summa cum laude', PBK, mean that she can, of course, be 'equal' doing 'men's work' in the world of work. The real situation is MUCH more complicated than that.
If she wants to try, okay. But if there are problems, fairly quickly just assume that Mother Nature is getting her way and BACK UP.
It's DANGEROUS. I know: She DIED.
Warm advice to all concerned, girls, women, fathers, husbands, etc.:
Take it easy. Don't push it. At the first sign of problems, BACK UP.
Yes, there is an E. Fromm statement:
"Men and women deserve equal respect as persons but are not the same."
He continues with an explanation: During the French Revolution, Western Civilization got the idea that any difference was a threat of injustice and, thus, worked to eliminate as many differences as possible.
But, I warn you and urge you to assume:
Mother Nature was there long, long before Mark Suster, feminism, etc. and has deep defenses we do not want to encounter.
Or in simple terms, women who were really good at what men were good at are mostly not our ancestors.
What was good for Mark Suster's mother and Fred Wilson's wife and some other women I can list need NOT hold for your sister, wife, or daughter.
If your wife wants to spend time with your daughter talking and reading about people, being sensitive, sympathetic, and empathetic, trying hard to fit in and get praise, acceptance, and approval, building emotional intelligence, etc. and your daughter wants to play with dolls, help her mother with 'women's work', have vicarious emotional experiences reading stories about people, be pretty, meek, and sweet and avoid technical and mechanical topics, football, baseball, and basketball, then LET IT BE.
If she wants to major in art history, performing arts, theater, literature, the psychology and sociology of child development, etc. instead of mathematics, physical science, engineering, or business, then encourage her in her wishes and let it be.
Sure, she is likely on a path to a career with low pay and will need a good husband to take care of her. Right. Sorry 'bout that.
But, trust me, that's better than having her pursue some direction in 'men's work' where she keeps failing and finally dies trying.
It's not nice to try to fool Mother Nature. Warning: Don't try.
The goals of feminism and 'equality' go way back. There has long been 'tension' there. Don't expect the tension to go away. But, still, don't assume that the goals of feminism and 'equality' are available for your sister, wife, or daughter.
The assumption that women are just like men and can do just what men do except for the most obvious physiological differences just represents a potentially fatal lack of understanding about women. Sorry 'bout that.
In particular, in much of K-12, the girls, especially when the teachers are women, in academic performance commonly knock the socks off the boys. And in some fields in college, the young women retain some strong advantages over young men. But do not assume that even the very best performances in K-12 and college, e.g., Valedictorian, 'summa cum laude', PBK, mean that she can, of course, be 'equal' doing 'men's work' in the world of work. The real situation is MUCH more complicated than that.
If she wants to try, okay. But if there are problems, fairly quickly just assume that Mother Nature is getting her way and BACK UP.
1. Women tend to have more intimate social networks than men. (Fewer people, stronger connections).
2. In almost every aspect of life, women tend to deviate less from the mean. For better and often for worse, men are bigger risk takers.
This second point I find really interesting. Lots of statistical gender differences can be explained by this one fact. Apparently, if you plot male and female behavioural patterns on just about any scale (income, crime, exam marks, etc), women cluster around the mean more than men.
Some of the effects of this:
- There are more men in prison.
- More men run big companies.
- Statistically, girls do better at high school. This is because the dropout guys bring the mean mark down more than the high achievers bring it up.
The best evolutionary justification I've heard is that humans were polygamous for large periods of our evolution. In a society where the top blokes got all the babes, it made a lot of sense to be a big risk taker. -- How else do you compete with attention from war heroes?
There was no benefit to risktaking behaviour in women because most women would reproduce anyway.