
Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1) - jl
http://blog.ycombinator.com/announcing-the-female-founders-conference
======
soneca
I'm assuming some HNers are soon to arrive saying things like "why does it
matter that a founder is a female?", "why make an excluding event? isn't it
sexism all the same", "imagine if someone make a 'male founders conference'?"

I would like to ask you to think for a moment, before raising this concerns (I
am not bothering here to debate with haters, only with those who are genuinely
concerned that this might sexism all the same).

If a group is underrepresented in some professional, economical, academical
field, it is worthy to understand the causes. Sometimes is a historical gap in
fields that have a self-perpetuating cycle of dominance (such as blacks in
politics). It is tough to adress such underrepresentation, and it take
generations to make any change (as it took generations and generations to
create the initial gap).

This is no such case for female founders. Here we have a much simples issue:
stigmatization. At least, this is how most people in this field, including the
organizers of this event, seems to classify it. It is easier to address
because a cultural perception is easier to change than institutionalized
cycles of power (as in politics).

And, as I see it, this is the only goal of this event. No one is claiming that
women are better than men in founding startups. Or the opposite, that women
are worse than men in founding startups that they need special treatment. This
event is only trying inspire women that founding startups does need to be
stigmatized as a male club. Women can have a good life in founding one if they
give this thought a chance.

So there the only assumptions I see in this event are that: (i) founding a
startup is a good thing that they should inspire people to do (something
largely supported by HN audience I would guess) and (ii) that women aren't
currently being correctly or ideally presented, attracted and inspired to
these opportunities of founding a startup.

These two assumptions may be contested. If you disagree with assumption (i)
you a have a much bigger fight to pick, basically the whole illusion that
Sillicon Valley sells to the world, this event isn't particular relevant in
this broader debate.

And if you disagree with assumption (ii), that this event is not necessary, it
means that is no harm done by such an event ocurring. It would by useless at
most, but not particularly harmful.

This is my perception of this, and I am writing it hoping to avoid a thread
full of heated debate based on false assumptions. Maybe I am being
pretentious, but I swear I am just trying to help and expose my thoughts on
the subject.

~~~
nhangen
My only concern with events like this is that males could also learn from
female founders advice and experiences. It just seems like a loss to
forcefully segregate the audience.

I would love to attend an event that featured a female only stage. It would be
a refreshing change from the current conference lineup.

~~~
mtrimpe
I'm pretty sure there's room for that _as well._

Perhaps Jessica could even use this as a spring-board to putting together an
all-women line-up for a future event.

~~~
southpawgirl
Sexism is a reality in the tech industry. Something has to be done. I agree
with the intention, 100% -- I am much less sure about the means. Self-
segregation is only reinforcing a us-vs-them attitude. Sexism starts with a
cultural attitude that ignore the issue of micro-iniquity: it starts as a
mental construction based on conscious or unconscious value wrongly bestowed
to the members of some broad cultural category: it's this fallacy that needs
to be removed. Self-ghettoisation is, at best, a remedial plaster on a wound,
at worst it makes things worse. Not to mention that us girls often partake in
broad categorisations, prejudices and stereotypes, sometimes against our own
'kind' (see the women attitude described in
[http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/09/14/1211286109.full...](http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/09/14/1211286109.full.pdf+html))

Today the problem is women, tomorrow (and, well, today too) black people,
LGBT... is it really the shortest way towards the elimination of unfair
handicaps and perceptions, to tackle one 'category' at a time?

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersectionality](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersectionality)

------
cousin_it
While we're on the topic of conferences that target a specific slice, does
anyone know if there's something like an Immigrant Founders Conference? That
sounds like another demographic that has huge potential and could use some
pretty specific kinds of help.

~~~
aylons
Are immigrants underrepresented in this community? My guess would be just the
opposite.

However, I understand they may have lots of things in common that are specific
for this group.

~~~
Crito
I imagine, if nothing else, non-naturalized immigrants have unique concerns
and obstacles. Visa concerns, ITAR (admittedly probably _rarely_ an obstacle
for YC style startups), etc.

I can't say I have any personal experience with any of that though, that's all
just a guess.

------
minimaxir
It should be noted that you don't need to be a current startup founder to
apply:

 _Are you a woman interested in starting a startup? Then we 'd love to have
you at Y Combinator's Female Founders Conference, where female founders we've
funded, along with some distinguished guests, will share practical advice from
their own experience._

------
mlyang
Fantastic! Will this be streamed? For women not based in Bay Area (and
therefore realistically women with even more limited access to female
tech/entrepreneur role-models), this would be a great resource to be accessed
remotely and real time, and could definitely be the catalyst for some quality
Twitterverse discussion/encouragement for female tech entrepreneurs.

