
No I won’t lean in because I stand up - goforthbebold
https://medium.com/p/30391777b1fa
======
arbutus
I don't agree with the article, and I think articles like this coming from
women are a part of the problem that we face. When women come along and say
that these barriers talked about aren't real, and that the only obstacle is
your own lack of self confidence, I suspect that people who are already
skeptical about the topic will just have their old opinions reinforced.

This woman sounds extremely fortunate to have either somehow avoided the well
documented, shared barriers that many women face. Maybe she's just completely
oblivious. But it cuts deeper when a woman (especially one in an apparent
position of power, though I've never heard of her company before) comes out
and essentially betrays all of us by essentially saying that the issues aren't
real.

I know that it's an unpopular opinion to say that women can be and are a part
of the problem, but I really see these types of articles as being quite
damaging.

~~~
goforthbebold
I value your opinion. I am actually not saying the barriers aren't real. I am
saying focusing on them does not usually lead to the solution for those faced
with them as I have been. I am the woman who wrote the article. The point is
when you focus on them you don't see the exits to the problem. You see
barriers. When you start looking on other things you can change you accel. I
understand that focusing on those external sources outside of ourselves
doesn't usually lead to a change in outcome. Observing them and moving around
them, does. So no I won't lean in, because I stand up. I could care less if
you have heard of me or my company. I am not going to wait until I have 500
million dollars to speak my mind.

~~~
arbutus
There's a significant difference between reinforcing a barrier by focusing on
it too hard, and acknowledging that there are barriers that can't necessarily
be overcome by self confidence.

Self confidence won't prevent you from being treated like a sex object by your
peers at conferences. It won't do anything to resolve the issue that women are
judged more heavily on past accomplishments where men are judged for their
potential. It's great that confidence has worked for you, but this is a
dangerous message to spread to the people erecting the barriers to begin with.

~~~
goforthbebold
If a man treats me as a sex object in a professional setting, I will correct
him to his face, consequences be damned because I am confident to know there
will be another opportunity. So while I understand your objection to my focus
on confidence, I object to your lack of how much push any one individual can
have in this world. I am supporting maximizing human potential and you are
confusing that with worrying about what is easy. I am focused on what is
possible. You are spreading fear and that is the most dangerous pill anyone
can swallow because it paralyzes.

~~~
kaitai
Why do you seem to think that acknowledging obstacles that may be gender-
related is spreading fear? It is not inappropriate to know that Mr X never
listens to the ladies, so go talk to Mr Y. That's not fear, but knowledge.
Ignoring problems will not make them go away. Pretending that the problem is
something other than it is is just lying to yourself.

It feels more empowering to pretend gender doesn't matter, but eventually
there will be a situation where it does and the truth will matter in how you
deal with it.

~~~
Hytosys
Such knowledge instills fear. You're right in that there will be a situation
where gender matters, but you are also right in that it is _eventual_.
Stressing the eventual sculpts the event.

Might as well feel empowered the other 99% of the time.

~~~
kaitai
I find it interesting that so many folks find the mere mention of the
possibility of sexism in some cases to be "stressing" its existence. Makes
conversation difficult, which I suppose is the goal.

This argument that knowledge makes you fearful is a terrible argument and a
total projection. Why do you assume that my acknowledging the existence of
sexism means I feel disempowered? That's just weird. I see the sky; it's blue;
I go about my day. I see sexism; it's there; I go about my day. I see poverty
on the bus, war in Syria when I read the news, and climate change when I go
hiking in the woods. Sucky things are true and suck. Your idea that they must
lead to fear and disempowerment is certainly not universal. It's part of the
human condition to see sucky and unfair things and then grapple with those
truths. It's what life on earth is about. Avoiding knowledge is also what some
humans do, but I don't see how that's to be celebrated.

------
dizzystar
>>What man would thinks so little of himself, what he is working on and the
intelligence of the people he is meeting with to think that the main reason
funding did or didn’t happen was based on an outfit!?!

I love this line. I'm a guy, and I find it disturbing how much weight some
women put into their looks.

I'll give a simple message: most men I know don't give a two flying hoots
about how you look as long as you aren't north of 250 pounds and don't wear
enough makeup to supply a circus.

We really don't care. We don't find looks like that attractive. We forget what
you wore last night and if asked, we honestly don't know or don't care if your
ass looks fat in those pants. We know you have a closet full of clothes and 15
pairs of shoes, but we couldn't recount how a single item looks.

So what do we find attractive? Stand up tall, smile, and tell a good story or
joke. Shine and be happy to own such a wonderful spirit in a wonderful body.
We aren't as visual as the media makes us out to be once we are past 19 years
old.

