We've banned this account for posting flamewar comments, breaking the site guidelines, and ignoring our requests to stop. Not cool.

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

"This lady", or "managerette", and "this guy" are quite different tho, don't you think?

The question is, if she's criticized differently, because she's a woman.

Personally I feel like the patronizing/infantilizing language wouldn't be used for "a guy".

I don't speak up for the CEO's protection, but for the women reading this. I don't give a fuck about the CEO's feelings at all, but the women who may feel discouraged by the additional burden of sexism.

Not defending the CEO's parasitic behavior. I don't get why execs should be paid differently at all, anywhere. It's a position which inherently attracts toxic people, if it's hold up as exceptional. She sucks. I totally get why people want to be a little mean, but please consider the collateral damage. That's all.

I think "managerette" is just rubbing it in that the person is mostly there to wave their hands, with little real vision for the things that matter - I guess "paper-pusher" would be similar in tone but more gender-neutral.

> Personally I feel like the patronizing/infantilizing language wouldn't be used for "a guy".

Patronizing, maybe not. They'd just get straight hate. Both would still be digging at the incompetent parasitism. Men and women are different, idk why people get their knickers in a twist about insults being gendered. I definitely get insulted in ways women don't for completely understandable reasons, and society doesn't give a fuck.

I'd mostly care if they're deserved or appropriate at all in the first place, not whether they're up to some linguistic standards.

I agree -- if you hadn't used irrelevant, sexist language, I wouldn't have called you a sexist.

Did you read my post? I'm not trying to defend her actions, just pointing out that her gender has nothing to do with her venality.

Do better, pal.