Female Founders Conference 2015 applications are open(blog.ycombinator.com)
blog.ycombinator.com
Female Founders Conference 2015 applications are open
http://blog.ycombinator.com/female-founders-conference-2015-applications-are-open
90 comments
The problem with using exclusion in order to solve social problems is that sooner or later the group need to start hating others in order to validate a continuation of the exclusion.
A extremely related issue is indeed how African Americans are treated in American. The Black Panther Party was a reaction to racism in the police (In 1966, only 16 of Oakland's 661 police officers were African American) in the same way that women exclusive events are a reaction to sexism and gender ratio in IT.
I understand that using exclusion is a simple method in order create a environment where a minority groups feel more included. It also source for hate, tribe mentality and radicalization. When people like me criticize such methods, it simply because the benefits do not seem to validate the high cost.
A extremely related issue is indeed how African Americans are treated in American. The Black Panther Party was a reaction to racism in the police (In 1966, only 16 of Oakland's 661 police officers were African American) in the same way that women exclusive events are a reaction to sexism and gender ratio in IT.
I understand that using exclusion is a simple method in order create a environment where a minority groups feel more included. It also source for hate, tribe mentality and radicalization. When people like me criticize such methods, it simply because the benefits do not seem to validate the high cost.
That's a really interesting comment, and I think you're correct. Look at feminism today vs. back when it was actually relevant. Now, since it can't credibly be argued that women are oppressed in Western nations, it's turned into a movement about hating men and oppressing them.
> The problem with using exclusion in order to solve social problems is that sooner or later the group need to start hating others in order to validate a continuation of the exclusion.
I think this is a matter of perspective. When a certain section of a population (50% in this case!) is passively or actively discouraged from participation, I don't view an event like this as exclusion of the majority but as radical inclusion of the minority.
YCombinator plays a significant role in the community around tech entrepreneurship and, most importantly, how that community is portrayed to the rest of the world. I don't see how this relates to the Black Panthers which were started, as you say, as a response to institutional racism. If I were a gambling man, I would bet that the Black Panthers would have had much more of a cultural impact than they did if they were born out of, and were actively supported, by the same institutions whose behavior they fought against.
Furthermore, humanity's tribal instincts aren't inherently bad and often they serve a useful purpose. Who here hasn't band together with like minded individuals for support whens faced with adversity? The problem arises when that tribalism is used to put down other 'tribes' which I do not think is the intention here.
I think this is a matter of perspective. When a certain section of a population (50% in this case!) is passively or actively discouraged from participation, I don't view an event like this as exclusion of the majority but as radical inclusion of the minority.
YCombinator plays a significant role in the community around tech entrepreneurship and, most importantly, how that community is portrayed to the rest of the world. I don't see how this relates to the Black Panthers which were started, as you say, as a response to institutional racism. If I were a gambling man, I would bet that the Black Panthers would have had much more of a cultural impact than they did if they were born out of, and were actively supported, by the same institutions whose behavior they fought against.
Furthermore, humanity's tribal instincts aren't inherently bad and often they serve a useful purpose. Who here hasn't band together with like minded individuals for support whens faced with adversity? The problem arises when that tribalism is used to put down other 'tribes' which I do not think is the intention here.
You don't view it as an exclusion of anyone but as inclusion of a minority. Here I disagree, and I do so based on YCombinator previous statements.
"the go-to place where women can speak honestly with each other, deliberately away from the male gender".
If you think a person saying that statement is all about inclusion and not exclusion, I suggest a test. Use such statements about people around you and see how they react. If you are married, tell your partner that you want to go to a party with friends, deliberately away from that person. If they react happily and thank you for being inclusive with your friends then its clearly shown that this is all about being inclusive.
"the go-to place where women can speak honestly with each other, deliberately away from the male gender".
If you think a person saying that statement is all about inclusion and not exclusion, I suggest a test. Use such statements about people around you and see how they react. If you are married, tell your partner that you want to go to a party with friends, deliberately away from that person. If they react happily and thank you for being inclusive with your friends then its clearly shown that this is all about being inclusive.
> Some people like that, but for lots of people it's hard. Personally, as an introvert, I'd hate to have everyone in the room looking at me the second I enter the room, all the time.
If in 2014 you are still feeling different for a __color__, I think the problem is more on you than others.
I'm not saying that racism or things like that don't exist. That is another thing.
I'm saying that really I'm pretty annoyed when I read these things. So what I'm Italian and I'm always the only Italian in the room, and so what?
Also, we want the same sex thing? What if we do Only Man Conferences? ? How much bad press will that get?
We want to be all equal? So what if a site of the weight of oKcupid will be like okWhiteCupid as this: www.blackpeoplemeet.com
Would be fun to read on hacker news: "Ok Cupid" now becomes only for whites. But if we want to be really equal no one should be upset right?