I've come to the conclusion that women pay far more attention to how other
women look and dress, makeup, and look good to impress each other. The guy
just thinks you are beautiful and wants to know you because you are, by the
shear nature of your body and person, a beautiful and attractive being.
Unfortunately, this message will be lost in the ether of the internet and
forgotten, never reaching the women who need to read it the most.

I'm over 30. The most wonderful day of my life was when I woke up one day,
looked around, and found nearly every woman on earth attractive in her own
way. Just don't stress about it girls: if you spent nearly the time studying,
socializing, and working hard as you glamming up, you'd be very far ahead any
guy you will ever meet in your life. Time is the most precious resource you
have, and wasting time on looks is the largest and mostly costly sink I've
observed.

~~~
krainboltgreene
> I'm a guy, and I find it disturbing how much weight some women put into
> their looks.

Some men also put lots of emphasis and thought into their looks. Why specify
women, and why does it matter that you're a guy? Why are we even talking about
what you and your friends like in women? Why steer it towards "men" vs "women"
stereotypes?

~~~
w1ntermute
> Some men also put lots of emphasis and thought into their looks.

A significantly greater percentage of women care about their looks than men.

~~~
krainboltgreene
Statistics? Study? Any proof to back that up?

------
ngoel36
From my understanding, Sheryl is not against the idea of "standing up". She
simply realizes that the world is not perfect, and no matter the amount of
"personal power" or "self confidence" a woman has, sometimes the cards are
just unfairly stacked against women.

That sucks.

Lean In is just as much for men to read as it is for women. Gender is a
component in nearly every interaction in today's business world. Race still is
too.

Sheryl does not attempt to say that women cannot overcome these challenges,
but instead she simply takes a no bullshit approach by admitting that those
challenges do exist. Why kid ourselves and pretend they don't? Recognizing
that those challenges exist is our biggest hurdle as a society, eliminating
them is much easier from that point forward.

~~~
goforthbebold
Ok but lets be real. We encourage men to move fast and break things. We tell
them if you want to achieve greatness stop asking for permission. Then we tell
women to lean in. Um I will pass on that last one.

~~~
calibraxis
Whatever works for you is great. But it brings to mind Kate Losse's words, on
who's supposed to "break things" in our society:

 _" What Stanford does not teach young white men like Midas, in the course of
teaching them about startups, is that everything they are being taught—about
breaking rules, taking risks, and not asking for permission—works especially
well for them, and often only for them, because of who they are, what they
look like, and all the associations their appearance does and does not carry.
On University Avenue, white men who break things look, in Midas’ words,
“cute”, not delinquent or scary, and this is why privileged young men are
brought to Palo Alto in droves to learn and practice the business of what
Facebook calls “breaking things”. At every turn this breaking of things is
celebrated and encouraged. If you’re not breaking things in Palo Alto, you’re
not doing your job._

 _" …unless you’re not a young white man._

 _" If you happen to live two more miles down University Avenue from where
Midas trespassed camp boundaries, you are living in East Palo Alto, which is
the economic and racial counterpoint to blond-boy-celebrating, millionaire-
laden Palo Alto. And if you live in East Palo Alto and you decided to walk
across the 101 freeway to University Avenue, to the same cafe that Midas
walked to from the other side, you’d be taking a risk, but not one likely to
be rewarded."_ ([https://medium.com/on-
startups/521cb394fda2](https://medium.com/on-startups/521cb394fda2))

~~~
calibraxis
BTW, to be clear, your article made me look closer at this sort of rhetoric
("lean in" and "break things") which I failed to learn about before, because I
gloss over it like meaningless startup names. Thanks.

------
vukmir
>"If you stop looking for gender obstacles you will probably see other aspects
of your situation with new clarity."

True, but also, you'll get attacked by those people who find their
gender/race/looks/weight/height/... as a comfortable excuse for not meeting
their own expectations.

I'm not dismissing gender (and other) issues here. It's just that I believe
that the OP's approach of seeing herself as a human being in the pursuit of
her own happiness is a much better way to live your life than to define
yourself as an oppressed victim. (Accordingly, I'm not commenting on gender
issues, just giving the props to the OP.)

------
dnautics
> Chloe, you will never get funded and may never get another job if you share
> this.

Really? People said this? After reading this, I'd totally want to fund you,
even more, because you have conviction and are clearly not afraid of speaking
what you think in the face of what might be an unpopular opinion. Of course, I
have no money, so my opinion doesn't count for much.

------
drblast
The "lean in" thing bothers me because the whole point seems to be to gain
acceptance and approval from people with "power."

I respect people a lot more who have an intrinsic internal motivation to do
something great, and damn what other people think.

