Hacker News Reader

Comment by chucksta | Hacker News Reader

>In total, three white and Asian women business owners are part of the lawsuit

I stand corrected. So three white women felt that out of all the VC funds in the nation, they felt threatened by these three black women?

It’s even worse that it’s women going after other women.

Of all the startups I’ve

worked for I’ve never been able to say that my CEO was a black, white or Asian woman. That’s not some mistake.

EDIT: understandably this has been locked for replies (by the powers that be not me). So before asking any question note that I will not be able to reply once the edit button expires. AAAAAND I can reply again.

But disappointed tbh, but I understand

Why did you drop “Asian”?

Because they don’t seem particularly favoured by any metric (not an advantaged majority in the space), so it's strange she would be behind this.

Uniformity or a pattern isn’t a requirement for an argument, consistency is. And I’m consistent about the idea that people who are doing great in one area shouldn’t be pushing down other people trying to get to the same place.

> Because they don’t seem particularly favoured by any metric (not an advantaged majority in the space), so it's strange she would be behind this.

Ahh yes, it must be the evil white women who put the Asian woman up to this.

> Uniformity or a pattern isn’t a requirement for an argument, consistency is. And I’m consistent about the idea that people who are doing great in one area shouldn’t be pushing down other people trying to get to the same place.

I'm sure you are quite consistent in your racism.

> not an advantaged majority

Why would they have to be both advantaged and a majority? Surely just being advantaged would suffice, and white women are also not a majority in VC funding, nor are they advantaged.

Women-funded startups received only 9% of investments - even if all of that 9% went to only white women, they would still be disadvantaged. Furthermore, 77.1% of founders were white, and 17.7% were Asian. Since whites are 57.8% of US, but Asians are 5.9%, that makes whites 1.33x over-represented, and Asians 3x over-represented.

In other words, Asians are 2.26x more likely to receive VC funding than whites, yet, without citing any data, you claimed they are less favored than whites.

Source: https://news.crunchbase.com/venture/untapped-opportunity-min...

>So three white women felt that out of all the VC funds in the nation, they felt threatened by these three black women?

You'll notice this with any kind of woke endeavor - white women are almost always at the helm and they won't tolerate being put in the backseat.

Not sure I understand, but also not sure I want to spark racial generalisations of character.

I’m not that kind of liberal or conservative.

This isn't a woke endeavour. It's a racist endeavour. It's the exacr opposite of woke.

This group can't stand black people working for other black people and they have to attack them and shut it down.

Don't be confused by your anti woke bias. This isn't it.

Both you and the person you are defending use the British "our" spelling of words. Considering you just made your account, I bet you are the same person or know each other.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com