~~~
jl
Yes, we are planning to stream this. Check out the conference site closer to
March 1 for more details.

~~~
mlyang
Great! In my experience, the most inspiring talks by female tech entrepreneurs
were ones where you would have had no idea whether they were female or male
based on the content of their speeches/talks (e.g. "This is how we got our
first 1000 users" rather than "This is how I navigated being in an all male
board room"). This conference is a great opportunity to hear the experiences
and perspectives of female entrepreneurs-- I hope that its content focus is
more on their achievements and strategies rather than their gender. Actionable
insights like how these entrepreneurs navigated their Series A or hired their
first employees give a less explicit, but (in my opinion) more resounding
affirmation that women have just as much credibility to succeed and achieve in
the tech space. Excited to tune in!

------
nawitus
I'm against these, because I'm against gender discrimination. Gender
discrimination means that one gender is treated differently from another.

It's also interesting to know whether transwomen will be allowed. Some radical
feminists only accept 'born as women' to their conferences. And if transwomen
are accepted, what's their definition of that.

~~~
danilocampos
> Some radical feminists only accept 'born as women' to their conferences. And
> if transwomen are accepted, what's their definition of that.

Really. That's interesting. I know... a _few_ feminists 'round these parts who
might be characterized "radical." Can't think of anyone getting their hate on
against trans women. And I don't know why you would raise such a specter of
exclusion with no basis.

~~~
mtrimpe
Feminists fighting against trans women is a fairly well known phenomenon.
Feminist and transphobic are hardly mutually exclusive worldviews.

Edit: dug up a few pointer links:

[http://www.transadvocate.com/unpacking-transphobia-in-
femini...](http://www.transadvocate.com/unpacking-transphobia-in-feminism.htm)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transphobia#Transphobia_in_fem...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transphobia#Transphobia_in_feminism)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_views_on_transgenderi...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_views_on_transgenderism_and_transsexualism)

[http://lmgtfy.com/?q=transphobia+feminism](http://lmgtfy.com/?q=transphobia+feminism)

~~~
rimantas

      > self-identified feminist
    

as opposed to what? Certified feminist?

~~~
ionforce
It calls into question one's worldview as a feminist if you are busy
discriminating on gender expression.

It seems logically inconsistent.

~~~
detcader
Much of "radical feminism" holds that gender isn't _about_ expression, and
that you can't switch genders as much as you can switch races. This makes
people extremely uncomfortable, of course

~~~
mtrimpe
Do you agree with the following definitions commonly used when discussing
gender issues?

Sex: Assigned biological category -- male or female: designated at birth by
visual assessment of anatomy based upon presumption of reproductive role.

Sexual Orientation: Term for an individual's physical and/or emotional
attraction relative to their own sex such as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or
straight.

Gender: The social meaning given to biological sex.

Gender Expression: External characteristics and behaviors associated with
gender that are socially defined and associated with masculine or feminine.
For transgender people, their gender expression doesn't match their biological
sex.

Transgender: People who identify with a gender that is different from their
biologically assigned gender.

Intersexed: Describes people who are born with external genitalia,
chromosomes, or internal reproductive systems that are not traditionally
associated with either a "standard" male or female.

Cis-gender: People who identify with the sex or gender they were assigned at
birth.

Gender is generally assumed to be _defined_ as that part of 'sexual identity'
which is a social construct and hence changeable.

~~~
detcader
When I say "gender" I mean the thing as described here (i.e. Rachel's working
definition of it):
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ot8cBm0YmXo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ot8cBm0YmXo)

------
aashaykumar92
This is awesome, congrats to all the hosts! It is more common now to see
female founders of non-tech companies but hopefully this conference will
inspire more women to get into starting tech companies and furthermore, will
inspire younger women to pursue more technical degrees, namely CS.

------
Beliavsky
The reason for a Female Founders Conference is presumably that women are
under-represented among founders. A quote from Paul Graham may explain why:

[http://www.paulgraham.com/start.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/start.html)
"One advantage startups have over established companies is that there are no
discrimination laws about starting businesses. For example, I would be
reluctant to start a startup with a woman who had small children, or was
likely to have them soon. But you're not allowed to ask prospective employees
if they plan to have kids soon."