--
Long thing...
I'm sayin' that while I'm for the parity of things and equality in general I just see most of them just taking advantage of being a minority to complain when things gets wrong.
As far I can tell you, mostly in my day to day life I don't see this white male dominance. I never judged someone just from the color or for being a girl, gay or whatever could be.
I'm pretty sure that is the same for most of us.
I'm not saying that there aren't problems about that.
TL;DR; humans seems to like to create problems (on both sides).
NOTE: I know is not really female only
NOTE 2: After the down-vote please explain.
If in 2014 you are still feeling different for a __color__, I think the problem is more on you than others.
I'm not saying that racism or things like that don't exist. That is another thing.
I'm saying that really I'm pretty annoyed when I read these things. So what I'm Italian and I'm always the only Italian in the room, and so what?
Also, we want the same sex thing? What if we do Only Man Conferences? ? How much bad press will that get?
We want to be all equal? So what if a site of the weight of oKcupid will be like okWhiteCupid as this: www.blackpeoplemeet.com
Would be fun to read on hacker news: "Ok Cupid" now becomes only for whites. But if we want to be really equal no one should be upset right?
--
Long thing...
I'm sayin' that while I'm for the parity of things and equality in general I just see most of them just taking advantage of being a minority to complain when things gets wrong.
As far I can tell you, mostly in my day to day life I don't see this white male dominance. I never judged someone just from the color or for being a girl, gay or whatever could be.
I'm pretty sure that is the same for most of us.
I'm not saying that there aren't problems about that.
TL;DR; humans seems to like to create problems (on both sides).
NOTE: I know is not really female only
NOTE 2: After the down-vote please explain.
>> So what I'm Italian and I'm always the only Italian in the room, and so what?
>> If in 2014 you are still feeling different for a __color__, I think the problem is more on you than others.
The thing is.. you're right that it's fucking ridiculous that people are so judgmental and mean for a __color__, and that __they__ have a problem. But the fact that matters is that when you're the one being judged and mistreated every day, it doesn't really matter if they're right or not, it hurts and it's frustrating.
>> Also, we want the same sex thing? What if we do Only Man Conferences? ? How much bad press will that get?
That's a whole different subject. The point is, why would you do a man-only conference? Is it because you really care about having only men in there? Or because that's a way to (passive-aggressively) express your opinion against how stupid you think feminism is?
>> I just see most of them just taking advantage of being a minority to complain when things gets wrong.
I see what you mean, and maybe it's true in rare occasions. But more often than not, for someone to publicly talk about an issue, it's something important to them. Maybe not to you, but to them.
As a stupid example, it really pisses me off when people are disturbing me when I try to hack. I lose all my productivity and I feel like I wasted my day. But for them, they don't care.. they don't understand, they're just chatting about the weather or whatever. Unless I take the time to explain to them why it bothers me, they won't get it.
So, maybe when you see the other gender complaining you think they're annoying, or find excuses, or are abusing their minority. But in practice, I'd recommend paying close attention to what they say because it's not about what you think, it's about how you (or someone else) just hurt them without even knowing it.
>> I never judged someone just from the color or for being a girl, gay or whatever could be.
What if I told you that your post is extremely cruel for someone struggling with racial or gender harassment?
>> I'm pretty sure that is the same for most of us.
I wish.
>> If in 2014 you are still feeling different for a __color__, I think the problem is more on you than others.
The thing is.. you're right that it's fucking ridiculous that people are so judgmental and mean for a __color__, and that __they__ have a problem. But the fact that matters is that when you're the one being judged and mistreated every day, it doesn't really matter if they're right or not, it hurts and it's frustrating.
>> Also, we want the same sex thing? What if we do Only Man Conferences? ? How much bad press will that get?
That's a whole different subject. The point is, why would you do a man-only conference? Is it because you really care about having only men in there? Or because that's a way to (passive-aggressively) express your opinion against how stupid you think feminism is?
>> I just see most of them just taking advantage of being a minority to complain when things gets wrong.
I see what you mean, and maybe it's true in rare occasions. But more often than not, for someone to publicly talk about an issue, it's something important to them. Maybe not to you, but to them.
As a stupid example, it really pisses me off when people are disturbing me when I try to hack. I lose all my productivity and I feel like I wasted my day. But for them, they don't care.. they don't understand, they're just chatting about the weather or whatever. Unless I take the time to explain to them why it bothers me, they won't get it.
So, maybe when you see the other gender complaining you think they're annoying, or find excuses, or are abusing their minority. But in practice, I'd recommend paying close attention to what they say because it's not about what you think, it's about how you (or someone else) just hurt them without even knowing it.
