
Noah Kagan and the Faceless Bitch slide - pw
http://sherprog.com/2011/07/10/noah-kagan-and-the-faceless-bitch-slide/
======
frankdenbow
(I was the guy in front scraping hot sauce off my computer/bag/clothes after
you threw the bottle up front)

Totally understand why you would be offended by the slide. Noah is a bit
edgier than most, and he was likely going for entertainment value. It was not
in the best taste to do it.

From what I know of Noah Kagan, he seems to be a good guy that goes out of his
way to help people in the scene. If all you got out of his talk was to type
faster, I think you missed out on a lot. There are lots of great points that
were made that may have been lost in presentation for you. Also not sure if he
fully understood why you wanted to explain why you threw the bottle, but I'll
let him defend himself on that.

I'm all for being upfront and honest about things (sort of what my last post
was about [0]) so its good to have these things out there. Its much more
effective than throwing hotsauce at innocent bystanders :-)

0: [http://frankdenbow.tumblr.com/post/7269203638/on-honesty-
in-...](http://frankdenbow.tumblr.com/post/7269203638/on-honesty-in-
startupland)

~~~
edash
I didn't get hot sauce on me and I wasn't at MicroConf — but I will defend
Noah. I've met him on several occasions and he's been friendly and helpful. He
also gives time and energy to many people and projects without wanting
anything in return.

I'm not defending his presentation; that slide offends me too. But I know that
he deserves better than to wake up seeing this on the front page of Hacker
News.

The author could have used the slide as a jumping off point for greater issues
like gender equality in tech, or the pros and cons of being offensive in a
presentation, or even a discussion about the word "bitch". Any of those topics
would have forwarded the point more than writing a long ad hominem attack on
someone who surely didn't intend to hurt or offend anyone personally.

~~~
niels_olson
Pro tip: one should not defend clearly sexist behavior if for no other reason
than it associates you with sexist behavior in your own mind. And the
speaker's behavior, as described, is clearly sexist.

~~~
edash
I wasn't defending Noah's behavior. I was defending Noah.

~~~
niels_olson
Your defense is wrapped up in the context of the entire conversation, which is
specifically about a particular behavior. Claims that you're offended by the
behavior and are only defending ther person, even if they are genuine, are
superseded by the enclosing context. For better or worse.

------
peteforde
This is a sad story. I'm really genuinely bothered when I hear about guys that
persist in thinking that this sort of presentation is cool or appropriate. I
am sorry that you're upset about it, and I feel badly for the event organizer.
This is the part that people will remember, not all of the amazing stuff.
Conference organizing is surprisingly thankless.

That said, you have to admit that the hot sauce aspect of this story is really
funny. What the heck did you hope to accomplish? If you'd actually hit him,
he'd be legally entitled to press charges.

Did you end up apologizing to the attendees that got splashed, or offer to
cover the cleaning bill for the conference organizer?

Sexism on stage or not, if you'd hit my shirt and my computer, I'd be pissed
off.

------
w1ntermute
Much like with Matt Aimonetti's "CouchDB: Perform like a pr0n star"
presentation[0], the male-dominated nature of the tech industry sadly often
makes men think that it's acceptable to say and do sexist things at industry
conferences. It's already hard enough to get women into technology, and things
like this only make it even harder.

0: [http://omploader.org/vNWNrNg/gogaruco-
couchdb-090418194027-p...](http://omploader.org/vNWNrNg/gogaruco-
couchdb-090418194027-phpapp02.pdf)

~~~
mikemaccana
My standard for sexism is: would it be OK to do it if the situations were
reversed?

So imagine a woman on stage, picture of some dude with a blot over his face
and 'BASTARD' written on it.

\- Sexist? Not sure it would indicate the speaker hates all men per se, just
this one.

\- But lame, like the speaker couldn't control themselves over their anger at
someone and had to bring it on stage for some kind of pathetic vindication?
Sure.

I'd advise not doing this not because it's sexist, but because it makes the
speaker look like an angry, sad individual.

PS. If the hot sauce was glass, that's obviously even worse. Lesson: stupid
drama (like throwing some ex girlfriend on an unrelated talk) invites more
stupid drama (like throwing bottles at someone rather than using words as a
first resort).

~~~
raganwald
That doesn't work in situations where there is a power imbalance. For example,
let's use our time machine and travel back to 1978. Consider the words
"Nigger" and "Honky" in a presentation. Nigger was way more offensive, to the
point that there really wasn't an equivalent slur you could apply to so-called
white people.

