reallyseriously

Informal at the places I've worked meant wearing silly shirts on Friday and harsh language was used if you screwed up. If a woman quit does that mean it was a sexist workplace? If a guy quit after being berated is that different? I don't think so.

Also, you linked to a feminist site to provide the definition of a word. Is that normally how people cite the standard/objective meaning of a word or is this story a chance to talk about something you feel very strongly about whether it fits or not?

Edit: just read the definition. Women can't be sexist? Hilarious. Let me guess, African Americans & Asians can't be racist either? Warped view of the world.

If we're talking about for example, a woman being the first one on the team everyone expects will take notes, I identify with someone that feels it is the symptom of a larger problem very easily. Same with things like, "C'mon guys, deadline coming up" and "Oh, you're not just working the booth?" Common sense stuff.

Of course, if someone gets offended they aren't "right" by default. The word "bro" is not offensive but people are using it to shoehorn in bigger issues they feel passionately about. It's like when someone is rabid about politics and tries to force it into conversations (thinking of an old family member here that goes on about Obama being a socialist at the drop of a hat). Clearly, the list you linked to is, for the most part reasonable. But reading this thread, there's that same propagandized vibe of people who have lost perspective.

On the other hand, there's a comment in here about a guy who said the people who used to beat him up used the word "bro" all the time. He was obviously traumatized by that, so his visceral reaction to the word is completely understandable. I can only speculate that others in this thread that genuinely are offended by the word "bro" in this context have had experiences that make them react similarly, whether it's physical assault, things said to them or being marginalized at work. I can have empathy for these people, but it doesn't make naming this tool bropages offensive.

Edit for clarity.

Well thanks a lot, now I feel like a jerk for being so uppity. jk. I'd never heard the term brogrammer anywhere but HN and just reading it, no less typing it makes me cringe a little. Take care.

Is this the part where I should say something about how they need to "toughen up" and they must be "too sensitive"? jk. That's actually a real shame. I'm not going to venture a guess at the % of threads that any woman would find offensive but always thought HN was roughest on people's work when seeking feedback, etc.

"You genuinely think that 'software tool with female name' is as 'bad' as 'software tool with male name?"

No, I said that a software tool with a male or female name would not be sexist by definition and I wouldn't find them exclusionary either. Edit: So yes, I'm equally unoffended by both.

As for the rest of your comments, I'm in a thread about a software tool named "bro". I understand the word "bro" to be a casual greeting, predominately male in nature (like "dude"). Looked it up in Merriam Webster[1] & it says something similar. So, when I read "misogynistic", "humanity loses out", "male-centric", "frat-boy", "oppressed" in the span of a couple sentences in reference to my non-offense at gender specific names for software, I think it's fair to say we're probably not going to be able to have a rational conversation.

[1] —used as a friendly way of addressing a man or boy

Good point, contexts were definitely conflated, sloppy reasoning. A better example would have been a programming language or software tool with a female name or slang. Of course, that wouldn't be sexist by definition and I wouldn't find it exclusionary either. But, the word "bro" in this thread has been compared to racial slurs so someone out there would probably have an issue with it.

If I may cut in, he's saying "bro" is poking fun at other men so it has nothing to do with making a joke at the expense of women. At the same time, all people, both men and women can take aka understand "the joke" so others don't need to protect women from it like they are children without adult reasoning abilities.

"How very odd that despite all of our behaviour being so non-offensive and non-exclusionary, we don't seem to have any women who want to hang around this forum with us..."

Correlation -> Causation?

Is that seriously why you think there aren't more women on HN? Because it's offensive and exclusionary against women?

Is the word "bro" sexist? If a woman says, "Hey guurl" is that sexist? They're both exclusionary, right? But aren't they just friendly greetings and anything more you put into it is your own personal baggage? Let's be adults and retain some perspective.

