Female Founder Secrets: Men Clamming Up

I had an experience at work where a coworker (who is black) shared his experience of being told to "stay in his lane" early on in his career. The insinuation was of course racism, he didn't mention it but it was obvious. Then I and someone else (who are white) shared our exact same experiences.

He told me he felt cut off, etc, even though we were sharing the same experience. If we had something similar happen, how can he definitively attribute that experience to racism? Even if it was, that was not the point of the conversation. We were all sharing our experiences on that topic and no one mentioned race. Why do we need to bend ourselves backwards to make sure all minorities feel comfortable all the time?

The point here is you can't talk to minority groups about anything these days, if you are white.

> The point here is you can't talk to minority groups about anything these days, if you are white.

I don't think that these universal sort of statements are anywhere near universally accurate.

There has certainly been a shift about what is an acceptable public topic lately, but "anything" is certainly false.

As a non-minority person, I often see people just being assholes. For example, some dominating dude who talks over everyone, who ignores others input, who takes credit for everything, etc. As a white male, when I encounter that behavior, I think to myself, wow, that guy is a fucking asshole. However, and I have experienced this, people who are in a minority often take it personally, that they're an asshole to them, because they're in a minority group. It can be very frustrating to watch that (especially if my group -- white male -- then gets blamed for the behavior, as if its my fault this other dude is an asshole) and I can't really say anything either or it comes across like I'm defending the asshole.

Why would you say something to defend the asshole? In your example, you interpreted the same - the guy was an asshole. Why give them a pass?

In most cases I hear of people that claim they’re afraid of giving “candid feedback” to a minority, it’s almost always the case that the person is an asshole when giving feedback IN GENERAL as well. Maybe evaluating your general behavior first, before going all scared of this or that minority group, would be much more productive? The net result is almost always positive.

Edit: I interpreted this as you having been witnessed situations where you felt someone was an asshole, and someone else did too but ascribed it to sexist or targeted. Apologies for the non-fluency.

> Why would you say something to defend the asshole?

I wouldn't, I'm not sure how you took that from my comment. I'm saying if I defend my group (eg "not all white males are like that" or "that wasn't sexism, he was doing the same to everyone") it often (in my personal experience) gets interpreted as defending the asshole, by going against the claim of sexism/racism/whatever.

In my personal experience, the chances of any comments on the situation getting misinterpreted as negative are too high. Either you get accused of denying the sexism is real (ignoring that you got treated the same way by the assholes), or you get accused of "well actually...". Sure, sometimes people understand, but the risk is real.

You missed the point by a very wide margin.

> Why do we need to bend ourselves backwards to make sure all minorities feel comfortable all the time?

> The point here is you can't talk to minority groups about anything these days, if you are white.

You lost me here.

You had one experience with one person and extrapolated that to multiple entire groups.

You should be able to discern how your conversation with that one person was okay and not a "cancelable" offense, and how your comment that I quoted is not okay and could be a "cancelable" offense. Or if that's not the issue, you should be able to see how to have that conversation.

Can you see that I can't tell if you've been pushed to extreme views where you wind up on websites where other people say the same thing and agree with you, or if you all your experiences are segregated like this to the point you would fit a definition of racist?

That was rhetorical.

The point is that your one experience is something fairly predictable but not an area that validates your complaint. There would be a way to continue that conversation, acknowledge the person's experience and how they conflate that with race-based oppression, while also being able to contribute to the conversation.

The question is whether it’s really the same experience. One could try to give the benefit of doubt and assume the situation isn’t the same. Figure out the difference. Subtle and not so subtle structural racism means situations aren’t the same for people different colors, even if at first sight look the same.

Lost me at that last sentence.

> Why would you say something to defend the asshole? In your example, you interpreted the same - the guy was an asshole. Why give them a pass?

It's exactly this line of thinking that is so problematic. You assumed that the asshole guy was "getting a pass".

I was discussing programming puzzles with a new group of colleagues. The way these discussions typically go is that after most of us solve it, they will start giving hints/spoilers to others to keep the conversation flowing.

So I did this as usual and offered a hint to the last person (who was a woman) to not see the trick this time. It surprised me when she looked visibly upset and asked me why I was explaining it to her. I'm guessing this is because of her own insecurities that she was worried that I thought she was too dumb to solve it on her own otherwise. Up until this point her gender was irrelevant to me. I only explain stuff because the value of discussing interview problems is to get practice solving and explaining stuff to each other. But now I have to question whether I was "mansplaining" or not.