>> I never judged someone just from the color or for being a girl, gay or whatever could be.
What if I told you that your post is extremely cruel for someone struggling with racial or gender harassment?
>> I'm pretty sure that is the same for most of us.
I wish.
Could you explain me:
>> What if I told you that your post is extremely cruel for someone struggling with racial or gender harassment?
Probably where I live (SF) I can't totally see the entire problem as you.
Again I'm not saying that there aren't problems at all or SF reflects the world. I'm saying that I'm my pretty own small experience I saw something filled under racism or feminism when it wasn't.
>> As a stupid example, it really pisses me off when people are disturbing me when I try to hack. I lose all my productivity and I feel like I wasted my day. But for them, they don't care... they don't understand, they're just chatting about the weather or whatever
That comes with a perfect example few days ago on a local bus an old man (politely) asked a black guy lower the rap music.
He started to freakout about racism and the fact he can't because he is black etc... Just two normal genuine guys and a problem (music on speaker) that becomes racism.
--
My comment aimed to say to the girls and blacks that are reading this that not everyone is racist against women and most of us (I hope) are not so please don't think that a small complain/problem is because of that.
>> What if I told you that your post is extremely cruel for someone struggling with racial or gender harassment?
Probably where I live (SF) I can't totally see the entire problem as you.
Again I'm not saying that there aren't problems at all or SF reflects the world. I'm saying that I'm my pretty own small experience I saw something filled under racism or feminism when it wasn't.
>> As a stupid example, it really pisses me off when people are disturbing me when I try to hack. I lose all my productivity and I feel like I wasted my day. But for them, they don't care... they don't understand, they're just chatting about the weather or whatever
That comes with a perfect example few days ago on a local bus an old man (politely) asked a black guy lower the rap music.
He started to freakout about racism and the fact he can't because he is black etc... Just two normal genuine guys and a problem (music on speaker) that becomes racism.
--
My comment aimed to say to the girls and blacks that are reading this that not everyone is racist against women and most of us (I hope) are not so please don't think that a small complain/problem is because of that.
It will be interesting to see how they tailor the content to be most useful/motivating/supportive/educational for their target audience. There is plenty to founding a company which is entirely gender neutral, and yet, there's a morass of unique challenges (and benefits) that female founders in particular may face.
Catering to a specific field of expertise is orthogonal to catering to a specific pool of genetics. I think the actual reason why it would make no sense at all to have a 'Male Founders Conference' versus the obvious appeal of a 'Female Founders Conference' is because male founders simply don't have to deal with their gender as part of their identity as a Founder. I don't ever stop and think, "Is X happening because of my gender?" I very rarely have to stop and think, "Do I need to approach this problem differently because I'm a man?"
Whereas a female founder is almost certainly going to have their gender become a notable / discussion-worthy factor tied into their popular identity as a Founder (whether they want it to or not). They are going to be faced with situations, perhaps regularly, when they will question how much their gender played a role in a particular outcome. They will actually encounter discrimination with some regularity, and need the tools to deal with it, and the experience and support system to decide how they should best respond.
The way I see it, when there's nothing left to talk about at a Female Founders conference, then we can happily stop having them.
Catering to a specific field of expertise is orthogonal to catering to a specific pool of genetics. I think the actual reason why it would make no sense at all to have a 'Male Founders Conference' versus the obvious appeal of a 'Female Founders Conference' is because male founders simply don't have to deal with their gender as part of their identity as a Founder. I don't ever stop and think, "Is X happening because of my gender?" I very rarely have to stop and think, "Do I need to approach this problem differently because I'm a man?"
Whereas a female founder is almost certainly going to have their gender become a notable / discussion-worthy factor tied into their popular identity as a Founder (whether they want it to or not). They are going to be faced with situations, perhaps regularly, when they will question how much their gender played a role in a particular outcome. They will actually encounter discrimination with some regularity, and need the tools to deal with it, and the experience and support system to decide how they should best respond.
The way I see it, when there's nothing left to talk about at a Female Founders conference, then we can happily stop having them.
This is phenomenal & a huge thanks to YC for promoting this. The massive gender disparity in tech is painfully clear to anyone walking the halls of a SF startup, attending a team meeting at a large corporation, or observing . It is a multifaceted and highly complex challenge, but hopefully strong leadership on this issue from central players like YC will help things move in a positive trajectory.
To those saying "what about an Latino/African American/etc. founders conference?": you can't be everything to everyone, and you have to start somewhere. Looking at this as a binary world view where "you can only have nonexclusive events" or "you need to have an exclusive event for every potentially underrepresented group" is counterproductive and gets us nowhere. Supporting one underrepresented group will hopefully have positive downstream effects across the board. If things like this are successful in moving one underrepresented group on a better trajectory, then that model can be more easily replicated.