------
zck
Of the speakers of this event, Diane Greene spoke at Startup School this past
year. Here's the video of her:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSEeFxq2X_c](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSEeFxq2X_c)

Jessica Livingston gave a talk in 2012
([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQJ6zsNCA-4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQJ6zsNCA-4)),
and interviewed Ron Conway in 2013 ([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bm-
Xj2jMCk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bm-Xj2jMCk)). I'm sure she's given
other Startup School talks, but I can't find any right now.

They're good videos, whether or not you can go to this conference.

------
eevilspock
Shouldn't it be called X Combinator? :)

~~~
richardlblair
In a post that is pretty serious and has some heavy conversion, I appreciate
your joke.

~~~
eevilspock
I made a serious and thoughtful comment as well, but this one is getting way
more votes :P

------
crazy1van
The problem -- and the reason they are popular -- with identity events like
these are that they give lots of people except the most talented women a cop
out:

Sexist males - "See, women can't hack it as founders in the real world. They
need extra help."

Non-sexist males - "Whew. I'll support this event and stop second guessing
myself whenever I choose to fund a male-led organization."

Mediocre females - "Sweet. Now I can get recognition even though a don't
deserve it"

Talented females - "Crap. Now everyone assumes I have this position just
because I'm a woman"

Maybe I'm just a naive idealist. I still believe that on average people's
individual greed causes then to hire the best people no matter their sex.

~~~
mtrimpe
You probably are a naive idealist; there's nothing wrong with that.

If you want to get rid of that give the IAT on gender a try at
[https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit](https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit)

I'm willing to bet that just the experience of taking it will make you
somewhat uncomfortable.

~~~
elohesra
Well, I took it and it determined that I don't associate gender with science
or liberal arts. It also felt extremely contrived, and felt as though it
functions largely on cheap tricks, like building a clear pattern of a theme
being presented on one side of the screen for a long while and then suddenly
switching it to the other side. To be frank, it seemed like the purpose of it
was to induce cognitive stress from trying to figure out where you're trying
to click than to actually assess anything to do with gender. I'm aware that
biases are doubtless a very hard phenomenon to study accurately, because they
can't simply be compared to some arbitrary 'unbiased' standard, because no-one
is unbiased, but this did nonetheless feel like it was more a test of motor
skills than beliefs.

For what it's worth, I'd be interested in seeing something which accurately
assesses personal biases, because it'd help one in determining where/if their
reasoning might be being influenced by irrational factors.

~~~
mtrimpe
The IAT is the bread-and-butter technique for determining implicit
associations and are probably the best technique we have for assessing
personal bias.

When you try it out for a topic where you _do_ have a strong association
you'll actually _feel_ directly what it's measuring and why it's relevant.

P.S. Did you really try to answer as fast as possible? If you take your time
it won't be able to measure much.

~~~
elohesra
Yes I really did try to answer as soon as possible. Why would I not? Because
it might give me a 'bad' evaluation? Why would I care when I don't even feel
that it's valid?

In fact, attempting to answer quickly is what lead me to feel it was largely a
trick, because it switched up locations of gender after consistent streaks of
a given gender (or other metric) being presented solely in one place. Several
times I'd be _just_ about to click something and then think "Hey, what the
heck? Why did it suddenly move the answer?". This represents a confounding
variable in the experiment, because it no longer strictly measures beliefs,
but instead measures a mixture of beliefs and motor ability (ability to react
quickly to the changing locations of answers), so the test can't determine if
an answer was due to belief or motor ability.

~~~
mtrimpe
Wasn't implying anything ... just making sure you did the test correctly.

And I think you were reading too much into the random placement. The test just
picks a number of words for each category at random and then determines
whether it's easier for you to categorize certain things together.

You'll be able to respond faster to 'good & saint' and 'bad & killer' than
'good & killer' and 'bad & saint' because your brain categorizes them
differently and that difference in performance is what this test measures.

------
sachinag
I ran into Donna Dubinsky at an event once and got to pick her brain for an
hour. It was amazing. She's in SFBA, and I'd love to see her added to the list
of speakers. (I'm really hoping someone does full notes for this conference
the way that someone usually does for Startup School).

------
pella
[http://femalefoundersconference.org/](http://femalefoundersconference.org/)

------
angersock
Out of curiosity, does anyone have statistics handy for the number of female-
owned businesses of all types, outside of tech?

You know, unsexy things like accountancies, laundromats, daycares, restaurants
and food trucks, gyms, and so forth?

I'm curious what the baseline here is.

------
pyrocat
This is a great step towards getting more women involved in the startup scene.
Thank you! Many people talk about the problem (myself included), but it's nice
to see that some people are working towards resolving it.

------
jjoe
Can males attend this conference? I do see an option for Male in the drop down
but I figured it's best to ask...

