Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwaway8844 | Hacker News Reader

This is probably an unpopular opinion but I think having separate gender events like these are a terrible idea. How much uproar would there be if there was an event called Male Founders Conference?

Now, I believe there is gender discrimination in the tech industry but I don't think segregated events like these are the answer, but a part of the problem. We should be working towards making all events and conferences, workplaces, opportunities available to everyone without discrimination.

Just my 2c.

View on HN

"Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

What's the difference between a flamewar topic or a controversial topic? This seems like a conversation killing policy to me, at least assuming you're exercising it as intended.

Killing a conversation unless you have something genuinely new to say about them sounds like a good policy to me.

What are the chances people heard it the first time? What are the chances somebody posting knows it's been posted before? To me this smacks of "yeah we've heard your stupid opinion before, it's been debunked, move on."

And by the way, the OP posted a flamewar topic. The concern here is with a flamewar opinion. Holding the opposite opinion on the same topic, I think, would get a pass. "I think it's great that they're getting up there, helping take on sexism in the industry." (And that's not to say I disagree with that opinion, I'm somewhere in the middle myself, for whatever it's worth. I'm just in favor of discourse.)

Carefull critisism of the basic idea of an event like this without trying to start a flame war is somthing that should be allowed though. We all know that things like these are issues that are part of a bigger issue (the lack of women in tech). But all issues surounding something like this should be addressed. Even if the critisism is pointed at attempts at solving/adressing these issues.

Like the trowaway account said/hopefully tried to say; segregation/discrimination is never the answer.

I would like to leave it at that before I aswell get accused of trying to start a flame war.

That was my initial reaction as well when I first heard about such an event. What's the point in segregating when there is already a segregation? But then I thought why even bother in which context an event with good intentions is held and as someone who favors utilitarianism I felt a little stupid that this wasn't my initial thought. From what I've heard these kind of events do have success, and the main motivation is, I guess, to create opportunities where women don't feel like a minority and where they can be role models for each other and people outside of tech. It's basically an attempt to break through the conjectured circular problem that women in tech are a minority because they are a minority.

More broadly, the point is creating safe space for learning and development. It's harder to develop new ways of being in an environment that reinforces the old ones.

Sounds like a solid point.

>where they can be role models for each other and people outside of tech.

Wouldn't it be a good idea to put more women who reach accomplisments in tech in the spotlight? Because I rarely hear about the results etc of conferences like these.

Putting more women in the spotlight might be a good idea, but these events don't prevent doing so as well. If anything, they might help by increasing their visibility.

Segregation is not harmful in itself. It depends on how it's applied. It's easy to see that this doesn't map to Jim Crow, and a lot of disingenuous people try to make it map anyway to serve their own agenda.

Considering you had to make a throw-away account to express your rather mild opinion, and then was immediately down-voted for it, yeah, I definitely agree you have an unpopular opinion. More than that, the whole issue of gender in tech has become toxic because of the two opposing sides polarizing the issue.

In my place of work, most of the folks there identity themselves with things like "the front end js / photoshop guru who works out a lot", "that designer who boldly splashes black", "the one who listens to your problems and helps you deal with life", or even "the vegan crossfit dba", and literally no one identifies him or herself "female programmer", "male engineer", or what have you... Incidentally, despite the fact people flirt, joke, and laugh while working and being professional, we've never had a problem with sexism.

Considering you had to make a throw-away account to express your rather mild opinion, and then was immediately down-voted for it, yeah, I definitely agree you have an unpopular opinion.

Or maybe people that are interested in the conference want to talk about it without having the conversation hijacked by a rehash of the tired argument around the question of gendered events, which never goes anywhere on HN.

A down vote does not necessarily imply disagreement of the opinion expressed - it might just express disagreement on the choice of thread on which it should be made.

I'm with you.

We have separate events for women in sports because they wouldn't be able to compete with men for obvious biological reasons. Holding separate events for entrepreneurship or engineering in the same way we do for sports sends the message that women can't compete with men in these fields either, which isn't true.

You would think so but if investors discriminate against female founders, It doesn't really matter if women are capable.

Also even as investor perceptions change, Women are still under represented in the startup circle and as with any other under represented demographic I don't see any problem with holding events that inspire/educate them to start a company.

> Holding separate events for entrepreneurship or engineering in the same way we do for sports sends the message that women can't compete with men in these fields either, which isn't true.

I wouldn't say that's necessarily true, it could be merely acknowledging (what I consider to be) the fact that women communicate differently enough from men that they'd like to have their own get togethers now and then. Is it "sexist"? Sure. Is that bad? I don't see how. Men in tech get to work closely with other men all the time, women don't. I don't see how women wanting the same thing just sometimes can't be considered perfectly reasonable.

We have separate events for women in chess tournaments as well. Could it possibly gasp be that womens brains are different to mens? Or is that utterly too horrifying to some to comprehend...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com