It's the same thing with "bitch." There is a power imbalance such that there
isn't an equivalent slur you can apply to men. "Bastard" doesn't even come
close to capturing the degrading implications of "bitch" today. Maybe it did
in the Middle Ages, but not today.

~~~
gojomo
If you use general-audience television/movies and the speech of the young as
an indicator, 'bitch' oddly seems to be becoming more acceptable over time.
I'm not sure if this is a rise of sexism, or simply a weakening of the word's
'degrading implications'. (It might even be a indication of falling sexism;
the word becoming less seen as a uniquely-gendered slur, and no worse than
calling someone a 'dick' or 'pig'.)

A poll of usage and attitudes by age might be interesting.

~~~
raganwald
On my ride to the office I had the thought that the launch of MTV may have
something to do with it. Just as my parents' generation made "fuck" an
everyday word, the MTV generation seem to have a different view of the words
"nigger" and "bitch," possibly in part because of the glamorization of hip hop
culture.

~~~
gojomo
Perhaps, but also: quasi-feminist efforts to reclaim the word and imbue it
with some positive qualities, of which a few examples would be:

• 'Bitch', Oakland- and then Portland-based feminist magazine, launched 1996

• Meredith Brooks' 2000 hit pop single, 'Bitch'

• a boomlet of books with 'Bitch' in the title, ranging from Elizabeth
Wurtzel's 'Bitch: in Praise of Difficult Women' (1999) to Helena Andrews'
'Bitch is the New Black' this year

That is, I don't think it's just hip-hop or glamorization of misogyny that's
the popularizing/de-taboo-ifying factor here.

~~~
raganwald
Well, that's interesting. I certainly have seen tee shirts proclaiming the
wearer to be a "Babe In Total Control of Herself."

------
lxmorj
Thoughts:

-She threw the bottle and it landed halfway. Was it an inaccurate assessment of Noah to assume she might not catch it? Looks like she proved him right in that regard, at least.

-The picture wasn't 'scantily clad' or derogatory, and was unidentifiable. There is a fair chance it wasn't even a picture of an ex.

-There was _some_ context, albeit I believe the main point was to keep people awake. 6 hours of speakers is a lot.

-Maybe I'm thinking too much into it, but I'm fairly sure 'type faster' was analogous to 'little shit can add up'.

-I've always considered 'bitch' to be a female specific version of 'dick'. Both being fairly synonymous with 'asshole'.

-She very much objectively f'ed up some of Frank's things. I was sitting between them and the bottle flew directly over my head. It is kind of a joke to get mad at someone's immaturity and respond in-kind, damaging a bystanders property.

 __Long story short- Noah is blunt. Maybe douchey. But throwing a tantrum and
making a mess hardly gives you the higher ground. __

------
pw
For those who attended MicroConf, this post is by Anne Gunn, the woman who
threw back the bottle of hot sauce during Kagan's presentation. Unfortunately,
it didn't quite make it and landed on some audience members.

EDIT: For clarity. (Anne wasn't trying to hit Kagan. She was just trying to
return the bottle the same way Kagan had been distributing them.)

~~~
tomjen3
So now posting a (to some people) offensive picture on a slide means that it
is okay to _physically_ attack (or attempt to) other people?

If I even get to make a presentation in such a place, and fill it with Nazi
symbols I may be asked to go (or the attendents might leave) but I am not
going to be physically attacked for it.

Yet bitch never killed anyone.

~~~
JonnieCache
Yeah, OP, I agree with all your points, the fact that you responded violently
kinda undermines the whole thing. Throwing glass around could have gone
_really_ badly as well.

You acknowledge that it would have been better to calmly walk out, but this
seems in your mind to be rather a matter of style and grace, rather than the
fatal loss of the moral high ground that it is. Physical violence is worse
than sexist language, full stop.

But yeah, as I say, I agree with you. This kinda shit is what makes me puts me
off the whole tech scene and makes me glad that I'm kind of an outsider at the
moment. That and the fact that if I'd been there I'd probably have been
tempted to shout "FOOD FIGHT!"

EDIT: I see that it was plastic, not glass. Still, play nice children.

~~~
michael_dorfman
It's clear from the OP that the intention was not violent, but rather, to toss
the bottle back in the way that Kagan was tossing them to the audience.

In other words, the primary error in judgment was one of distance and
trajectory, not malicious intent.