~~~
jl
We want to give priority to women, since we have limited space.

~~~
jjoe
Understood. Already signed up but feel free to remove me from attendance.

------
watwut
I dunno. I would be largely annoyed by male only anything (except restrooms).
Female only whatever (except restrooms) does not sound that much better.

~~~
Symmetry
The harm that a FOO only conference does in directly proportional to the
representation of FOOs in that industry, in terms of lost opportunities for
networking. And the benefits to FOOs in terms of being able to compare
experiences with other people like them that they might not be able to do
otherwise is inversely proportional to their representation. It might annoy
you and that's understandable, but it's still a reasonable thing to be doing
despite the exclusion it causes. If half of all founders were female maybe
thing would be different, and I honestly think that male only conferences for
nurses or educators might be a good idea.

------
yongjun
Many HNers appear to be outraged that this event is 'female only.' I think
creating a conference environment that is restricted to women is very
important. For a group that is under-represented in this community, having a
safe space where open discussions can take place without fear can help
strengthen a growing community of female startup founders (just look at some
of these comments; you can't reasonably expect anyone to feel open to
discussing these issues when there might be concern for some of these types of
responses).

Even as someone who believes in the importance of gender equality, as a male
co-founder, I acknowledge that I do have subconscious biases that need to be
checked periodically (or better, constantly). When there are more female
founders, and more of a presence of female leadership, I believe those biases
(and the biases of other men in our community) will decline over time. Having
a safe space where supportive discussions may lead to success for more female
founders is a great place to start.

------
xrctl
Encouraging women's complaining might be the last thing they actually need.
This is kind of like throwing a kegger for alcoholics.

~~~
detcader
Actually, you're exactly why this conference is necessary

------
theorique
When is there going to be a conference for male founders only?

\- where we sit with legs spread and scratch our balls without females giving
us dirty looks

\- where we can wear sweatpants and football jerseys and watch sports

\- where we can talk about cars and cheerleaders and drink beer all day

\- where there's no threat of a sexual harassment lawsuit if some feminist
witch overhears you and decides she doesn't like you talking about a "dongle"

There are some things that women just don't get about men, and in a mixed-sex
group, we're forced to conceal our true natures. Where is the conference for
men only?

(FYI: If you take this post at all seriously, relax. It's a joke, poking fun
at both men and women.)

~~~
supersystem
"There are some things that women just don't get about men"

Seems more like you don't really get what it means to be a man.

~~~
theorique
I'm curious to know why you say that. I wrote down a bunch of different
stereotypes that people have about being a man, as a joke.

What do you think it means to be a man?

------
philwelch
I don't know why people ascribe ideological significance to this kind of
thing. Fact is, there are proportionally few female founders, probably even
fewer than we would expect even if we expect more men than women to do
startups, hence encouraging women in particular to do startups will increase
the pool of founders overall (which benefits everyone) with the side benefit
of improving YC's portfolio. There is still Startup School.

------
ChrisAntaki
Nice! I hope this inspires more women to kick ass in the technology scene.

------
mikeleeorg
It would be very, very interesting to repurpose the Brown Eyes/Blue Eyes
Racism Experiment[1] to one that highlighted the subtle (or not so subtle)
differences faced with gender. Then applied to the audience here. I wonder if
more empathy for such a conference would be seen.

[1]
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeK759FF84s](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeK759FF84s)

------
rdl
This sounds awesome. I remember buying a ticket for a "female founders grub
with us" thing run by jl as a present for a female founder friend.

I wonder if some companies could sponsor expenses for non sfba female founders
to attend. I think it is a lot easier for female Bay Area founders than female
Midwestern founders, so it would help them a lot.

------
kelvin0
Aren't the autistic-transgendered-albino hackers are also an underrepresented
group? Where does the fragmentation stop?