I should add: even if that means that those people aren't as financially
successful as a "lean in" person.

------
trustfundbaby
This comes from a good place but I think this is pretty naive. This is going
to be an unpopular view here because most HN'ers really want to believe that
the tech world is one based on meritocracy. The truth is that it doesn't
really work that way.

I'm not a woman, but I'm a minority in Tech and most of the same scenarios and
situations that apply to gender are very applicable based on ethnicity as
well.

Let me take the points I contest one by one

 _If anything if you show up as a woman in a room of 200 men you have an
advantage at the networking event not the disadvantage_

This is how it feels like at the time, and if all you're trying to do is pitch
your business or get an introduction to someone more serious, this might even
be correct. The real problem here is when you're not taken seriously as a
techie, and dismissed where someone who looked like you but was white or male
_might_ get that benefit of the doubt that gets them seed funding.

 _I would rather they introduce these women as “Amazing People” rockstars in
their field. Can you imagine an article Men in Tech — Meet the men behind
Dropbox and Airbnb? No. That article will more likely get titled — Meet 2 of
the most powerful CEO’s in Silicon Valley changing the way we think about
sharing_

This argument has a parallel in what people in the Black community call the
"exceptional Negro effect". People look at folks like Obama, Colin Powell,
Neil deGrasse Tyson and wonder why you can't be like them. After all if those
people could succeed against all the odds why can't you? right?

The problem is the "all the odds" part, and also the fact that these people
are "exceptional". They're really good at what they do and with some serious
willpower and perseverance they can ascend to the tops of their professions.
The problem is that, by definition, these people are 1% of the entire
population.

The rest of the world, trying to make it will usually be average/above average
and in those tiers the "against all the odds" becomes just that tad bit more
difficult when you factor in gender/ethnic biases.

Point being. If you're actually rockstar, you can probably ignore gender
issues because you're in the 1% and likely to succeed anyway. The unfortunate
thing though is that people like this can't really identify with the average
woman/minority, because their brilliance effectively insulated them from
things that less fortunate people who look like them had to go through.

I mean, why do you think that the people who break barriers in gender and race
are ALWAYS exceptional? Isn't it odd that a person just couldn't be average at
what they did and break that barrier? that they have to be _that_ much better
than comparable white people/men to do it?

 _I never have any expectations that the person I am talking to is going to
value me less because I am a woman — because I myself do not value myself less
because I am a woman_

This is great. But again, just because you don't have that expectation doesn't
mean that reality won't slap you in the face eventually ... and rudely. I'm
not saying every male is out to get every woman in tech, but there are subtle
biases that can really hold a person down, like having to be that much better
than a person with your same skills just to get the same recognition that they
get

 _Men and powerful women would not bring gender into this equation and instead
would come up with all the reasons they thought the meeting went well or
didn’t go well. This is about personal self confidence and empowerment. If you
stop looking for gender obstacles you will probably see other aspects of your
situation with new clarity_

Again, this is a great technique. And I've always applied it, because I want
to succeed. Nothing brings you down faster than thinking something out of your
control like race or gender is holding you back. So whenever I encounter
something like it. I file it away for reference and think of a way around my
problem, just like she suggests.

But when I do make it, I plan to keep an eye out for ways to make sure that
the things that were obstacles for me based on ethnicity are NEVER an obstacle
for anyone else if I can help it.

To close. I understand what she is trying to say, I've been that person myself
(fuck a handout, screw someone helping me get over). But i've since realized
that the subtle biases in friends hiring friends, helping other friends get
hired, or cognitive errors that people make all the time, can add up to very
powerful forces that make life just that much more difficult for a non-
outlier-brilliant woman/minority trying to make it in Tech.

~~~
kaitai
Thank you. This is good.

Every generation there's a set of young people who discover "self-confidence
is enough" and "discrimination is over." Over twenty or thirty years some
groups of them realize that this is not true.

As you say above, the technique of not looking at gender and looking for what
I personally can improve or do differently is the rational and utilitarian
course of action. It is, after all, the only thing I can do as an individual.
But there are those situations that keep coming up now and then that don't
have a solution -- for me. For other people, there is a solution. For me, it
becomes clear that I simply need to go elsewhere.

Fine. I can be as flexible as I need to be. But when it's, say, meeting with a
venture capitalist and I'm always not quite what they're looking for, or if
it's meeting with my grad school advisor and always being too talkative and
emotional, or etc. -- and nothing I do changes this! -- and I have to work
around venture capitalists/advisors/etc... it really slows me down, because I
also have to work around the same sh*t that everyone else does.