~~~
jawns
Yeah, but in the case where Kagan was tossing them to the audience, I'm
assuming he gave them some indication that he was about to hurl something at
them so they'd be ready to catch it. Did the OP give Kagan the same heads up?

~~~
frankdenbow
The point of the hotsauce was that Noah was rewarding people who asked good
questions. She didnt warn anyone that she was throwing it back, i just heard a
big thud and saw hotsauce everywhere. As was said earlier, it was more an
error in trajectory and force than malice.

------
verdum
I've dealt with Kagan in the past and without going into too much detail, had
a very negative impression. A shameless self promoter, who gave off the
impression that he had no integrity.

~~~
red_dawn
I hate to create a throw away account for this, but I've had the same
experience as you. I got the impression Noah was mostly a kid who is good at
hustling, but with no ethical framework to support him. The recent email in
which the readers were lead into thinking Tim Ferriss was involved, is just
one example of his professional standards. To his credit, his customer support
can be very good and prompt.

------
BasDirks
I'm sorry to say, but I agree that Kagan's a total douche, both for this and
previous remarks online. The amount of posts about sexism is starting to annoy
the hell out of me, but it does deserve attention.

~~~
jarin
It's ok to call him a "douche" though.

(Not defending him, just pointing out the irony)

~~~
eli
Well, for one thing, the context is entirely different.

I told my coworker he was being a moron last week at happy hour. However, it
would be entirely inappropriate if I added a slide about how he's a moron to
my next conference slide deck.

------
Vivtek
I read the entire thing thinking OP was male. It perplexed me why Kagan
responded with a curt "No" when asked whether he wanted to understand the
episode.

Then I saw from the first comment that OP's name is Anne - and suddenly saw
why Kagan had been a jerk with her.

~~~
k33n
If someone threw a bottle of hot sauce at me during a high pressure situation,
I wouldn't care at all about what they have to say to me. If she had
approached him respectfully, without an unprovoked physical attack, he would
have responded much differently.

~~~
Vivtek
Maybe. I see nothing to support that hypothesis here, but if it makes you feel
better, then by all means.

------
look_lookatme
His slide was offensive and doesn't belong at a conference, but neither does
petulant behavior such as throwing a bottle of hot sauce at the speaker in the
middle of his or her presentation.

~~~
michael_dorfman
But the OP made it very clear that her act was _not_ "throwing a bottle of hot
sauce at the speaker in the middle of his or her presentation."

~~~
jerrya
OP mansplained that her act was not "throwing a bottle of hot sauce at the
speaker in the middle of his or her presentation."

Regardless of her mansplanation, in fact her act was "throwing a bottle of hot
sauce at the speaker in the middle of his or her presentation."

Imagine you're the principal of a middle school and you heard what happened in
the auditorium. Are you going to give both kids detention, neither kids,
detention, or one kid (which one?) detention?

------
petercooper
Some rather passive aggressive writing in there attempting to belittle Kagan
(who I suspect couldn't care less). But this stood out to me as an indicator
of the poster's disdain:

 _"Apparently, in the small but influential industry of high tech companies
and service providers who cater to high tech startup companies (yes, I’m
serious, there is such an industry), Noah Kagan is a bit of a rock star."_

Yeah, there is such an industry, but the faux incredulity only serves to
weaken the other points made.

~~~
Duff
The ironic thing is that the passive/aggressive style reflects more poorly on
the author. It sounds like a public justification about throwing the hot sauce
and soaking people.

I know nothing about Kagan, except that he sounds like a self-promoter who
values name recognition above all else. So whomever wrote this screed was
successful at: A - Demonstrating to the world that she is an immature,
passive-aggressive type and B - Letting me know who Noah Kagan, a man I have
never heard of, is.

Who "won" here?

------
etruong42
tl;dr the author attended MicroConf2011, enjoyed the overall experience, but
disagreed with (aspects of) Noah Kagan's presentation and ended up throwing a
bottle of hot sauce at the presenter.

The rambling, ranting writing style removed all of the author's credibility in
my eyes. The writing focused on the author's actions and feelings, rather than
the facts of the day. The fact that the author threw a bottle of hot sauce
does not help portray a level-headed narrator either. The author may be
providing a legitimate case and outcry against sexism, but when the author
reduces it to matter of their own ego and hurt feelings, I do not give it any
credence.

~~~
anishkothari
This reminds of the food fights in high school.

------
econgeeker
New Rule: If you're going to show a sexy, naked, or scantily clad woman in a
slide, you damn well better be making a self deprecating joke.

