It's a valid question only if the investor commonly asks it both to men and women.
Re:Horror Stories From Women in Tech
by yummyfajitas on Tuesday March 15, 2011 @01:15AM
(#2326098)
Or if the investor understands Bayes rule (and also knows that women are more likely to care for children than men, forming a prior).
That prior might be valuable if it was based on the population under study, which is to say entrepreneurs. As is, based on the population at large, that prior is reasonably likely to be value-destructive.
Not really. Men and women are different and relate to families differently. Deal with it.
Not really. Men and women are different and relate to families differently. Deal with it.
I'm not really sure what to say to this other than I would prefer not to see such blatant sexism anywhere, but especially not on HN.
Speak for yourself. I see no need to "deal with" your perceived differences in the way men and women relate to families, if that has not been my experience.
In an employment interview in most places, it would be an illegal question.
Assuming you think this is the intent behind it, "how much time can you commit to working on this?" or "you need to be immediately available at all times - can you do that?" would be a better way to phrase it. From the perspective of working, it doesn't matter what the thing is that is placing external demands on your time, only what those demands are.
Not valid at all, except that I know some people in that situation like to purposely ask jarring questions to see how one will respond to pressure. It may or may not have been condescending.
Let's be honest. It's a rather valid question, from an investor perspective.