~~~
calibraxis
Yes, when reading this article, I wondered how influenced it was by the
philosophy of hyper-individualism. And maybe even the positive-thinking
ideology Barbara Ehrenreich discusses.
([http://www.barbaraehrenreich.com/brightsidedexcerpt.htm](http://www.barbaraehrenreich.com/brightsidedexcerpt.htm))

But people team up to accomplished shared ends; they're constantly "pushing
in". Startups are often done by people who work crazy hours to gain something
they didn't have before. We build formal corporations (weird sorts of
communes) and informal networks. Because we live in a social context; money
ceases to make any sense absent certain social relations.

So it's only rational for people to form teams where members support each
other through shared difficulties.
([http://leanin.org/circles/](http://leanin.org/circles/)) (Would be even
better if it's not just for those whose problem is the glass ceiling, but also
the dark basement.)

~~~
calibraxis
BTW, the gendered passive "lean in" rhetoric is definitely a problem, here I
agree with the author, and previously misunderstood.

------
plinkplonk
Something I've always wondered about, people here might be able to help.

If brown skinned Indians aren't discriminated against in tech, why are brown
skinned Mexicans (apparently) discriminated against? Does such skin color
based discrimination really exist in the Valley?

Given their relative population size in the USA, Indians seem to be well(or
even over) represented in the software industry as VCs, founders, employees
etc. As are Chinese for that matter. Are Chinese discriminated against in
tech?

How _can_ someone in software discriminate against Mexicans/South Americans,
but not (East) Indians (if said discrimination is supposed to be primarily
based on skin color)? Mexicans and Indians are often mistaken for each other.
I've had Mexican Americans start conversations in Spanish with me.

Is there any _evidence_ of _race_ based (vs gender based , or even age based)
discrimination _in the tech industry_? I've never encountered it (due
disclosure: Indian, have lived in the USA, was never discriminated against or
made to feel unwelcome).

Genuine question. Thanks in advance

~~~
nl
In Australia, Indians are discriminated against in tech, whereas Chinese
aren't.

I wrote a long comment speculating why this could be, but I don't have enough
evidence to support my ideas.

I think it comes down to reputation. In SV, Indian developers have a very,
very good reputation which is made very visible by some stars in the
programming and VC fields.

I suspect the lack of those visible success stories affects other ethnic
groups negatively.

~~~
orclev
Funnily enough it's almost the opposite in the rest of the USA. Indians in
general have a very bad rep in tech because of the cheap offshore tech
companies and the tons of low wage H1B tech workers that certain headhunting
shops flock around. I've certainly seen some very senior and talented Indians
in Tech, but you're more likely to run into the untalented hacks than one of
the relatively rare talented ones. I've very rarely met an Indian programmer
that wasn't either very good or very bad. To a certain extent you get the same
thing no matter the race, but the strange duality of Indians (they're almost
all either really really good or really really bad) makes it particularly
stand out in their case.

------
stretchwithme
There are certainly thing people can do in tech all by themselves. We have 14
year olds making apps and selling them through app stores. All the knowledge
required is available online. No old guy approval required.

If that's the case, we should see more people doing this sort of thing than
working in industries controlled by biased gatekeepers? Do we?

Or is it the case that our educational system is crippling the aspirations of
our children before they are even old enough to make an app?

------
jacalata
This reads like The Secret: Women In Tech edition.

~~~
goforthbebold
And the answer is 42

------
dsugarman
respect

------
icecreampain
Another article about how the tech world is / isn't biased against group x /
y? Sigh.

There is no gender, color, language or height barrier to becoming successful
and wealthy. The barrier is the spoon one is born with. Born with a silver
spoon in your mouth? That means you've got money, which means you've got spare
time to become good at something, meet other wealthy, well-connected people
and keep your ears open to job opportunities. Then a job offer comes up it's
not because you're really, really great at what you do (although it might
help), it's more that people who are in a hiring position at tech companies
are, generally, other not-at-all poor people that you most probably grew up
with or can identify with.

Born with a dirty, wooden spoon in your mouth? Then your childhood is going to
be spent trying to take care of your other six siblings while both your
parents are out trying to clothe and feed the household. And the baby that's
due in two months. There will be no money to invest in tech stuff, no time in
which to learn several languages and no interest from the parents in letting
you ignore your chores. There will be no frat parties, playing golf or fucking
around on the stock market with extra money for shits and giggles because your
CEO friends all do it as well - because you will never become a CEO. You lack
the money, the connections and the self-confidence needed to become a person
of import.

Some people get rich, and some people die trying to feed themselves.

~~~
RodericDay
_There is no gender, color, language or height barrier to becoming successful
and wealthy._

lmao

look, I'm very down with pointing out class and wealth play gigantic roles,
but you shouldn't open up contending other things don't as well.