If you show a derogatory slide about an innocent bystander (such as an ex-
girlfriend) whatever you say about them is a reflection on you, not them. (Of
course, making fun of your legitimate competition is always a risk, as well.)

~~~
LaGrange
New rule: if a presenter shows a sexy, naked or scantily clad woman in a
slide, and tries to justify themselves by making a self-deprecating joke, the
audience is supposed to say "oh yes you are", spray them with hot sauce, and
leave.

~~~
Tichy
What if it is a conference of the porn industry? Or even just the fashion
industry?

~~~
praptak
I'm not sure what your point is. If all you mean is that there might exist
some conferences where nobody would notice then yes (also: sky is blue.) But
what does it have to do with this discussion?

~~~
Tichy
The point was that the rule might not be useful everywhere. Sorry for adding a
pointless point to a pointless discussion. I figured at this comment depth it
might be OK to insert some humor.

I guess my bigger point was really that this discussion is pointless on such a
general level.

~~~
seabee
The point is that the rule should not actually be a rule. At least, I took it
to be a simple reversal of the original 'rule' post.

------
veastley
I was sitting right in front of Anne at the conference, so I didn't see her
throw the hot sauce, but I did see the bottle explode all over the stage and
the people in front of me. My first response was to shut my MacBook Air. ;-)

An awkward tension hung in the air like a big stink bomb once everyone
realized what had just happened. Noah managed to brush off the incident and
continue his talk as if nothing happened. I'm sure I couldn't have continued
so coolly if I were in his place.

I doubt any of us at the conference understand what was going through Anne's
head at the time. I was confused by the whole incident, and figured she didn't
want the hot sauce and was trying to playfully toss it back.

As for Noah's presentation, I thought parts of it were very low-class and out
of place. My opinion of him as a person was lower at the end of his talk. That
said, I did gain some valuable insights that have helped me focus better and
improve my business.

------
cipherpunk
Oh for crying out loud. Someone got angry at a picture of an ex-girlfriend
with "bitch" on her face -- WHY?

It might be a bit distasteful, but what the fucking hell is offensive about it
unless you _were_ the ex?

If I put a photo up of my ex-boss and it had the word "cock" on his face would
males in the crowd start getting really offended and start throwing bottles at
stage? If so, I think the problem is in the audience. This has nothing to do
with sexism.

~~~
LaGrange
Oh my god. You are joking, right? You're actually getting it, but trying to
portray a kind of disgusting sexist male that would say that?

The slide is offensive, because it relates to objectification of women. It's
just that. It would be hard to explain it to you, and, actually, the only
reason you don't get it is because you don't want to get it, so I won't even
bother for your sake. But, like, I don't think things like what you said
should be left without an answer, because some innocent might stumble upon
them and think no one objects.

It's because of the way women are treated. It's because of the prevalence of
violence and rape. It's because a dude probably won't be battered and raped
due to him being an ex, but it's something that happens to women all the time.
It's something that's hard to grasp for most dudes, including you. It does
relate to a form of violence/abuse, and only way you can reject that is by
being intentionally obtuse.

Oh, and if he put up his previous boss face with the word "cock" on it, he
would stand a serious chance of being fired. He put up his ex's (or just
random woman's, still relevant) photo with a word "bitch" on it and he still
has a job. And the job lets him speak publicly. What. The. Hell.

~~~
guelo
If I really hate my ex girlfriend and think she is a horrible evil woman, what
would be a good biting derogatory word to use that would connotate "awful
female" without other women seeing it as an attack on the entire gender?

~~~
raganwald
If she is an awful _person_ , just say so. The fact that you connect her
awfulness with her gender is the problem. Consider the fact that I am an
asshole. I can describe this in many ways without needing to describe my so-
called color. But the moment someone calls me a Nigger... That's wrong.

Same thing.

~~~
defen
Can't say I'm a fan of this sterile world where realms of human experience and
observation are ignored for the sake of an ideology.

~~~
raganwald
Can you be a bit more specific? What is sterile about describing a person in
opprobrious terms without using the word "bitch?"

What realms of human experience and observation are we ignoring? I suggest the
opposite: Slurs like "bitch" are _lazy_ , they ignore the myriad of subtle
colours and shades of human behavior and replace them with a catch-all that
means roughly "we disapprove of you."

