>>egamir+w8
did you read it, or are you just trolling?

> If you identify as a woman and are interested in joining Leap, please sign up for our beta here [https://leap.ycombinator.com/]

>>stable+(OP)
Direct sign-up link:

https://leap.ycombinator.com

>>bischo+R9
>I am a bit triggered.

This is tangential to your point, but I'm pretty sure what you're referring to isn't being "triggered." It's, I don't know, disagreeing? It has a specific and important definition, and it seems to be getting thrown around in other scenarios, to the detriment of those with PTSD.

https://www.webmd.com/mental-health/what-are-ptsd-triggers

>>Ranger+lc
I put together a gif with some example content from Leap when I posted Leap on Product Hunt. You can check it out here if you like: https://www.producthunt.com/posts/leap-by-yc. I'd describe it as a hybrid. I'd love to hear which bucket you'd put it in.

>>stable+(OP)
We all need a safe space to come in from the cold. When you feel vulnerable, you want to communicate with friendly, like-minded people. However, you'll find more noise within an echo chamber and that jerks exist regardless of gender.

This sort of gender-specific walled garden is nothing new and I suppose will always attract a certain stereotype. Here's an old Anthony Lewis post from 1994 that may sober folks on the idea: http://www.nytimes.com/1994/10/14/opinion/abroad-at-home-tim...

"I wouldn't want to belong to a club that would have me as a member" --Groucho Marx

>>fvdess+Pc
We women in tech frequently need to re-hash this discussion. We offer personal anecdotes, and they are written off as outliers. We present diversity numbers and pay gap data, and we are told that those are due to women either choosing family life over career or that we are biologically predisposed to not being as good as men at tech. We present data and stories about rampant, institutionalized sexism at large industry leaders, and we are scolded for being "overly sensitive". Assertiveness is conflated as bitchiness. Timidness as incompetence. The advantage is apparent - the real goal of constantly asking us to prove the advantage is to create doubt and the appearance of a controversy over the data. But I see these as thinly veiled gaslighting attempts. I have worked in tech all my life, and have had many men take credit for my initiatives and ideas, talk over me constantly through most meetings, pass me up for promotions because I didn't "engage with the team" (ie. attending late night drinking sessions at strip clubs), always get second guessed - even when I am the resident SME and was hired specifically for task, etc. I have lived it. If more men would make themselves aware of the systemic sexism in the industry instead of making women repeat themselves, argue every data point, and be 3x as good as their peers to receive recognition, maybe we could stop having this discussion . . .

See:

https://blog.100tb.com/the-technology-industry-is-a-mans-wor...

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/08/women-in-tech-gender-...

https://www.witi.com/articles/1165/Men-Dominate-the-Tech-Ind...

https://qz.com/940660/tech-is-overwhelmingly-male-and-men-ar...

Also:

http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_incidents

There are piles of data. Seriously, you are one google away from incontrovertible evidence.

>>cbcowa+F4
How does your site cater to the nonbinary and trans communities?

Does the fact you apparently require participation in Facebook to register signal that you agree with Facebook's policy of outing trans and gender-non-conforming individuals in the enforcement of its "real name" policy?

(Not to imply that's anywhere near the only problem with Facebook's "real name" policy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_real-name_policy_cont... )

>>mychae+Di
You know how right now you're offended, and feeling left out just because of your gender? That's how some women in tech feel all the time.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16160940

>>rev_bi+Xb
The word was properly being used. The definition of triggered is "anything, as an act or event, that serves as a stimulus and initiates or precipitates a reaction or series of reactions."[1] Definitions also change over time, and the colloquial definition of the word seems to be shifting to "Getting filled with hate after seeing, hearing or experiencing something you can't stand."[2]

[1] http://www.dictionary.com/browse/triggered

[2] https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Triggered

>>sieveb+eo
I warned you once in this thread already (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16161338), but you've managed to break yet another HN site guideline with this comment, the one that reads as follows:

Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize.

Obviously Cadran was talking about making Leap inclusive within the scope of being a forum for women—that's what the question was about. You don't have to agree with any particular view to see that, it just takes basic respect. If you can't or won't abide by the rules here, please stop commenting until you can.

>>TheAda+Oc
> Why would fighting racism with racism or sexism with sexism be a productive

Here you cross into making this yet another same-old generic ideological thread, thus guaranteeing repetition and tedium. What more we can do to explain to HNers that this is where discussions become off topic because the light/heat ratio goes to zero? I realize the line isn't obvious when a topic starts out close to it anyhow. But you know, it especially isn't obvious when you aren't consciously looking for it in the first place. Since you have a habit of doing this in HN threads and stand out as a user who's done particular damage this way—unintentionally I'm sure—we need you to do a better job with this.

Perhaps the following heuristic would help. If a comment breaks away from the specific content of the specific story and becomes generically ideological, it's on the wrong side of the line and you probably should not post it.

Note that this doesn't have to do with the ideologies or politics in question, or what view you're arguing for. It has to do with generic discussions being boring in HN's sense of the word.

https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...

>>rev_bi+2t
Your comments have been crossing into incivility in this thread—not principled incivility, just garden-variety internet swipes like "I don't give a shit", "this is nonsense", and "you're pretending". All this breaks the HN guidelines, regardless of how wrong someone else is or how right you are or feel. Please read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and get on the right side of the rules if you want to keep commenting here.

