zlacker

>>femfos+(OP)
A female founder acquaintance of mine (who's quite smart and capable) went on a Twitter screed a couple weeks ago. As it turns out, someone else had copied her idea, and her startup now had a competitor. The competitor was also able to raise a solid amount of money despite her being first to market and her having more relevant knowledge of the problem space (by her own estimation).

So, this scenario isn't exactly uncommon in the startup world. It happens all the time. But because she's a minority female and her competitor is a white man, it suddenly becomes an example of white supremacy and the patriarchy conspiring to oppress her. The VCs who funded the competitor? Obviously racists and sexists, and she called them out explicitly as that on Twitter.

I considered reaching out to her to offer some perspective, but ultimately demurred. Why? I didn't want to be caught in the wurlitzer. Better to let her make more problems for herself than offer a sense of perspective that could get me cancelled.

>>scarmi+6O

  So, this scenario isn't exactly uncommon in the startup world. It happens all the time. But because she's a minority female and her competitor is a white man, it suddenly becomes an example of white supremacy and the patriarchy conspiring to oppress her.

Doesn't this sort of thinking basically make these notions into a conspiracy theory? Every piece of evidence interpreted in a way that it supports the chosen narrative.

One consequence is so many opportunities for insight and thoughtful constructive reflection are lost. It's funny to me that under the guise of narratives that supposedly empower women (narratives which have also, as in the above example, been abused beyond their true purpose of calling out actual unfair bias), women are instead holding themselves back and getting in their own way mightily... and they don't seem to realize it? How can so many smart women have such a whopping blindspot to be duped into acting this way and think this is "power"?

I think it has something to do with how compelling and self-satisfying these stories are. You know, the ability to blame everyone else rather than face yourself and take personal responsibility. So, sadly i think, many people just get addicted to this as a short circuit substitute for actually doing the hard work of processing experiences and cultivating useful insights out of them. They just short circuit to feeling good temporarily, sadly prioritizing these fake stories and reasons over getting results.

It seems if a movement was really interested in empowering women it would try to address this glaring structural weakness of the current approach rather getting them hooked on these fake payoffs that don't get them anywhere :(

>>gadf+7T
It's genuinely difficult to find the right balance, though. (Even as an individual, let alone as a society.) I don't think there's a clean solution; the only easily-applied heuristics are the stupid extreme ones, either assuming that everything that could possibly be Xism is Xism, or that nothing is Xism unless the perpetrator conveniently says something like 'women can't do maths' or 'I don't want you to work here because you are black'. I'm not really sure what to do about this; maybe we just have to wait, make our own judgments as best we can, and hope that our society finds a non-terrible equilibrium.

>>retsib+kY
it's definitely about balance, i don't think it should be as hard as it seems though. what does seem difficult [and is extremely sad in my view] is that Occam's razor type edge, acting like a filter between achieving that balance or not. you said this, i agree.

the sad part is something like this thread; where half [majority? like before Reddit hit critical mass] the people can/do understand what the difference is between, say, trolling and a dialectic or stoic whatchamacallit, and those that don't/can't.

as i think this thread seems to generally agree, those that can't then resort to this rhetoric you're talking about. you can see the same echoes in things like socialism and fascism. general bigotry. the backhand of misunderstanding.

where it really gets messy is when you have University graduates who can't understand these 'tropes'/dynamics/straight up logic getting opportunities ahead of an uneducated person that CAN understand those things, simply because they have that degree. it comes from the same place where racism and sexism are valid. where it's invalid you get this blame game. it's the hammer and the nail. those who can, do. those who can't, say... the Germans must have a word for this? man i wish i was more articulate cause i think we've all [as in hacker news minded type people?] got the words for this on the tips of our tongues. so much so that even out most basic know it's coming [the civil war chatter].