~~~
MartinCron
Wow, you can take something reasonable and stretch it until it is no longer
reasonable! What rhetorical mastery!

~~~
kelvin0
Please define a 'reasonable' subset of hackers as opposed to an 'unreasonable'
subset (such as the one I mentioned previously). Does not any individual or
group deserve equal consideration? How can you judge what group 'makes more
sense' in you opinion?

------
krstck
Very pleased to hear about this. I've applied, even though I'd have to travel
from Texas.

------
sdegutis
I can't comment about this because I'm a white male and therefore cannot
relate to anyone who is oppressed, since I've experienced nothing but
privilege my whole life. So the only thing I can do is be silent so that the
silenced can be heard.

------
kyro
There is literally nothing bad that could come of this, and I'm totally
serious. I'm sure the women that attend will benefit hugely. I may get the
missus to watch the stream. Been trying to ignite her entrepreneurial spirit!

------
mekoka
Any female-centric conference of the sort should be as praised as any
"\--insert-female-dominated-field-here-- Conference for Men". This should
strip out most of the bigotry from both ends of the spectrum.

------
mankypro
Heh, let's add some gas to the fire and talk about the rampant age
discrimination in the SiliValley!

------
Fibrewire
If we created a Announcing the [Male] Founders Conference (March 1) they'd be
marching on washington

~~~
ksrm
make u think!

------
judk
Men looking to marry into a wealthy family will be hanging around the local
clubs and lounges.

------
ehm_may
So is this some sort of response to PG's comments about women?

------
teh_klev
I've scanned this thread and the other [1] and my reaction is this. In the
Western world we are free to assemble in groups of like minded interests -
publicly and privately.

If private organisations wish to have conferences or meetings aimed
specifically at certain groups then that is their right, as is the case with
YC's FFC. It's YC's money, they can spend it how they like, and decide who
gets to attend or not.

I see plenty of veiled and not so veiled accusations of positive
discrimination, but you forget YC/pg already "discriminates" against sole
founder startups. He also pretty much insists you move to SF if you accept a
place on his/their startup treadmill. Annoying? Discrimination? Yes/No/Maybe,
but it's his company, and I guess statistically for him sole/remote founders
are much harder and costlier to work with than startups who are local and have
2+ founders. That's YC's choice as a private company operating in an
interference free capitalist democracy such as the US.

I might, if I was bloody minded, take issue at government trying to fund and
run these Special Interest Group meetings without demanding an equivalent "man
only" conference. But to be honest I don't, for various common sense reasons,
and the obvious fact that in industry the number of males sitting at the top
tables of companies far outweigh the number of women. The recent thirty to
forty years of equality enshrined in law does not eradicate hundreds of years
of inequality, we still have years of work to do with regards to gender and
race equality.

I think what the "outraged" HN crowd (which I liken to the UK Daily Mail
"outraged of Little Upper Bottomly" types) forgets is that these special
interest group conferences don't affect existing hiring practices. I'm heavily
involved in hiring staff for our company, I do the technical screening calls
and assess how well a candidate might or might not fit with our company, staff
and goals. I don't really care if the person I'm hiring is in a "special
interest group" and has been attending or promoting "Women Only" conferences
or classes, all I care about is hiring staff based on the merits of skill,
ability and commitment.

There is a huge amount of "Reductio ad absurdum" in both these threads (and
please note I am not accusing anyone of sexism), but I really wish some
members of our community would try to gain a bit of perspective. Privately run
conferences, focusing on particular gender or social groups are not the same
as active positive discrimination (which I am vehemently against) when it
comes to hiring/promotion in the workplace.

[1]:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097326](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097326)

------
ye
Isn't that illegal? Discrimination based on gender, which the organizer openly
admits to: "We want to give priority to women".

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964)

~~~
tonyarkles
I'm Canadian, I fully admit that I don't know how your legislation works in
its entirety, but after giving it a quick read I have to ask: Illegal under
which Title?

------
goggles99
How sexist.... I am offended.

When was the Male Founders Conference again???

~~~
hythloday
Looking forward to going once you organize it and pay for it. Make sure to
post your amazing speaker lineup on HN, it's pretty hard to get people to go
to conferences that are predominantly attended by men.

~~~
goggles99
So if next year Black Hat was men only (which it pretty much already is), no
one would show up? LOL

------
therogerwilco
This is like feminism. Once I had a feminism say it was about equality for
women AND men.

I said, "would you like to join an organization called 'maleism'? It's for the
equal treatment of men AND women."