I am certain that a man can damn his ex with far more wounding intent by
expanding his vocabulary and unleashing his inner poet. Such insults would
hardly be sterile, they would be _fecund_.

~~~
defen
First of all I want to make it clear that I'm not defending Noah's use of that
slide - I think it was dumb. I don't think that you think I approve of it, but
I just wanted to get that out of the way up front. For the sake of argument
though I'll be operating under the assumption that denigrating an ex- in a
slide is a good idea, and the issue is to choose the correct word.

Back on topic, the ideology I was thinking of is the idea that men and women
aren't statistically different (or if they are, that mentioning such things is
impolite). I would argue that "bitch" captures a characteristically female way
of hurting a man with whom she's had a relationship. (See _Carmen_ for the
high-culture version, or Louis CK for the pop-culture version -
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpW3orlfp7E>) It's true that the word also
carries other connotations, but I don't think that was the intent.

I agree that it may be "lazy", but from a purely practical perspective, it
would be tough to find a similarly short word (short enough to fit on the
bobble-head) that conveys the meaning. "Evil" might work and is gender-
neutral, but the class of actions that make one "evil" are broader than the
class that make one a "bitch".

------
jerryr
This is worth a read for anyone presenting:
<http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Incidents>

I won't go so far as to condone the OPs actions, but I can understand why
women in tech might be at a breaking point.

------
kadavy
This is going to be a very biased comment because Noah is a close personal
friend of mine.

Noah will generally be the same guy while talking to your parents as he is
having a beer with close friends: direct, open, and sometimes irreverent. This
is shocking to many people in our (to use the author's term) "post-polite"
society, but this is precisely why _Noah is one of my favorite people in the
world._ When you're talking to Noah, you know that he will tell you exactly
what he thinks, and he'll have fun doing it.

I owe a tremendous portion of any success I've had to Noah. In addition to
being a brilliant marketer, Noah has taught me to ask for forgiveness and not
for permission - something every entrepreneur needs to be reminded of every
once in awhile. He's always been a huge help to me. A mere 2-minute
conversation with him can be pure gold, so it's a shame that the author was
too upset to absorb what was (just positing - I wasn't there) probably a great
presentation.

On one hand, I personally would not have used "the bitch slide" in a
presentation. There are not enough women in tech, and while I wouldn't compare
the word "bitch" to a racial slur, it is just sexist enough to ensure that at
least some of the few women who are in the audience will feel alienated when
used within the context of a male-dominated conference.

I'm sure that Noah doesn't really think that his ex-girlfriend is a bitch. His
current girlfriend is the only serious relationship I've known him to have in
the past 5 years, so he may have just made up this ex for the sake of joking.
In actuality, Noah is one of the more emotionally mature and communicative
people I've ever met, so he's perfectly capable of understanding that
relationships are two-way streets.

On the other hand, the hypersensitivity the author demonstrates is exactly the
kind of buttoned-up bourgeois bullshit that made me want to work for myself. I
want the freedom to be myself. Sexuality, relationships, and the ambivalence
that comes from all of it are a part of being a human, and success in
entrepreneurship is about as close as one can come to self-actualization (at
least in America).

The line:

> the small but influential industry of high tech companies and service
> providers who cater to high tech startup companies (yes, I’m serious, there
> is such an industry)

gives away that the author was clearly out of her element. This isn't the
world of stodgy HR policies and training manuals. We make it up as we go
along, we test the boundaries, and sometimes we make mistakes just to find out
where those boundaries are. I'll be damned if a flame post and an errant
Sriracha bottle is going to take that away from us.

~~~
verdum
"Noah has taught me to ask for forgiveness and not for permission"

This. I speak as an entrepreneur: if you're crossing a moral line and using
this as justification, you're using the philosophy in the "wrong" way.

~~~
kadavy
I think you're implying that putting up a slide with a faceless person on it
and calling them a "bitch" is inherently morally objectionable? If so, I
wouldn't agree with that.

Louis CK called his 4 year old daughter a "bitch" [0] on stage, and I know I'm
not alone in thinking it was hilarious.

Noah called an anonymous person a bitch. If it were a comedy club, probably
nothing would have been said. But, it was a tech conference, and there
probably weren't many females there, so it came off as sexist, and it
alienated and offended at least one person. As the author alludes to when
mentioning the style of presentation, the line between conference presentation
and comedy routine is blurred.

Noah made an attempt at comedy, and it apparently didn't work out. (I wasn't
there, so maybe it was hilarious)

[0] <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vRhr502wIc#t=1m24s>

------
davidandgoliath
Curious, if the speaker were female, and had a slide where she had 'asshole'
written over some guy's face (Let's use Noah's as an example), would there be
a similar level of outrage?

As much as it was obviously distasteful no matter the context, I'd find having
to listen to him for a half hour more offensive than the image -- worse,
knowing I had paid to attend a conference to listen to said drivel.

