Hacker News Reader

Comment by toomuchredbull | Hacker News Reader

Do people expect that writing these sorts of screeds wins them sympathy? I would avoid such a person like the plague. You know they are always going to insert sexism into any interaction you have with them

View on HN

When I checked her bio, the first thing that I thought was, "damn this person is extremely privileged". Are these kinds of people just completely blind to just how privileged they are compared to normal folk?

And for all of that privilege, she still has to navigate the disadvantage of being a female founder.

I don't think a survival guide is meant to elicit sympathy, it's just supposed to provide practical advice for people in similar circumstances.

If someone wrote a personal guide on how to survive if you're bitten by a snake, my first thought wouldn't be "man, they must really be looking for sympathy."

Seemed like a normal and reasonable guide. Do you really posit that absolutely no men are sexist to them? I'm sure you'd agree there much be some. So then what ought they do about it to defend themselves and have a career they want? That's exactly what this guide is. Its target audience is clearly other women, that's the style it's written in. So why do you feel this is a ploy for sympathy? You should see if any specific criticisms you can supply from reading the article would hold up to analysis, I'm open minded enough to hear them if you want to give it a try.

It's hard for me to take even the tweet seriously (working a few years in Palanteer guaranteeing an investment just because somebody is a male...also what are those already profitable companies that don't get investment? If VCs are so blind not to invest in great already profitable companies, bring those examples to HN). Bring data to the table if you have those extreme statements.

Fair point, the tweet wasn't quantitatively backed up. Interestingly the title above said "The standards for you are higher." and yet her paragraphs after that don't revisit that idea, but rather make the point that they ought to adopt a conversational style related to their background that compensates for what they say is a common flaw with women pitching (modesty about accomplishments). Which I think is a fair bit of advice to give anyone entering the valley, to have a pitch explaining why you're great to others.

I believe that there's a strong bias, and women have to jump though it (as a man I feel strong sexual bias in my dating life, and do my best to accept it and jump through those hoops).

But exaggerations can lead to hating the other sex, which is always detrimental to the end result. The tips themselves were great, it's just important for the author to stay professional.

Well said. I just thought the person who is the root commenter of this chain characterising the article as "An attempt to get sympathy" was overly myopic. I also feel bias in parts of my life and if someone had written a guide about how to overcome them and a person with the opposite traits said the point of it was only to get sympathy, id be upset that they dismissed the true point of the article, which in this case was to empower them to overcome what biases do exist.

I think ,,An attempt to get sympathy'' is partly true in this case. Writing about bias against women founders is a cool topic nowdays, that's usually upvoted, and that makes low-effort articles, like this one get onto the front page.

Compare it with a PG essay, where he goes over it many times to make sure that the writing is as good as he can get it.

Or compare it to a software project where a person worked on something for years before a Show HN.

https://www.elephantinthevalley.com/

(2015)

The struggle is real. I've had the fairly unique experience of being an executive (VP Eng) of a 50 person software startup where I was the only man on the executive team (CEO, COO, and CFO were women) for a period of several months, and where the male to female ratio on the exec team never skewed to a male majority.

Despite the CEO and COO being strong and supremely capable (COO in particular was a tremendous mentor to me) industry veterans, questions were often directed to me that would have been more appropriate for them to answer, or the makeup of the team would be treated as a bit of a novelty or curiosity.

On the positive side, having strong female representation in the management group did wonders for recruiting, and through no particular plan or design, I ended up with the most diverse Engineering org I've ever been a part of. Lack of bro culture and clear demonstration that there was no glass ceiling were huge weapons in the hiring arsenal.

I think as long as there are men who dismiss whatever they have to say about sexism, women will keep writing, “these sorts of screeds.” If you want it to stop, do something beside whinge about women calling attention to the problem.

I read the article and did not find it a screed. It didn't really complain or anything. And it provided concrete action items that aren't "society hates you" but more "this is what this place expects; play to the expectations" which sounds smart.

Honestly, if anyone read the parent comment and concluded that this is one of those "Everyone hates me because I'm a woman" things (which do exist) then you've been misinformed.

Article is also useful to men, in my opinion, and not as "ally" or "social justice companion" or whatever but just for you to know how things are laid out in SV so that you too can play to the right expectations. First paragraph, for instance, is not a gender divide. Paragraph about Elizabeth Holmes is also a pointer that people pattern match a lot based on superficial characteristics and that it might help your success to be aware of and either mitigate or play to those characteristics. That's not gender-based either.

Where in the linked article did you see a call to sympathy? If it doesn’t resonate, could it be that you’re not the target audience because you’re not a founder?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com