Comment by staticelf | Hacker News Reader

Comment by staticelf | Hacker News Reader

People today get upset about fucking everything.

Lets break the points down, shall we?

> introduces himself to the men in a group but ignores the women

Just bad behavior. Hard to say anything else about such a general claim. I can't say I share this experience.

> makes eye contact with the men while speaking and ignores the women

Well if you make eye contact with women today, some get offended so easily that they write blog posts and even accuse men of being creeps. If we don't, obviously we do not respect you.

> asks a woman if she is a plus one at the event acts surprised to discover a woman knows about cryptocurrencies

Not weird at all, how many women have you met that knows a lot about cryptocurrencies? Seriously, this is just statistics. Of course people are going to be surprised of this. It's like being mad about a person acting suprised in learning that another person never have taken a car ride.

> comments on the woman’s appearance rather than what she is saying

Most men are attracted to women in general, so unless this is in a moment that is highly unprofessional I am not surprised. However, I have pretty much never witnessed this except on psuedo-anonymous places like comment sections on internet, never IRL in a professional context.

Personally, I follow people because what they do / what they have to say. I also believe most men do that. I am very tired of feminism and this constant nagging. In fact, it is my experience that women follow and judges people a lot more based on their looks and not what they actually have to say.

"Not weird at all, how many women have you met that knows a lot about cryptocurrencies?"

Overwhelming majority of men don't know about cryptocurrencies either. It is only people who go to tech events who do. Of people who go to meetups and such, I haven't seen any +1 of any gender. The assumption that if you went to tech event then you know about tech seems safe for anyone.

And dunno, going meta offended over someone expressing that yep, this makes women questioning whether they are treated equally behind back is, well, being special snowflake too. You just explained to me what for construct is instead of reacting to my proposal seriously, do you want me to pretend I think I am treated equally?

I know I am not, you know I am not (because statistics), so why expectation to pretend otherwise? It is just a lie.

Depends completetly on the event. The author doesn't specify any example of what type of event this regards (except that it is a "crypto event").

> I haven't seen any +1 of any gender

Sure this is probably quite uncommon on most tech events and meetups but there are several events where people bring family that is related to technology.

> And dunno, going meta offended over someone expressing that yep, this makes [...]

I am not offended, I am simply tired to hear this over and over when in reality it at least for me seems to almost never happen.

> I know I am not, you know I am not (because statistics), so why expectation to pretend otherwise? It is just a lie.

I think women and men are treated equally, at least where I live and in all the events I've attended. Of course people are going to be douchebags and uncomfortable situations between genders are going to occur, but this is true for everyone. I have been disrespected by both women and men but I do not get upset about all of them because of it.

So your position is:

"I don't experience this so it probably doesn't happen often but others should stop talking about it because I'm tired how often this comes up."

I'm curious what aspect of your contribution you think contributes to anything.

No my position is a tad more complicated than that.

My position is that of course people should voice concern over actual discrimination based on gender. But this rant on social interactions in which there is no evidence presented and just big claims that this happens a lot is simply what is is, big claims.

I claim that this don't happen as often as some people suggests, a claim that is just as valid as the authors. My position is that this hurts women in tech and diversity as a whole.

Baseless arguments like the authors contributes to the toxic environment we have today where everything you do is wrong. Just take that conference Github was supposed to have. They picked all candidates from without knowing gender or anything about the authors (blind review) [1] and when it was discovered every presenter picked was a male, the conference was cancelled because meritocracy is appearantly not ok if only men were selected even if their talks were deemed superior [2].

This is just one demonstration about the extreme views that is hurting equality. Another is Brit Ruby 2013 which was cancelled for the same reasons basically: https://gist.github.com/seanhandley/4106776

And it is just the absolute top of the mountain, there are so many stupid things going on in the name of equality and diversity it's unbelievable.

If we are not supposed to care about genders, why do we care if there is more women in tech at all?

[1] https://cfp.githubapp.com/events/electronconf-2017 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14480868

your position is the same as I stated but you have rationale behind it. I get that. the issue I have is still the same though, you're projecting your experience onto others and expecting an argument where none is being made.

as a woman in cryptocurrency, this isn't a valuable resource because it proves our work environment sucks. it's speaking to others like me who already know our work environment sucks and signals to each other so we can at least create spaces where not everything is terrible. don't think there's a problem? cool. it's not a universal experience, just common which is why you hear about it all the time. we're not looking for your help except to do your part or get out of the way.