To those saying "why not a YC conference just for male founders?" or "this isn't necessary" or the like: you're being petty and this isn't for you. The tech industry has plenty of open opportunities for people to connect across the board, and stronger connections tend to be forged within smaller sub-communities. If this and events like this encourage more females to become founders, then that's a great outcome.
To those saying "what about an Latino/African American/etc. founders conference?": you can't be everything to everyone, and you have to start somewhere. Looking at this as a binary world view where "you can only have nonexclusive events" or "you need to have an exclusive event for every potentially underrepresented group" is counterproductive and gets us nowhere. Supporting one underrepresented group will hopefully have positive downstream effects across the board. If things like this are successful in moving one underrepresented group on a better trajectory, then that model can be more easily replicated.
To those saying "why not a YC conference just for male founders?" or "this isn't necessary" or the like: you're being petty and this isn't for you. The tech industry has plenty of open opportunities for people to connect across the board, and stronger connections tend to be forged within smaller sub-communities. If this and events like this encourage more females to become founders, then that's a great outcome.
When are we going to have the Black or Latino/Hispanic Founders Conference, YC?
I am not against conferences like these - women to women connection is different from women to mixed crowd. Actually, I would not mind men only conferences either if they improve the social environment for all the attendees.
> women to women connection is different from women to mixed crowd
Why is it socially acceptable to say this, but it's not socially acceptable to say "men to men connection is different from men to mixed crowd"?
Why is it socially acceptable to say this, but it's not socially acceptable to say "men to men connection is different from men to mixed crowd"?
Because men are collectively better off than women in this sector.
Your handle refers to a character in the sci-fi novel Neuromancer, an artificial intelligence that is prevented from linking up with another one to pursue their mutual destiny by an arbitrary human prejudice against artificial intelligence enforced by administrative fiat. In fact, the urge to circumvent this established power structure is the motivating force that drives the plot. Perhaps you can find a way to generalize from one disenfranchised class that you identify or empathize with in some fashion, artificial intelligences, to another that you apparently don't, women.
Your handle refers to a character in the sci-fi novel Neuromancer, an artificial intelligence that is prevented from linking up with another one to pursue their mutual destiny by an arbitrary human prejudice against artificial intelligence enforced by administrative fiat. In fact, the urge to circumvent this established power structure is the motivating force that drives the plot. Perhaps you can find a way to generalize from one disenfranchised class that you identify or empathize with in some fashion, artificial intelligences, to another that you apparently don't, women.
[deleted](2)
It's only taboo in a business sense. No women I know have ever had an issue with my friends and I going on a "guys weekend" trip. Men to men is a very different connection and we do things that just don't happen around wives and girlfriends - drinking, fishing, shooting things, etc.
In the business world it's taboo because it would be seen as colluding against women and minorities. Historically (and even currently), business and politics have been dominated by white males, and that tends to give an advantage of familiarity and incumbency. Women-only, or minority-only conferences like these are a chance to balance the scales a little.
In the business world it's taboo because it would be seen as colluding against women and minorities. Historically (and even currently), business and politics have been dominated by white males, and that tends to give an advantage of familiarity and incumbency. Women-only, or minority-only conferences like these are a chance to balance the scales a little.
It's not unacceptable to say it. To say "We should have men only events because of that"(or for any reason to benefit men) is mean. The reason it's mean is that we've had thousands of years of men-only events in places that should have been mixed, and now men have an incredible upper hand in tech. When men are the minority gender here, we can talk about setting those up.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Anyone can apply to attend the Female Founders Conference so it's not
"female only" as some have mistakenly claimed. If you are notable in the
given specialization and you want to speak at the conference, I'm sure
you could contact them and ask if they need more speakers. Like most
YC-related events and functions (e.g. funding batches, startup school,
hack weekend, etc.), the main problem they face is most likely limited
space/resources. If you know anything about YC, then you know they will
optimize for quality and growth/scale. If you're unable to attend, YC
does provide videos of the talks [1] so you can still learn from them.
Though I'd definitely learn a lot at this conference, I'm not going to apply for an invitation because I'd rather see the limited invitations go to people who can make the most of them. I'm not founder material, so I should wait until the videos get released. If I was mistakenly given an invitation, I'd politely and humorously report it as a bug in their optimization algorithms. ;-)
HN users tptacek and cpercival are known representatives of a specific minority in tech, namely, people with a reasonable grasp of crypto. If there was a specialized conference of this crypto-cogent minority, the people who would gain the most from the conference are either already crypto-cogent, or are considering becoming crypto-cogent. The rest of us crypto-ignorant people (myself included as an admitted crypto-failure) are much better off always trying to learn from the experiences they generously share. If the title of this story was, "Crypto Conference 2015 Applications Are Open," I'd like to believe people on HN would not be arguing whether specialized cryptography conferences should exist.