~~~
rwolf
This question presumes equality in other ways of our treatment of female
presenters. You have changed more than one variable.

------
andrewcooke
i first asked for a while back, but i think we need it more and more: i would
pay good money for a system that tracked people not as friends, but as
arseholes. an application that correlates identities across sites and greys
out their comments and the like. in "real life" i can pick my friends and drop
the arseholes. online i have no idea who "Thom" (see comments on that article)
might be, and no way of flagging that same user on, say stackoveflow, when
they are asking for help. we need some way to make karma work better online.

<http://www.acooke.org/cute/Automatemy0.html>

~~~
WingForward
iHate?

~~~
andrewcooke
well, more ithinkyouarenotveryniceandsoiwontplaywithyousothere or, perhaps
better, ifyouwantmyrespectgrowthefuckupandearnit

------
parfe
Kagan's current girlfriend should be the one offended. If he's willing to call
an ex a bitch she is in danger of him defaming her in a similar way if they
split. And they seem to share a professional environment which could be
detrimental to her career. Guys who publicly call exes bitches generally
consider all exes "bitches" because of their self centered view of why the
relationship failed.

"No Cindy, you're special. My ex Jane was total bitch."

"No Jane, you're special. My ex Stephanie was a total bitch."

"No Stephanie you're special. My ex Anne was a total bitch."

If he's capable of calling the ex a bitch in public he's capable of the same
with his current girlfriend.

------
peterwwillis
Request: next time anyone writes about a sexist talk by a clueless startup
rockstar, keep it to 5 paragraphs. I don't need to spend 20 minutes reading
filler just to hear about Sriracha throwing and a slide of a guy's ex-
girlfriend.

------
monochromatic
The faceless bitch slide? Maybe a little offensive and a touch douchey. But
breaking a bottle of hot sauce on people and then writing this rant? Bitchy.

Get over yourself.

------
nateberkopec
Whether or not we (the mostly male HN community) think it's "offensive" is
beside the point.

Are we going to encourage more women to get into tech if we call them
"faceless bitches?" Does that create a welcoming atmosphere?

I certainly don't think so. We sit back and wonder "gawrsh, why aren't there
more women hackers/programmers/tech entrepreneurs?"

This. This is why.

~~~
k33n
Would it have been appropriate for the speaker to display an image of a man
with his face covered with a circled labeled "asshole" before saying "this is
my old boss"?

I'd be willing to wager that OP is simply an unhappy, angry person who enjoys
playing the victim whenever possible. Nobody called her a bitch. Nobody called
all women in tech bitches.

If someone is so sensitive that one slide in a presentation would keep them
out of our industry, it's safe to say we're better off without them. I've
worked with plenty of women in tech and they're no different to me than my
male colleagues.

------
hadtocomment
It occurs to me that OP might be more upset about receiving the bottle of hot
sauce than she was about the images. Sure, the writhing woman and the bitch
slide were offensive, but it wasn't until Kagan ostensibly attempted to
marginalize her by rewarding her with the hot sauce that she really got angry.

Money quote: "What I should have done was stand up, walk the bottle of hot
sauce back up to the stage, point out to Noah Kagan that he had not earned the
right to give ME a token of recognition..."

That's really what this is all about: "boys being boys" and not acknowledging
that there's anything wrong with it, despite obvious indications (like an
audience member taking a photo of your offensive slide) that there is indeed
something wrong with it.

------
lesterbuck
I attended Microconf, and I sat on the third row aisle. Anne was sitting
directly behind me. Thus, I had a ringside seat for the hot sauce incident. I
am somewhat surprised to learn that Anne was enraged at the picture, as I was
not detecting that at all. I need to work on that. I do specifically remember
that Anne received the hot sauce and clearly did not want it, so she started
pumping her arm preparing to return it. Alas, after three or four pumps, Noah
had not noticed, and I figured she would return it otherwise. But suddenly it
was released, without enough force to make it to the side of the stage where
she was aiming. My impression at the time was that Anne was being playful in
the same way as Noah, trying to give it back, but that was not what was going
through Anne's head. If I had known she was so upset, I would have discussed
it with her. As it was, I just thought it was a playful way to get into the
flow of the talk that had backfired, and best not bring it up with her.

As for Noah, I was looking forward to his Microconf talk, as I listen to most
Mixergy interviews, and Noah is a huge resource for Andrew's recruiting new
interviewees. It is interesting how Noah has briliant ideas but seems to have
some impulse control. For example, sending underwear to people he wants to
meet, to get their attention - brilliant! Showing his underwear during a
Mixergy interview - a mistake. (Glad I was audio only there...)

The faceless bitch was hardly the only sexual innuendo from Noah. He had had
some blowback from his ASmartBear guest post recently, where he started a blog
post in which he mentions, in passing, waking up next to his naked girlfriend.
In his very first comments at Microconf, he brings up how everyone thought
that blog post was about his sexual adventures, when _of course_ it was about
burnout. Except the out of place denial practically proves the rule - Noah is
a very sexual guy, and it oozes from him. It almost defines him. Out of the
120 Microconf attendees, who brought their (very attractive) girlfriend? Only
Noah Kagan. Who referred to his previous girlfriend as a bitch, live, in front
of his current girlfriend? Noah Kagan.

Some of these sexual references go over the line, and make tech conferences a
hostile place for women. But I think sometimes we doth protest too much at one
of the fundamental forces driving entrepreneurship, and that is sex. Napoleon
Hill, writing in the 1930s, devoted an entire chapter to "The Mystery of Sex
Transmutation", and how the most successful entrepreneurs can take the
enormous energy available as the sex drive and convert it into useful work.
Yes, the vague idea that we can win the hot chick will drive many, many long
dark nights of building a company. I keep suggesting to Andrew Warner, our
modern version of Napoleon Hill, to explore this powerful drive, and how
successful entrepreneurs harness it to their advantage.