I'm honestly taken back every time I read opinions like yours since you don't experience this, think these are claims that need evidence, and want to shut down debate over something that doesn't impact you. I can only assume you're somehow threatened but I struggle to see how. men feeling threatened by women talking about their spaces is very strange but maybe that's because you think we're saying something about you when we complain about how we're treated.

> your position is the same as I stated but you have rationale behind it. I get that.

But it is not. Which I just explained why. The difference is that the things I complain about is specific examples with data to back it up. The author and other people similar just throw out random shit that is as provable as a religious experience.

> it's speaking to others like me who already know our work environment sucks

Great attitude there buddy.

> think these are claims that need evidence

I provided evidence for the examples I brought up, the rest is just as the authors anecdotal with no evidence. This is my whole point.

> I can only assume you're somehow threatened but I struggle to see how. men feeling threatened by women talking about their spaces is very strange

Why do people always resort to this jargon? I am not "threatened" I just do not like discrimination based on gender and I believe that is happening more towards men than women in tech today. It is happening in the name of diversity and equality.

> I just do not like discrimination based on gender

if you feel that way then maybe don't drop into a conversation women started to tell them their likely misinterpreting situations and need to provide better evidence before you'll take their claims seriously. maybe don't go point-by-point refuting their experiences as conjecture then center discrimination concerns against men. maybe don't engage others who, like you, don't like discrimination based on gender with the opening line:

> People today get upset about fucking everything.

The converse of that is exactly what these blog posts are - constant wide-ranging criticisms based on a few anecdotes, usually wrangled together from others who write similar blog posts.

You just said that it makes sense to treat women differently in events, because statistically women know less about crypto. Now you are saying that you said the above just as off-topic remark unrelated to discussion, since men and women are treated always the same?

Being made uncomfortable is less of a problem then being assumed less competent. It has bigger impact and you said it is reasonable assumption, but bulk of it is either behind your back or only indirectly visible (by having to push more when I say something or by being ignored or assumed wrong by default while someone else is assumed correct even after he stated multiple wrong thongs before). It just so happen that the bigger problem is impossible to talk about, but when someone is open enought about his bias that I can point to it, I should not talk about it because it makes ppl feel tired.

No I didn't say that. I wrote that it was not weird. It is simply a common reaction everyone has and it doesn't have to be negative.

I have never met a woman that knows a lot about cryptocurrencies, of course I would be surprised (maybe not at a cryptocurrency event) if someone I met did actually know more than me. Context matters and just because I am surprised by it doesn't mean that I assume the woman in question to be less competent, it is just unusual knowledge for women to have.

You wrote that a majority of men doesn't know about cryptocurrencies and while that is true I have still met a lot of men that invests in it and know a whole lot even if they aren't working in tech in any way. Of course I understand that experiences may vary a whole lot, but the fact is simply that women are generally less interested in cryptocurrencies than men.

I would say men generally like women that shares their interests and it is quite obvious that those women that do often gain a lot of attention. I cannot sympathize with the author at all because my experience is the reverse of what she describes. Women in tech get an unreasonable amount of attention even if their contribution is smaller than that of men and they are favored in all kinds of ways.

I never deny that sexism exists towards women, I am simply stating that I personally do not buy this mindless nagging of that women are so unequal etc. when the reality I live in is so different.

I should not need to be best of the best to be accepted/treated equally. The "if you are like the most capable men in a room then ... we will be surprised but accept that" is not equality and strawcase.

Equality is that beginner women is also treated the same way as beginner men. It means that women who knows enough to bluff the same way semi knowledgeable men bluff is treated the same way as them. Nobody is born knowing it all and pretty much all highly knowledgeable men started as confident dudes who did not knew much, but were assumed to be participants. I personally started that way and pretty much lucked the environment. Seen other environments too and yep, it is a difference.

The masses of people who just knew whole their life they are good and never been beginners are just adults with low self awareness.

> I should not need to be best of the best to be accepted/treated equally

I agree and I think that is exactly how it is for the absolute majority.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com