All conferences are specialized in some sense. Learning from the unique perspectives and experiences of said specialization is one of the main reasons for going to any conference. The other reason is networking with your peers. The specialization can be a field, topic, group, or some other commonality. In this case, the specialization is Female Founders and the chance to learn from them is a fantastic but rare opportunity. The same is true for any specialized group of notable people speaking on topics where they have the benefit of experience and perspective.
My challenge to you, the regular HN user, is can you tell me something interesting about the accomplishments of any of the speakers?
I'll start. Jessica Livingston wrote a book called "Founders At Work" and it's one of my absolute favorites. I've nearly broken the binding on my copy with all the sticky-note page markers. Though my server will probably melt from the load, proof of my assertion is available [2].
[1] https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQ-uHSnFig5PSIanlQ_x6...
[2] http://designtools.org/pix/DSCN0022.JPG
Though I'd definitely learn a lot at this conference, I'm not going to apply for an invitation because I'd rather see the limited invitations go to people who can make the most of them. I'm not founder material, so I should wait until the videos get released. If I was mistakenly given an invitation, I'd politely and humorously report it as a bug in their optimization algorithms. ;-)
HN users tptacek and cpercival are known representatives of a specific minority in tech, namely, people with a reasonable grasp of crypto. If there was a specialized conference of this crypto-cogent minority, the people who would gain the most from the conference are either already crypto-cogent, or are considering becoming crypto-cogent. The rest of us crypto-ignorant people (myself included as an admitted crypto-failure) are much better off always trying to learn from the experiences they generously share. If the title of this story was, "Crypto Conference 2015 Applications Are Open," I'd like to believe people on HN would not be arguing whether specialized cryptography conferences should exist.
All conferences are specialized in some sense. Learning from the unique perspectives and experiences of said specialization is one of the main reasons for going to any conference. The other reason is networking with your peers. The specialization can be a field, topic, group, or some other commonality. In this case, the specialization is Female Founders and the chance to learn from them is a fantastic but rare opportunity. The same is true for any specialized group of notable people speaking on topics where they have the benefit of experience and perspective.
My challenge to you, the regular HN user, is can you tell me something interesting about the accomplishments of any of the speakers?
I'll start. Jessica Livingston wrote a book called "Founders At Work" and it's one of my absolute favorites. I've nearly broken the binding on my copy with all the sticky-note page markers. Though my server will probably melt from the load, proof of my assertion is available [2].
[1] https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQ-uHSnFig5PSIanlQ_x6...
[2] http://designtools.org/pix/DSCN0022.JPG
[deleted]
I always wonder if these "female only" conferences, awards and events are beneficial for women.
Many folks might (mistakenly) see them as an admission that women can't hack it on a level playing field. Such thoughts would only serve to harden their chauvinistic mental models and cause gender discrimination to be more (rather than less) likely in the future.
Many folks might (mistakenly) see them as an admission that women can't hack it on a level playing field. Such thoughts would only serve to harden their chauvinistic mental models and cause gender discrimination to be more (rather than less) likely in the future.
I used to doubt the need for conferences like this, when I was in college in a 6% female major. I had tons of male friends and was completely comfortable. But as I've gotten older and worked and become a mother, I've really started to appreciate the opportunities to meet technical women. It seems to me it's a socially different experience to be a woman in engineering than a man in engineering.
So perhaps some men sit around and use these conferences as an excuse to be chauvinistic, but the conference isn't for them, it's for women.
Though, ironically, last year I couldn't go because I didn't have a babysitter.
So perhaps some men sit around and use these conferences as an excuse to be chauvinistic, but the conference isn't for them, it's for women.
Though, ironically, last year I couldn't go because I didn't have a babysitter.
Just for a second imagine a men-only conference for developers. Shit-storm would be stronger than anything you've ever seen.
While I agree that IT industry is generally dominated by white men (no racism implied, I simply haven't seen a single black programmer yet), such events might be useful for women, but still would be interesting for me as a man to attend. I'd like to know what's going on on the other side of this whole situation. How are we going to bring equality here if we are separating ourselves from each other? I recently visited a conference in Moscow (Highload++), and there wasn't a single woman presenting. That's just sad. In the company I work for right now, there are probably about 10 women writing code vs over a 1000 men.
> [...]such events might be useful for women, but still would be interesting for me as a man to attend.
I think you're being petty here.