>>fvdess+Pr
You'd probably like this essay if you haven't seen it before: https://medium.com/@maradydd/when-nerds-collide-31895b01e68c

>>tptace+lz
Gender is a protected class, so "it's (not) illegal" in either direction is a bit of a blanket statement. So let me try and be more precise.

In some states, AFAIK the "women-only gym" is allowed, but in others it isn't. The point, if I remember correctly, is "exercise requires such compromising clothes and positions, that the right to personal privacy trumps the right to not be discriminated based on gender". And even then, this is not a 100% clear case. Toilets and physical activity follow a similar (although less polemic) pattern.

Having said that, and as far as I understand, you need to show that discriminating based on gender is so important for your activity that it can't be done in any other way. My gut feeling is that, should anyone sue Leap, clearing that barrier would not be trivial.

I would appreciate a lawyer's point of view, and was hoping that Leap had already talked to one that could give a properly researched answer.

Edit: I found a very interesting article[1] about the law when it comes to all-female health clubs. As expected, the conclusion seems to be "it's complicated".

[1] http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?artic...

>>beat+xu
"The real reason why there are so fewer women in tech isn’t because of discrimination, harassment or unequal pay (although like I said these factors do exist and need to be fixed). The real reason is that most women clearly aren’t as interested in technology-related work as men are. It’s a choice. And for whatever reasons, more women seem to choose other fields."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/quickerbettertech/2015/03/16/th...

>>louiss+QN
It isn't frowned upon at all! Substantive comments are best, whether agreeing or disagreeing. But among unsubstantive comments, it's the negative ones that we frown upon, not the positive ones. Here's what pg wrote years ago:

Empty comments can be ok if they're positive. There's nothing wrong with submitting a comment saying just "Thanks." What we especially discourage are comments that are empty and negative—comments that are mere name-calling.

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

>>studio+vQ
We've banned this account for trolling. Please don't create accounts to break the site guidelines with.

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

>>_zachs+Dz
What specifics are you seeking? Have you read any of the linked articles in this thread? Or performed a single google search?

-Pay Gap: https://www.aauw.org/research/the-simple-truth-about-the-gen...

-Employment Gap: https://www.forbes.com/sites/christinawallace/2016/10/20/gir...

-Leadership Gap: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-02/why-so-fe...

-Visibility Gap: https://hbr.org/2016/09/to-succeed-in-tech-women-need-more-v...

-Sexism/Hostile Workplaces: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/04/why-is-...

-Hiring Discrimination: https://www.aauw.org/2015/06/11/john-or-jennifer/

-General Discrimination: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/11/20/the-tech-indus...

And just in case you missed it the last time: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_incidents

>>probab+HI
IANAL, but:

> Gender is a protected class

Which means that businesses doing public accommodation are restricted from discriminating, but 'private clubs' (such as the Boy Scouts), who have a narrowly tailored interest that is benefitted by discrimination against a protected class is generally allowed (subject to variances within state law).

For example, a group for men who have been sexually molested by men would likely be considered presumptively lawful, but a group for men who also happen to be car salesmen would likely not be.

There are a number of details that need to be considered as well, as (loosely) prescribed by _Rotary Club of Duarte[1]_, such as exclusivity (it can't be publicly available to be overheard), and purpose (already covered), but if neither conditions are met, and a state law prohibits such discrimination, then it meets (at least) a rational basis standard.

[1] - https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/481/537

>>jochun+q41
So because some guy at big tech co was reprimanded for publishing his opinions on the matter (the veracity of which we don't even need to get into), the real injustice here is a man's inability to speak, not a woman's inability to do her job in a safe/supportive environment?

Both speech and gender issues are complex, no doubt. But what I do have are my own very real, collected experiences as well as those of many other women I've talked to and read about on the topic. There is also plenty of data if you look. [0] It's getting tiring to have to continually explain to men that yes! This is actually a problem! No matter whether you think you've seen differently, no matter what your probably good intentions are. This stuff is happening all around you, and hey, maybe it's because you've enjoyed a lifetime of it not happening to you that you aren't constantly attuned to it.

[0] earlier post in this thread with some links to data https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=16163130&goto=threads%...

>>YeGobl+Vi2
There are real genetic differences in how the brains of men and women work. Men and women do not have the same interests, the same goals, nor the same desires. To claim otherwise is ignoring established scientific facts. Studies on this subject always lead to the same conclusion: That women are just less interested in tech jobs, just as men are less interested in social jobs.[0]

I presented the OP with a objective, data-based argument and limited myself to quoting only the article (of which there are many, many, many more I could have chosen from) exactly to avoid a subjective response like yours. I am not interested in ideological discussions about purely subjective arguments (Read: flamewars). You can ignore the data all you like, but please don't try to drag me into an argument with that.

[0]: https://flowingdata.com/2017/09/11/most-female-and-male-occu...

>>cbcowa+Kr
Here are some ideas:

lobste.rs has a invite system where a person who invites someone may potentially be kicked if the person they invite is a problem. See https://lobste.rs/about#invitations

Organize a booth or representative at women-focused tech events like FFC or GHC, or have events/meetups for Leap members to meet face-to-face where prospective members are also invited. The invite system would make this easier to implement.