Common, while there are some sexist comments, majority are not. Paranoia over sexism harms too - there is no reason to promote more fear then is actually reasonable.

Women are not helped by painting the world worst then it really is - that just makes women less likely try things that could turn out enjoyable or profitable.

IMO, that is one of the things that holds women back - the moment we poke out of cocoon helpful people feel the need to inform us about grave imagined dangers and some end up believing that. If you want more females to try out these things, dont overestimate problems (nor ignore them).

In response to OPs polite, inoffensive, post someone told them to "go away"; suggested they had a "mental disorder"; was told they'd never be hired, etc.

And this is after only a single hour of the post going up.

I ctrl-f'd for the posts you mentioned and found all of them to be downvoted and/or flagged.

There's going to be hostility on the internet. That's why some users can downvote or flag posts that don't add anything to the discussion.

I can see maybe one or two comments that I don't feel contribute anything near the top of the page, and that's because they were posted so recently it would be wrong to kill them immediately.

HN is not perfect, but it's damn good, especially when you give it time (as 'dang mentioned above).

I missed those - I read whole discussion when it was young and did not had those comments yet, refreshed, quickly read the rest and missed them somehow.

Then I reacted also because the fear thing is a bit of pet peeve of mine.

> Sexism on HN is prevalent

Sexism on HN is prevalent amongst the most downvoted comments on the page perhaps...

I wouldn't say this community has a sexism problem any more than "real life has a sexism problem", the same - or worse, heavily upvoted sexist comments can be found in just about any other online community, so making it out like HN in particular has a problem when quite clearly the majority around here do not exhibit that is quite a stretch.

> I wouldn't say this community has a sexism problem any more than "real life has a sexism problem"

I guess I've only been using HN for... [looks at bio] 9.77 years. But yes, I'd say HN is significantly worse than real life. And honestly, I expect it to be better. It's backed by YC. It's a professional forum for people who pride themselves on being smart and rational.

Almost every time a topic like this comes up here I consider it an embarrassment. I am always encouraging people to get involved in tech. I would like this to be a place I can send people new to the industry. But the amount of sheer garbage on anything that doesn't coddle the feelings of white men means I can't.

I'm not suggesting HN is the worst. But it's pretty bad, as are tech communities generally. Because I care about HN I want it to be better.

HN isn't separate from real life, it's part of it. Many people have built their careers through HN. Companies get funded through HN and people launch their startups on HN. This place is real, and if it's not welcoming to women, people of color, or other marginalized groups then that's a problem.

> HN isn't separate from real life, it's part of it.

I wasn't suggesting it's separate - I was simply suggesting that I think its sexism level is comparable to many "real world" average places. I think that's pretty good, especially for the Internet where the disconnect is often larger.

Unless you're suggesting women and minorities are turned off immediately by heavily down-voted comments, many of which are hidden unless you check the "show me the bad stuff" box then I don't think "not welcoming" is an accurate description. I can't speak to race or sex, but with other things at least, I know that seeing nasty comments present but heavily downvoted is a sort of comfort to me.

I would ask you to reconsider your attitude here. There is a strong element of unfair and unfounded accusation in this thread that has basically created bad-faith dialogue here. While there may be insensitive or even overtly sexist people that comment here, your own minimization of unfair attitudes w.r.t the presence of good men with your snide hashtag reference is a serious part of the problem too.

I'm not being snide with #notallmen. The hashtag exists because denial is such a common response when sexism is pointed out.

dang acts like sexism is just like any other topic on which HN is passionate and divided. Like tabs versus spaces, or whether linux is ready for the desktop.

Sexism is far more pernicious and far more serious than those other hot button topics though, so it should not be piled onto that heap.

I'm baffled by the suggestion that reasonable responses somehow negate the hateful bile others post. If somebody gets sexually harassed by 3 people in the office, does it help to point out the other 17 people have done no sexual harassment at all?

Your sibling comment is a strong rebuttal to the parent. This comment though basically confirms the suspicion of the parent.

The argument on this subthread is that you can't judge the response of the community based on the most immediate, knee-jerk comments written on a thread. What you're doing is attempting to co-opt that sentiment into rebutting the question the thread is based on.

let me now reply in more temperate and deliberate language, since this deserves discussion. I would appreciate it if when you disagree with me you attempt to discuss the disagreement with me instead of making assumptions about what I think or believe.

The OP of this thread asks women specifically how to find an employer that she might feel comfortable working at. That is a fair question, though personally I believe that toxic workplaces for women are also toxic workplaces for almost all men as well. But fine, that's not the issue. Some men have responded even though they were asked not to and some of those responses have been thoughtful and potentially useful.

In this subthread a HN moderator told a poster that they had made an unfair comment. That was refuted by another HN poster who asked the moderator to reverse his judgment because it his his responsibility as a moderator to support a particular political agenda that the other poster wants him to support.

I asked that person to reconsider their attitude because, like the moderator, I believe that there was a significant element of unfairness in this subthread and the moderator was correct to call it out because it leads to uncivil and unproductive discussions, as well as encouraging a kind of prejudicial attitude about men.

I agree with the moderator. That is the extent of my statement in this thread. In what way am I co-opting something? What am I co-opting? How does my language accomplish that, if that is what I am doing?

Maybe you will speak to your own positions here as well, since that might advance the conversation. You seem to enjoy sniping me so I don't hold out much hopes, but maybe you'll be nice. What do you think is going on here?

The moderator told a commenter they'd made an unfair comment. You attempted to assumptively apply that response to the topic of the whole thread. Seems like a simple enough criticism to have made of your comment.