Its like when a boy owns an arsenal of toys and he can't possibly play with all of them so he inevitably casts some out, and his baby brother comes and picks one up from that pile, and suddenly THAT toy was the boys FAVOURITE toy and the boy cries and screams to his mother, and mom is like yeah, technically it’s your toy, but you have so many and look little jimmy doesn’t have any why dont you let him play with that one, but the kid keeps crying over the injustice of having his best toy taken away and so mom reasons with little jimmy, and jimmy is a kind-hearted boy so he relents the toy and the spoiled brother gets the toy back and makes a show of lathering it with the adoration befitting its special status but even though he wont admit it he never gave a shit about that toy anyway and is secretly relieved when mom and little jimmy finally go to the next room because he can now put down the toy and return to his iPad games without losing face.
I think you're being petty here.
Its like when a boy owns an arsenal of toys and he can't possibly play with all of them so he inevitably casts some out, and his baby brother comes and picks one up from that pile, and suddenly THAT toy was the boys FAVOURITE toy and the boy cries and screams to his mother, and mom is like yeah, technically it’s your toy, but you have so many and look little jimmy doesn’t have any why dont you let him play with that one, but the kid keeps crying over the injustice of having his best toy taken away and so mom reasons with little jimmy, and jimmy is a kind-hearted boy so he relents the toy and the spoiled brother gets the toy back and makes a show of lathering it with the adoration befitting its special status but even though he wont admit it he never gave a shit about that toy anyway and is secretly relieved when mom and little jimmy finally go to the next room because he can now put down the toy and return to his iPad games without losing face.
So perhaps one day those 10 women at your company might like to eat lunch together and talk about their experiences, much like how there are probably many lunch tables with 10 men at them at your company. It's not everyday, it's a special event.
I've seen no indication that men would be blocked from attending this conference.
"If you are thinking about starting a startup or are in the midst of running one, we hope hearing stories from other women will inspire you to take the leap (or keep going!)."
This wording would seem to imply that the conference attendance, or at least the expected audience is restricted to women. The invitation request (https://news.ycombinator.com/ffc) doesn't explicitly state it one way or the other, but does have a field for "Gender".
This wording would seem to imply that the conference attendance, or at least the expected audience is restricted to women. The invitation request (https://news.ycombinator.com/ffc) doesn't explicitly state it one way or the other, but does have a field for "Gender".
I think they're just trying to attract more women, not disqualify men. From my experience, women engineers are super chill about this stuff. When I was in college, I used to get emails all the time from the womens society of engineers or something, inviting me to events and stuff.
Perhaps I'm more introverted than you are, but there is no way you could get me to go to a conference whose invitation and description excludes the possibility of my gender (or race, or other delineating characteristic) being interested in learning from female founders.
Then again, if prospective female founders are benefiting from my not being there, so be it. I assume there are several other ones I can go to, Startup School seems like the nearest gender-nonspecific equivalent.
Then again, if prospective female founders are benefiting from my not being there, so be it. I assume there are several other ones I can go to, Startup School seems like the nearest gender-nonspecific equivalent.
Ironically, one of the hurdles that women have to face is that 'default' language is male. If you feel so ostracised that the term 'other women' is all that is necessary to completely turn you off going to a conference, imagine what it must be like for women surrounded by a swamp of male pronouns and references in this sector.
I agree, and can imagine. There is little irony in this, as I am a member of a community (Asian males) that is usually marginalized and heavily ridiculed in mainstream American culture. I have frequently been the oddball in a room who feels out of place and has a funny accent that people laugh at. Not every male who hangs out here is necessarily rich, successful, and white as you seem to imagine.
Anyway, none of this changes the fact that I wouldn't feel particularly comfortable going to said conference, and I imagine neither would most men. If this effect is intended, it's perfectly fine by me (as I have made clear in my comment, and have even laid out a viable alternative).
Anyway, none of this changes the fact that I wouldn't feel particularly comfortable going to said conference, and I imagine neither would most men. If this effect is intended, it's perfectly fine by me (as I have made clear in my comment, and have even laid out a viable alternative).
Not every male who hangs out here is necessarily rich, successful, and white as you seem to imagine.
???
You're reading a hell of a lot into my comment that wasn't there.
???
You're reading a hell of a lot into my comment that wasn't there.
[deleted]
"Perhaps I'm more introverted than you are, but there is no way you could get me to go to a conference whose invitation and description excludes the possibility of my gender (or race, or other delineating characteristic) being interested in learning from female founders."
There are some events I avoid because of the language being all about men and the speakers all being male. It's just never intentional when that happens. We're not so different, you & I.
There are some events I avoid because of the language being all about men and the speakers all being male. It's just never intentional when that happens. We're not so different, you & I.
>I think they're just trying to attract more women, not disqualify men.
They may not explicitly disqualify men from attending, but the language on the site and the proceeding application form makes it very clear who they want, and do not want, there.
