Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1)

Re:Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1) by scott_s on Tuesday January 21, 2014 @03:18PM (#7098023)

The event is targeted to women, but they are not exclusionary. Look at the invitation form.

As to your main point, when there is a power asymmetry, I think it is unlikely for that asymmetry to remedy itself without explicit efforts targeted at it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1) by ElComradio on Tuesday January 21, 2014 @03:29PM (#7098114)

There is no mention of males involved or invited to come anywhere else, so I'm going to believe that drop down exists to send a "thanks for your support" or is simply an oversight.

I don't have a moral problem with gender exclusive events. It's sexist and exclusionary and that's ok, and I hope the ladies putting on the event feel the same.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1) by DanBC on Tuesday January 21, 2014 @03:31PM (#7098127)

Did you read the thread where people running the event have said that males can apply, but that females are goven priority?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1) by ElComradio on Tuesday January 21, 2014 @04:11PM (#7098407)

I did not, thanks. However, can we agree that a drop down box and a comment buried on HN being the only indications men are welcome to apply amounts to hair splitting when we are deciding whether or not to classify this as a gender exclusive event?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Announcing the Female Founders Conference (March 1) by yapcguy on Tuesday January 21, 2014 @05:33PM (#7099075)

YC have jumped the shark and landed into an ocean of political correctness.

The conference is called "FEMALE" Founders Conference, yet males can apply?

Utter lunacy.

[ Parent | on HN ]