[HN Gopher] San Francisco All-Female Hacker House Aims to Suppor...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       San Francisco All-Female Hacker House Aims to Support Women
       Builders
        
       Author : RuffleGordon
       Score  : 23 points
       Date   : 2021-05-09 17:41 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (thenewstack.io)
 (TXT) w3m dump (thenewstack.io)
        
       | vmception wrote:
       | Are non-inclusive safe spaces legal?
       | 
       | It seems that in residences that it would be sanctionable to deny
       | housing based on assigned sex or gender identity, and in
       | education it would be sanctionable to have admissions based on
       | that as well.
       | 
       | I was curious about this with Hackbright too, but I wasn't
       | interested in this cause enough to see what legal counsel thought
       | of it (it was the closest coding academy to me at one point). The
       | California regulator ended up slapping them with other
       | violations, and the sanctions seem fairly toothless.
       | 
       | I don't really think the various Civil Rights Acts support the
       | bay area's rebranding of separate but equal.
        
         | javagram wrote:
         | https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/f...
         | 
         | " The Fair Housing Act covers most housing. In very limited
         | circumstances, the Act exempts owner-occupied buildings with no
         | more than four units, single-family houses sold or rented by
         | the owner without the use of an agent, and housing operated by
         | religious organizations and private clubs that limit occupancy
         | to members."
         | 
         | So, they may be able to get by legally under the private
         | club/member exemption.
        
           | vmception wrote:
           | Thanks! The California version can be stricter too with fair
           | housing and employment being under one agency
           | 
           | Education under another though
        
         | Barrin92 wrote:
         | >I don't really think the various Civil Rights Acts support the
         | bay area's rebranding of separate but equal.
         | 
         | that is an incredible bad faith characterization. In informal
         | 'frat house' style settings that don't have many rules women
         | often face incredible amounts of harassment because mostly men
         | don't respect boundaries. It's why there is such a
         | stereotypical bro-culture in SV, it's enabled by the laissez-
         | faire attitude.
         | 
         | In settings with rules and where people expect professionalism
         | it doesn't tend to be as much of an issue, but in some house
         | where people even mix drinking and work it tends to go bad
         | really quick.
        
           | vmception wrote:
           | It's supposed to be provocative to potentially stoke
           | introspection.
           | 
           | I understand the rationale behind "safe spaces", that wasn't
           | my question.
        
             | Barrin92 wrote:
             | well it's not provocative, it's just stupid. The whole "oh
             | safe spaces? See you're the real racist!" thing you can
             | find in the youtube comment section of Ben Shapiro videos.
             | You're not making some genius point here, you're just not
             | familiar with the kind of experiences women face in these
             | environments or lack the social intelligence to imagine it,
             | like 95% of the HN audience.
        
               | vmception wrote:
               | your words and I'm not familiar with those influencers
               | 
               | Is the way they are addressing it compatible with
               | existing laws? Do you see how easy that is for me to have
               | zero emotion on this, your turn. Think of it as a
               | standardized test question, you have to answer those
               | based on accuracy.
        
               | Barrin92 wrote:
               | >Is the way they are addressing it compatible with
               | existing laws?
               | 
               | Obviously. Private, gender separated clubs exist
               | everywhere in the United States. Ever been to a sports
               | club or a fraternity? Civil rights legislation addresses
               | employment and 'spaces of public accommodation'. You're
               | obviously JAQing off because you know this
        
         | klyrs wrote:
         | I'm still waiting to see a lawsuit forcing strip clubs to hire
         | equal proportions of male and female dancers
        
           | vmception wrote:
           | In California they only recently got reclassified as
           | employees and the club as employer, so you were waiting for
           | that first and now you might be able to get the challenge you
           | desired.
        
         | dlgeek wrote:
         | I think the residence non-discrimination requirements don't
         | apply if it's a shared space, only if it's a multi-family
         | dwelling over a certain number of units.
        
           | vmception wrote:
           | Ah possibly, thats how employment works too, some anti-
           | discrimination statutes coming into play after a certain
           | number of employees.
        
         | MyHypatia wrote:
         | Yes, non-inclusive spaces are legal. There are still golf clubs
         | in the US that don't allow women. Just last week the top golf
         | club in the US voted to allow women for the first time in its
         | 108 year history. If these male-only spaces are legal I don't
         | see how these female-only spaces would be illegal.
         | https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.espn.com/golf/story/_/id/31...
        
           | vmception wrote:
           | Just because something hasn't been challenged doesn't mean it
           | is legal and the ongoing existence of a counterpoint is not a
           | strong argument regarding legal review.
           | 
           | And the more obvious difference to me is that your example is
           | not providing housing and is not providing education.
           | 
           | There are really two questions here, the first being is it
           | legal, and the second being is this what we want whether it
           | is currently legal or currently illegal? If the answer to the
           | second question is "yes" then carry on. To me it currently
           | seems incompatible, and I am still trying to understand what
           | the current consensus is. I don't have strong opinions on it,
           | or much of anything, which is why I gravitate towards the
           | legal field because - like lawyers - I can compartmentalize
           | anything. So I am aiming to also understand the consensus on
           | what people desire and if "safe spaces" are the most
           | productive approach to getting there.
        
             | mensetmanusman wrote:
             | People have the freedom to hang out with who they want?
        
               | vmception wrote:
               | With some limitations on housing, education, and
               | employment.
               | 
               | The question is whether those limitations apply here.
        
             | MyHypatia wrote:
             | Ok, some other examples include:
             | 
             | -Seminaries and monasteries that only house and educate
             | men.
             | 
             | -Women's colleges that only house and educate women.
             | 
             | -Homeless and domestic violence shelters that only house
             | men or women.
             | 
             | -All-boys and all-girls schools that only educate boys or
             | girls.
             | 
             | I don't have a strong opinion on whether this is "good" or
             | "bad". I'm just pointing out that there are many examples
             | though out the United States. So your statement that "the
             | bay area is rebranding separate but equal" just doesn't
             | make any sense when this is common in various forms
             | throughout the entire United States.
        
       | ublaze wrote:
       | What are some well known companies that came from founders living
       | in hacker houses?
        
         | maneesh wrote:
         | Pied Piper
        
         | cbm-vic-20 wrote:
         | l0pht Heavy Industries / @stake
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L0pht
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | Nice. SF also has Double Union, an all-female hacker space.
       | 
       | Although it's late in the cycle to be starting a hacker house.
        
       | meristohm wrote:
       | Good luck to The Garden! I'm curious what creations will take
       | root there.
        
       | [deleted]
        
         | FlagBrigade wrote:
         | I would say so. Post went from front page down to last
         | position.
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/news?p=17
         | 
         | More abuse of the flagging system
        
           | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-05-09 23:02 UTC)