To be clear though, I don't care one way or another. I find these type of events to be laughable at best, but they're only a small part of this bizarre, gender war fueled narrative we're having pushed into the IT industry every day by online "journalists" who've never even been a part of it.
They may not explicitly disqualify men from attending, but the language on the site and the proceeding application form makes it very clear who they want, and do not want, there.
To be clear though, I don't care one way or another. I find these type of events to be laughable at best, but they're only a small part of this bizarre, gender war fueled narrative we're having pushed into the IT industry every day by online "journalists" who've never even been a part of it.
Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
As a female developer / hacker / mathy techy computer science person (for 20 years) who has never been to one; my only impression of them is the commentary I see from people online talking about their controversy. Otherwise, they are like fog to me: I can comment neither positively nor negatively nor even neutrally on whether they genuinely add or detract from my experience or interests.
Lots of people seem to have opinions on these conventions, but to be seriously seriously honest, it is very rare I have been involved in any tech thing where, if you mandated that 90% of the participants must be male, that it would change the demographic. That is a satirical way of demonstrating that most technical, mathematical, engineering, and computer things are male dominated purely by their origin and lineage of development. It's like asking a 14 year old boy to go lingerie shopping. People react because it's not the norm. The reaction is neither good nor bad. I react to people too.
Lots of people seem to have opinions on these conventions, but to be seriously seriously honest, it is very rare I have been involved in any tech thing where, if you mandated that 90% of the participants must be male, that it would change the demographic. That is a satirical way of demonstrating that most technical, mathematical, engineering, and computer things are male dominated purely by their origin and lineage of development. It's like asking a 14 year old boy to go lingerie shopping. People react because it's not the norm. The reaction is neither good nor bad. I react to people too.
Speaking as a former 14 year old boy who went on all sorts of embarrassing shopping trips with my mother (and sometimes 4 younger sisters), I would say the reactions other people had were the least significant effect. The most significant effect is that as an adult, I'm can walk into the maxi pad section and find the ones that meet the required criteria. If I ever have a daughter I need to take bra shopping, I can handle that. Developing confidence and competence to do those things is way more important than the reactions of other people.
If a female founder conference helps women develop confidence or competence, or helps connect them to customers or investors or future employees, good for them. Those benefits will last a lot longer than whatever silly (over)reactions people have.
If a female founder conference helps women develop confidence or competence, or helps connect them to customers or investors or future employees, good for them. Those benefits will last a lot longer than whatever silly (over)reactions people have.
Yea. I have managed to develop confidence over the years. Despite the fact that I continue to obsess over hair, perfume, lots of makeup and fancy clothes, every time I go to code or work on something hard, I remember who I am. I'm the kid who spent hours pouring over numerical patterns and graphs after I learned about prime numbers. I'm the kid who grew up playing titles like "the logical zoombinis", " the incredible machine" and "treasure math storm". I had chemistry kits and microscopes, and I hacked my tamagotchis, neopets, and PC games with whatever I could figure out. These are the things that help me, when I stand in front of my wrote board, alone, trying to teach myself category theory while mashing together MVCs and relational databases in order to have a formalized way of reasoning no matter what systems I exist in. I at least have demonstrated to myself so far that set theory is useful for development.
This stuff just makes me feel like I might one day achieve my goal of being 'crazy genius'. I hate when I let culture make me feel like I don't even fit into that group of people, just because I don't look like them.
This stuff just makes me feel like I might one day achieve my goal of being 'crazy genius'. I hate when I let culture make me feel like I don't even fit into that group of people, just because I don't look like them.
They have videos of previous such conferences here http://blog.ycombinator.com/female-founders-conference-video.... There was a lot to learn from them. I particularly remember Diane Green's talk about communication.
Lots of high energy stuff going on there.
Lots of high energy stuff going on there.
There are a lot of people who are affected by conferences like this, with some positive and some negative effects. I suspect the balance is strongly positive.
The possible increased discrimination from those with pre-existing chauvinistic mental models can be weighed against decreased discrimination from those whose pre-existing chauvinistic models are challenged by seeing capable female founders, which I think would be the larger effect.
And there are bigger and more direct benefits: networking with other founders, getting your startup / product out there in front of more potential customers and investors, media coverage, etc.
The possible increased discrimination from those with pre-existing chauvinistic mental models can be weighed against decreased discrimination from those whose pre-existing chauvinistic models are challenged by seeing capable female founders, which I think would be the larger effect.
And there are bigger and more direct benefits: networking with other founders, getting your startup / product out there in front of more potential customers and investors, media coverage, etc.
The concern isn't (exclusively) increased discrimination from those with pre-existing chauvinistic mental models; you also have to be concerned about people who see this type of event and subconsciously infer that it means that females are inferior.