This minor event bothered me so much I never talked to her about programming puzzles ever again.

Can insecurity be ascribed to gender? If it was a man, and they got offended, could we say it's also because he was insecure about not finishing in time? I think it's difficult to say gender as the de facto reason here. I'm not ruling it out, but I don't think it can be labeled a certainty, either.

> This minor event bothered me so much I never talked to her about programming puzzles ever again.

This makes me sad, but it is exactly what I would have done. My life is built on avoiding anything awkward or uncomfortable. And...that's not working for me anymore. Thanks to a mental health professional, I'm working on embracing these "problems".

If I had your experience today, I'd come up with a plan to at least clarify things. I'd probably start with a slack message. Maybe something like:

> I'm sorry.

> When I talk programming puzzles with <person>, we have a routine of the first person to solve waits a short while and then shares the answer.

> I like that system, as spending 45 minutes to come up with the "trick" usually isn't fun for me.

And then see how the conversation goes. I'd expect 70% something with the feeling of apology-accepted, 20% being told that mansplaining is a pattern of mine, 5% things getting very personal/real/vulnerable, and 5% wildcard. Maybe the estimates are wildly off. I'm still new to being honest and real. But today-me looks at those odds and says sum of awkward + fear isn't high enough to beat the expected value of the conversation.

> If it was a man, and they got offended, could we say it's also because he was insecure about not finishing in time?

Yes, absolutely. Men do that all the time.

If it was a man, atleast it won't be about mansplaining - could be insecurity, frustration, personal dislike or such factors. In case of a woman, all of the above + mansplaining comes into play and the last one is a slippery slope to being labelled a sexist which is just too much risk to take.

Yeah this really gets to the core of a lot of this for me.

He's clearly not giving them a pass. He's calling them out. I encourage you to reread that post.

Why start with an apology when you've done nothing wrong? This only exacerbates the problem.

I'm going to guess the parent has more than one experience

> This only exacerbates the problem.

I personally haven’t found this to be the case. I’ve often found that starting out with an apology leads the offended to be much more receptive to what you have to say next. Best case scenario the person you are apologizing too isn’t offended at all and tells you so. Worst case scenario the offended uses your apology as justification that a wrong was committed in the first place. Thankfully I have only ever encountered either the former or people somewhere in the middle.

So, just to make sure I understand. a minority person reports a story: "That's just one example! That's not racism!"

A white person reports this story and says "see, minorities exaggerate." and you are willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that it must have happened to more than one person.

Do you see the problem?

Do you wonder then maybe then when you hear a black person reporting a story of racism, that's ALSO not the only experience they've ever faced?

That maybe this anecdote was also far from the only scenario they faced?

Opening up with "I'm sorry" sets a tone for the conversation. If my last interaction with someone was a little tense, I need to _reset_ the emotional balance before moving forward.

In this hypothetical, I don't believe I did anything explicitly wrong. But I also didn't handle the situation well. Maybe the "sorry" is "sorry for not addressing your concern". Or maybe it's just "sorry that 'mansplaining' is a situation you encounter frequently". It doesn't have to be BLAME. Just empathy.

> dealing with

Even the word choice is sus

> Why start with an apology

All an apology costs you is pride, which is basically free. If it gets you to a place where you can have a normal conversation, who cares who has done what wrong? The point of talking things out isn't about assigning blame.

I generally agree with this but when the issue is the person assuming they are a victim I think there is a separate point.

Whatever you think you are responding to in between the lines of my comment isn't there.

My only comment was regarding the number of experiences of the parent. Nothing less, nothing more.

1 (usually dealings) a business relation or transaction: they had dealings with an insurance company. • a personal connection or association with someone: my dealings with David consisted of giving him his late-night formula. • the particular way in which someone behaves toward others: fair dealing came naturally to him.

And what does that have to do with the conversation we were having? He made it about race himself, and decided to take offense to something imaginary.

A personal connection with someone, not an entire ethnic group / race of people. I really have doubts that you would say it another way.

“This kind of insensitivity always happens when I deal with white people.”

Whether its accurate or not, this comes across as a chore, as if there is a checkbox of trying that I get around to on occasion. As opposed to just socializing with people.

and the second bullet point doesn't even apply as thats not how you used it.

You should really engage in deeper introspection of your interactions to see why this is a chore for you.

I think it's important to re-emphasize it's not about who is right.