Thanks for the response, Morgan Wildermuth. Good point that some women who support YC and Facebook’s position here may be hesitant to say so on Twitter. And it cuts both ways — I’ve also talked to women who disagree with YC’s position but work for a YC company or a company that Peter Thiel invests in so aren’t comfortable saying anything publically. For that matter there are plenty women who don’t want to say anything at all on Twitter about this kind of topic because of all the trolling and harassment. So yeah, it’s certainly not any kind of scientific sample — I updated the post to make it clear that I wasn’t suggesting that it was.
> I’m sad there weren’t more people in your sphere making a claim that tolerance demands you tolerate someone supporting a political candidate you find detestable, period.
There were plenty of guys making that claim in my sphere (although also plenty of guys saying otherwise).
This really is the crux of the “Paradox of Tolerance”. Wikipedia has good quotes from Karl Popper and John Rawls on this, both arguing that society has a right to self-preservation that can outweigh tolerance. My experience is that most people agree and have some bounds to what they’ll tolerate — they just draw the line in different places. For example, Sam Altman said that if Thiel had done some of the stuff Trump has, he’d be out of there. One of the added complexities here is the level of indirection … still, if Thiel had given $1.25 million to the KKK or a group of Holocaust deniers, would the reaction be different?
> Enough people pissed at you and labelling you the anti-Christ (hyperbole) tends to have an impact, think of Curtis Yarvin.
For those who don’t get the reference: Curtis Yarvin (aka Mencius Moldbug) is founder of a Thiel-funded startup whose invitation to speak at Lambaconf this year lead to some intense discussion. Tess Townsend’s article Controversy Rages Over ‘Pro-Slavery’ Tech Speaker Curtis Yarvin is a good overview; the Geek Feminism wiki has other links.