Yep, that's sort of the point - the advice is the same no matter your gender. I put that in the title because my theory about why more women don't apply is because they feel like they won't get in, and in general I have found (gross gender generalization coming) that women take rejection worse than men.
YC is approaching the acceptance rate of Berkeley PHD - due to the ever increasing supply of applicants, mostly. The classes have actually gotten larger. So any feelings that "I probably won't get in" are probably true for any gendered applicant.
By all means apply! But have a backup plan. I have known people that have looked for funding only from YC. That's just as silly as only applying to Berkeley and then giving up on your PHD if you don't get in. As they say in football, that's not a high percentage play.
There were plenty of women PHDs at my graduate school, and men too! So I know people of many genders can navigate processes with lots of rejection.
To be accepted, the 'backup plan' needs to be similar in implementation to the 'YC plan' — if you wouldn't have proceeded with your startup in some form if you got rejected, then YC will almost definitely reject you.
Or... just start your fricking company. pg rocks, YC rocks, but you can actually start a business without either one being involved. without any outside investors in fact.
Your generalization could be correct (as a male, I would not even try to generalize women), but I think more women don't apply simply because there are less women in tech. The fear of rejection keeps men on the sidelines too. There are just more men hackers and thus more apply and become founders of tech companies.
and that's why you have to attack the problem at every decision point. From birth to death we are told what is a masculin job and what is a feminine job. So from birth to death we need to start pointing out that jobs are simply to be done by people who can accomplish the tasks.
The fact that it is written by a female founder is what doesn't make it linkbait. It's a case of "hey girlfriend, here's the list of things you need to do to be a founder, and guess what, none of them involve dropping testicles".
They psychology of these things is quite complicated.
I don't see what's complicated; it's an HN policy that titles should succinctly and accurately reflect the content of the article submitted. And this was a self post.
I second that it's a good useful post, but misses the point of why women aren't female Y-Combinator founders. If you aren't ready for a life of rejection, then it doesn't have anything to do with Y-Combinator, but don't be an entrepreneur!
Yep, the rejection part I agree with. I wanted to write something actionable instead of yet another theoretical musing on the dearth of women in technology. The "why" part of it is something that I think has been well-explored.
I agree. Exposure of role models is key. Being the first to do something often sucks. so it;s nice to know others have been there and it was not so bad.
