jab
Veteran Member
Some of them, like the DE Vosses are notoriously anti-science.
Last edited:
-
Features
Female Privilege or Femme Fatale?
- Thread starter Trausti
- Start date
Some of them, like the DE Vosses are notoriously anti-science.
jab
Veteran Member
So she's a femme fatale? There's a notion that silicon valley is sexist and that VCs only invest in men. Here, a bunch of old rich dudes handed over wads of cash for a lady without details of proof of concept. Something's going on.
Helps explain the more blatant and bigger fraud of Bernie Madoff
or the success of Trump (as in Donald, not Ivanka) University, or of the original Ponzi . . .Con men and con women and scanners use whatever they got to rip people off by getting people to part with their money irrationally. For both con men and con women that may involves playing off gender and sex related feeling and stereotypes--like older wealthy-looking possessors of dicks are real smart about finances.
To deny this is to be naive.
I'm not sure Anna Nicole was a con at all, in that her hubby seemed satisfied with what he got, and she never divorced him.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 50,296
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
Why are we even talking about Smith? She wasn’t revered or anything. Funny, some woman potentially tries to take the estate of an old man after he dies and we hear about female privilege. Some private investors takeover a private company, rake out the assets and leave it for dead and that is capitalism.
Koyaanisqatsi
Veteran Member
Misogyny.
Copernicus
Industrial Grade Linguist
My opinion, as well. There seems to be an impression among some that any nefarious activity involving a woman is an act of "female privilege". Men behaving badly are just people who are behaving badly. Women are being singled out for an extra shot of blame because of their gender.
Female privilege turns pale when compared to "Old white guy" privilege, as illustrated by Bernie Made off with billions.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 50,296
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
Kenneth Lay came to mind as well.
So tiresome.
- - - Updated - - -
I can answer straight questions, but you are demanding answers to questions loaded with false presuppositions. Moreover, I have explained why the OP appears misogynistic, but you have ignored those explanations. Trausti is pretty blatant in his misogyny, as you can see with his use of the offensive tone in his last post. His attack on the female CEO was based solely on her gender, not her use of her gender to gain some kind of advantage that men don't have. Attacking women just for being women is misogyny, pure and simple.
You and he have also resorted to the baseless speculation that she could have used her physical attractiveness to entice investors into spending money, but there is no evidence of that at all. And that is not what the term "female privilege" refers to. But maybe you think that women who prostitute themselves are exercising "female privilege" of some kind. Men are being victimized by these prostitutes?
Why the trash talk? I realize that you didn't mean it seriously, but I have been addressing the content of your posts, not calling you names.
I was just trying to fit in.
Koyaanisqatsi
Veteran Member
Then go to sleep snowflake.
Emily Lake
Might be a replicant
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2014
- Messages
- 8,454
- Location
- It's a desert out there
- Gender
- Agenderist
- Basic Beliefs
- Atheist
Interesting interview with the reporter who broke the story and has a book coming out on Theranos:
[YOUTUBE]ta1DqI4xDRw[/YOUTUBE]
At about the 16:00 mark they actually discuss the possibility Elizabeth Holmes may have used her attractiveness to help sell the company's story.
O, the misogyny!
[YOUTUBE]ta1DqI4xDRw[/YOUTUBE]
At about the 16:00 mark they actually discuss the possibility Elizabeth Holmes may have used her attractiveness to help sell the company's story.
O, the misogyny!
barbos
Contributor
Interesting, author appears to think it was a scam from the start.
I admit I had not been following that story closely before it went bust. The fact that she started it at 19 would have made me very suspicions. This is not designer handbag business.
I admit I had not been following that story closely before it went bust. The fact that she started it at 19 would have made me very suspicions. This is not designer handbag business.
ruby sparks
Contributor
Without wishing to comment on this specific story, women using their attractiveness to gain something is arguably exercising a privilege, yes. It could probably be called a female privilege when it's a woman using it, especially if she's using it on men, perhaps. Similarly, a handsome man may have a 'handsomness privilege' (though evolutionary psychologists might say male ape looks are not as important as male ape status when it comes to attracting female apes, in general terms).
As far as I am aware, it ('attractiveness privilege') works best, for a woman, on men, if she has or is perceived to have, breeding years remaining.
As I understand it, the idea is that it increases competition among male interactors, or 'potential investors', financial or otherwise.
thebeave
Contributor
Good video. They actually describe her as a femme fatale at that point in the video, as the "misogynistic" OP title asks.
With regard to her attractiveness, I'm struggling with that a bit. I can't quite pin it down, but her looks, coupled with her rather manly voice sorta creeps me out a bit. I've followed her rise before she was exposed as a fraud, and even back then her appearance unsettled me a little. Maybe its too much makeup and the eyes are a bit bugged out?
I think a lot of her appeal to investors was that she was seen as the first real superstar female entrepreneur that Silicon Valley had created, on par with Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerberg, Sergey Brinn, etc. Investors didn't want to miss out on the chance to be associated with the "next big thing". Perhaps they felt if they got on board with her and the company became a raging success and a household name, they could tout their newfound "I'm totally not sexist and super supportive of women" credentials. I think the idea that a woman would be capable of creating such a monstrous fraud was probably inconceivable to them. Such massive frauds have historically been the domain of men.
barbos
Contributor
In a way she achieved something
I do think had she been a man result would have been basically the same. VC companies are filled with people who have no science background who often got rich by pure chance. They naturally distrust expert advice and rely heavily on gut feeling. Nice field for unscrupulous bullshitters.
Don2 (Don1 Revised)
Contributor
Wait, you guys think that's goddess-level attractive, even the crazy eyes?
barbos
Contributor
Well, I don't think that. And she has tons of makeup most of the time. But the guy has a legitimate suspicion with his old man and young woman theory.
Don2 (Don1 Revised)
Contributor
So a woman just has to be above average charisma to make a billion dollar company then. Hmmm...if that's a real privilege, then why are most companies led by men, and why were most executives for Theranos men. It appears people are trying to make a general case out of an exception.
I know quiet a few investment managers and some of them work with venture capital and start up funds. I don't think any of them would be swayed by the attractiveness of the person making a pitch for their money. If anything, they would be more suspicious. Most start ups fail because the gizmo either doesn't work, or can't be produced and sold at a profit. Very few people, men or women have whatever it takes to push their company into deception and outright fraud when problems crop up.
barbos
Contributor
I understand she had a lot of entrepreneur charisma, question is, did she have some other, specific to women, type of charisma. The guy thinks she might.