If you're going to police people on their specific word choice over their intent and actual meaning, are you concerned about hurting "innocent" people? Not everyone loads the same baggage onto the word "bro" that you do. If you're the most sensitive person in the room or office, do you set the rules for speech?

Also, the majority of people (both men & women) are hostile to brogrammers so why make it a gender issue?

One of the top headlining comedians in the US talks about this. Some people will be having a great time at his show and laughing at everything. But, then when it comes around to something about them, all of the sudden it's not so funny anymore. If you don't understand how absurd that is, you don't understand comedy.

Hopefully you realize that your personal experience and everything you load into the word "bro" is not universal.

You've nailed it here. Sexism and racism, etc. are serious issues but some people, for whatever reason, have lost all sense of perspective.

Intent doesn't matter? I hope you don't mean that. If someone truly does not mean to be offensive and uses a term either out of ignorance or because they don't associate the word with the same things you do, they are not a "bad person". If you're the most sensitive person in a room or office, do you set the rules of speech? This comment just makes you sound like one of those people that would relish taking someone down over a word choice, regardless if they are actually racist/sexist.

Another thing that's odd, are brogrammers the in-group? Seems they are actually the out-group and are looked down upon by most other people (majority of men and women). But, for whatever reason you choose to view it from a men vs. women mentality talking about locker room mentality and "especially women".

Also, your negroes example is terrible. It's worse than the same type of examples you're arguing about with people in other comments.

Agree, whether it's startups or politics, those born into a lower social class don't really have advocates (obviously politicians pay lip service to the poor). That said, if a group of upper-class women want to have a founder conference where the attendees are primarily upper-class women no one should begrudge them.

"It seems you need a bit more than dclowd9901"

How arrogant and condescending.

Agree, at least in this case it's become clearer that you don't need to be employed by a group of specific companies to get the protections of a journalist. What an absurd idea.

Is it possible for someone to disagree with you without you calling them a liar and belittling them?

Clearly Paul Graham must take steps to change this. I'm not saying he is to blame, but if he does not act he is obviously sexist and a part of the problem.

The risk is less than you'd think. Things can be contained quite nicely with just some reinforced steel and a bit of water. Accidents should be quite rare too with these self-driving Google cars. Now, I'm not a nuclear engineer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

"there has not been one important decision we've made that I have not been a part of."

Careful, you're not fitting the narrative these people want believe. But seriously, disappointed pg even wrote this. Just engaging with these people is losing.

http://youtu.be/VXbDJ3uBl9M?t=1h26m36s

Glad PG wrote this and equally glad this is the top comment so far. It appears PG hasn't yet learned that it will never be enough for some people. In anything he writes on this topic he'll leave out some group or state a point in a way that someone disagrees with. And then, all they'll do is attack attack attack.

Even Seinfeld isn't immune: http://youtu.be/VXbDJ3uBl9M?t=1h26m36s

"and they've made an effort to change"

This is weird. What should YC change? Tech Stars doesn't do blind apps or publish all the stats you request so that's not it.

"I didn't really want to deal with keggers full of falling-over-drunk guys, jokes about "chicks", guys hitting on me, etc." "I have no inclination to fight over casual sexism"

Very difficult to work with if you're concerned about imaginary things or looking to read into things that aren't there. This sounds much more about you than YC. Good luck.

Agree w/ the first part but it's not sexist at all for him to note the demographics of the pool of talent he's choosing from.

Most of the anti-Snowden stuff seems to get a fair amount of push-back. Agree with what others have said though, in choosing him as Tech Person of the Year isn't a high enough "honor".

"@ericabiz is very open, transparent and direct about what she has seen and heard." Really? Sounds like she just sat around with some friends who all agreed with each other without any knowledge of anything.

Erica: "I've talked to many female founders and YC does have a reputation as a "frat house"

"Genuine question: Did you reach out to any female founders who went through YC to ask about their experience?"

Erica: "The straight answer is no. Here's a slightly longer version of the story..." goes on to ramble about unrelated bs.