~~~
aashay
> Yes, the vague idea that we can win the hot chick will drive many, many long
> dark nights of building a company.

If this qualifies as your motivation criteria for building a company, you're
most likely in it for the wrong reasons. There's a difference between taking
"the enormous energy available as the sex drive and convert[ing] it into
useful work" and letting your sex drive be a motivator to your success.

~~~
jtheory
Maybe there should be more emphasis on the word "vague", there.

There's definitely a link between my own motivation for success and my sex
drive, even though I'm very happily married and am way, way off the market. I
want to be wanted even though I'm unavailable, I suppose, and I'm quite happy
to be wanted by people who are unavailable to me, by extension.

This is not driving a motivation for "success" in monetary terms, btw; it's a
drive to become more of a person I would admire, and (by extension) a person
that others would admire and desire. Part of that involves NOT being the sort
of person weak enough to cheat on his wife, interestingly enough. :)

------
agunn
I'm late to this party. I hit Publish on my Noah Kagan post, headed off for
some vacation, and came back to a week of getting product out the door. By the
time I realized how much interest the piece had stirred up, I was thoroughly
behind the curve. I didn't want to jump in till I'd had a chance to go through
the whole thread, which I finally got to do yesterday.

Don't worry; I'm not going to try to dredge this one up with responses to a
lot of different comments, just one, I think.

For anyone who might still have an ounce of interest, I did try to respond to
some of the comments and questions that were, more or less, directed to me,
over on my blog[0].

All I can say, from this my first real encounter with Hacker News, is, "Wow.
This is a remarkable place. Such passion and energy, so much erudition, and so
many flames."

ag

0: [http://sherprog.com/2011/07/24/kudos-regrets-apologies-
lesso...](http://sherprog.com/2011/07/24/kudos-regrets-apologies-lesson)

------
derfclausen
Opportunists tend to objectify many things.

------
irms
I'll tell you, it's not so much the slide itself that that was upsetting --
although he was essentially begging for someone to say "orgasm" and that was a
sad sight to see; the audience was way ahead of him and didn't want to partake
-- but that he carried himself like a jerk, wanted people like him because he
was a jerk, and ultimately had no message in his presentation. It was hard to
watch, and not because I'm a woman, but because an hour is a long time to
listen to someone talk excitedly about nothing.

------
paolomaffei
To me this sounds like a delirious rambling about someone who is embarassed to
have thrown hot sauce on some people.

I don't know who Noah Kagan is.

------
rmc
As a tangent, what would be the gender neutral equivalent of "Bitch"? The male
equivalent would be "bastard".

~~~
dkarl
There isn't one. By the literal meaning, it would be "dog", which used to be a
common insult, if literature is any guide, but which has fallen out of use.
"Bitch" implies malice and viciousness, shallow in thought but deeply
ingrained. And, of course, it implies unwomanliness, and it doesn't make sense
to accuse a man of unwomanliness.