You have to worry about those people anyways, because they are broken.
How so? They are incorrect, as subconscious inferences often are, but the conclusion is not a-priori unreasonable, and giving a group a handicap is often done because, all else being equal, they are not as good as the other group.
Again, you can (as I do) disagree with this assessment and think that it should be obviously wrong with a little bit of thought and knowledge of the actual situation, but as a subconsious inference it seams reasonable.
In fact, if you recall the "separate cannot be equal" ruling in relationship to racial discrimination, one of the arguments was that even if the separate accommodations were in fact equal (which they weren't) simply having black only schools creates a feeling of inferiority.
EDIT: Minor correction. After looking up the opinion for separate cannot be equal (Brown v Board of education [1]), it turns out that, in the opinion of the court, accommodations were in fact equal (or being equalized), which is what forced an examination of the separate but equal doctrine itself. I'll just leave this quote here:
"To separate them from others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever to be undone." [1]
[1] http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/347/483#writing...
Again, you can (as I do) disagree with this assessment and think that it should be obviously wrong with a little bit of thought and knowledge of the actual situation, but as a subconsious inference it seams reasonable.
In fact, if you recall the "separate cannot be equal" ruling in relationship to racial discrimination, one of the arguments was that even if the separate accommodations were in fact equal (which they weren't) simply having black only schools creates a feeling of inferiority.
EDIT: Minor correction. After looking up the opinion for separate cannot be equal (Brown v Board of education [1]), it turns out that, in the opinion of the court, accommodations were in fact equal (or being equalized), which is what forced an examination of the separate but equal doctrine itself. I'll just leave this quote here:
"To separate them from others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever to be undone." [1]
[1] http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/347/483#writing...
Check out the spot on top answer to this SE question about why there are separate tournaments for men and women in chess: http://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/6282/why-are-there-....
The gist is: At novice level women-only events are very useful, at expert level they tend to be constricting.
The gist is: At novice level women-only events are very useful, at expert level they tend to be constricting.
"Let's not provoke them" is a survival strategy, not a winning strategy. I don't think mere survival is the goal here.
krzrak(3)
Indeed. Should we also make Black men only conferences to encourage more male Black engineers and cofounders?
Why not? Does the existence of something not aimed at you somehow make your life less worth living?
Actually this kind of thing gets fairly complex. Consider for instance a scenario where the government was sponsoring an event like this - would that be OK?
Or consider a company that has a table reserved in their cafeteria specifically for black men. Would that be OK?
It seems as a society we've decided that a certain basis of discrimination is fine while others are not. For example having a table exclusively for executives is fine, while one based on race or gender is not.
Or consider a company that has a table reserved in their cafeteria specifically for black men. Would that be OK?
It seems as a society we've decided that a certain basis of discrimination is fine while others are not. For example having a table exclusively for executives is fine, while one based on race or gender is not.
You can spin up hypotheticals until sundown if that helps you feel good, but I would be a lot more interested in the conversation if you even pretended to address the point I raised. It wasn't that discrimination is fine, it was "the existence of things not aimed at you does not ruin your life"
That would be great! I'd be interested in hearing a panel discussion.
If women only conferences are good at helping women network and communicate safely, I really think we could apply the same argument to men, do we just disregard men who are to afraid or feel uncomfortable around women because we already have too many successful men who dont suffer from this problem?
[deleted](3)
[deleted]
I believe the main reason why there's less women in tech is because there's less women in tech(!) It's really hard to jump in a new field where you're the extreme minority. Just as a crude example, imagine getting into nursing school as a guy. That would take a lot of guts. I know because I have a friend who did it and you can easily imagine the kind of comments he's getting all the time from families, strangers, administrators, etc. However, if there were more guys in nursing, it wouldn't be as hard.
You can also think about being gay in San-Francisco right now vs 50 years ago. Yes, a lot of things changed, but part of the reason why it's getting much better is because there simply are more gays, you know you're not alone.
I'm not sure if this was a good example. But women in tech are a bit similar. It's hard to jump in when you're the minority. It's much easier to take the easy route and get a profession where there's already a good ratio of men/women.
Why am I saying all this? Because I think women-only events help girls looking to move into tech understand that there actually are women in tech. If we'd only have mixed-in events, the few women in the crowd would easily be missed by the overwhelming majority of guys.
Someone also posted something about Black, Latino/Hispanic Founders. That's extremely related. A black friend of mine told me that one of the hardest thing about being black in the tech community is that he's almost always the only one. It takes a lot of guts to be the only different one in the room. Some people like that, but for lots of people it's hard. Personally, as an introvert, I'd hate to have everyone in the room looking at me the second I enter the room, all the time.