The disturbing thing with insults is that even today, they're mostly used in
gender-specific ways. Even the ones that don't seem gender-specific, such as
"jerk", are rarely applied to women. That's sexism in itself -- when we want
to insult a woman, instead of reaching for a word that communicates exactly
what we feel, we fall back on the generic "bitch" because her gender seems to
have something to do with her transgression. There are so many words to choose
from that communicate exactly what's wrong with someone: jerk, liar, pig,
dumbass, worm, bastard, loudmouth, traitor. It should feel just as right and
satisfying to apply them to a woman as to a man. But in the heat of the
moment, your aggression amplifies every negative feeling, including your
sexism, and you watch to lash out at that _bitch_. Better control yourself,
though. When you call someone a "bitch", it sounds like you think what they've
done was inappropriate for a woman. I.e., maybe it would have been fine if she
was a man. Now you've got everyone wondering how you feel about women instead
of thinking about what she's done to earn your enmity.

So next time you want to lash out verbally at a woman, choose your words
carefully. Is she an idiot? A jerk? A dick? (Hmmm, maybe there's a better word
for that.) Let's let "bitch" go the way of "harpy" and "harridan". When you
hear those words, you don't really trust them, because they give away the fact
that the speaker is holding their target to a sexist standard of femininity.
Somehow "bitch" survived as our only remaining insult for women (except
"whore", "slut", and all the other words that mean "woman who makes me feel
bad by having sex with men who aren't me".) Well, there's "cunt", but that's
mostly a Briticism, and it's just as lazy and meaningless as "bitch".

There are so many ways to give your listener a vivid image of your target
instead of have them wondering about your misogyny. You could call someone
mealy-mouthed, two-faced, greedy, ruthless, petty, malicious, mercenary, or
disloyal. (When a woman's sexual behavior disturbs you, try "dishonest": if
that doesn't apply, then she probably isn't doing anything wrong.)

Not only will you seem much more composed, serious, and credible than if you
resorted to "bitch", not only will you leave your listeners with a more vivid
and convincing image of your target, it's also much more efficient, since
you'll be using the same store of insults for both men and women. And as
hackers we should always be using the most abstract solution.

(Of course, if you really want it to _hurt_ , then sexism never hurts. Or
rather, it always hurts. But when you're playing to an audience, malice
undermines your credibility.)

~~~
parfe
Bitch means female dog while males are called Sires which is far more noble
sounding.

------
jarin
At the first Ignite San Diego, one presenter gave a talk comparing working in
the tech industry with being a pick-up artist. I think it was pretty
comparable to this presentation, but I remember the general opinion being more
that it was more in extreme poor taste than straight-up offensive.

I also remember thinking it was a little ironic how many people threw the word
"douchebag" around afterward.

Admittedly, I don't have quite the same perspective since I'm a man, but as a
minority I try to imagine if someone used some word like "chink" or talked
about "peeing in your Coke" in a presentation in an effort to be edgy. Unless
it was said in a patently hateful way, I probably would think of the speaker
as stupid rather than malicious.

It's also possible that growing up in Hawaii (where ethnic jokes are socially
acceptable, and generally made without malice) has made me take a "it's
probably a joke unless proven otherwise" default reaction.

------
Perceval
This reminds me of the kerfuffle over the Drunken Batman slide "Black People
Don't Use Macs" <http://www.flickr.com/photos/rtmfd/1097058025/>

------
wyclif
The OP does not seem to realise that the "girlfriend" comment from Kagan could
have been a joke.

~~~
LaGrange
So? The point is, not all jokes are appropriate. Some are offensive. Some
jokes are just a lead-in to violence. Some just work to belittle people,
little by little. So, yeah, the "ex-girlfriend is a bitch" joke should be
ostracized.

~~~
wyclif
This was a conference talk, not workplace speech. Methinks you protest too
much. I don't want my conference content modded by the speech police, thanks
very much.

~~~
praptak
_"This was a conference talk, not workplace speech."_

So? Both are public, a conference talk even more so. Make your speech
offensive, expect people to react.

 _"I don't want my conference content modded by the speech police, thanks very
much."_

Someone's calling out rude behavior -> cry speech police. A little bit on the
strawman side if you ask me. This guy wasn't censored, wasn't forcibly removed
from the conference. The only consequence of his "joke" was someone expressing
their disgust.

~~~
wyclif
_The only consequence of his "joke" was someone expressing their disgust._

Right. Which is just shorthand for saying, "tomorrow morning nobody is going
to remember this." People will just move on to the next outrage. If you don't
think the speech is politically correct enough, stop attending the conference.

