The only good thing to have come from the fitness industry, though, is to make gyms much more accessible for those of us who are either not male or not fitness-educated or not hanging around with the right crowd. Before nice shiny gyms came along, there was no way I (a woman) was walking into the garage type place that looks a bit like a minimum security prison yard. However, the problem now is that although gyms are accessible to everyone really, they are shit and the proper weights are still in the darkest mostly-large-males corner where it's still a bit intimidating to go to and bend over or lie down in the middle as the only female.
So there's a silver lining but there's still a cloud.
Just go to that dark corner. I'm a skinny guy (less skinny now), I was intimidated by that corner as well.
My observation: the vast majority of those "mostly-large-males" are extremely nice, even if they do sometimes make scary faces while lifting and look like Danny Trejo. If you pick the right gym (typically in lower class neighborhoods), they might even critique your form, which is incredibly valuable.
So don't go back. You could make the same argument about a lot of restaurants/bars/public places, etc.
Honestly, I know a lot of VERY big guys who lift a heck of a lot of weight. Without exception, every single one of them is the nicest, most even-tempered, welcoming fellow you could imagine. The stereotype of a angry, musclebound meathead is just that, a stereotype.
If you're really too scared, go find yourself the most convenient Crossfit gym and drop by for a free workout. You'll find that MOST Crossfit gyms are well over 60% female and that there are several women there that are leading a lot of the men in weightlifting and overall athleticism. I'm a guy and I've most definitely been shown up by a lot of the women at my particular box and I'm not alone.
Believe it or not, weightlifting/getting fit is going to make you VERY uncomfortable for non-trivial periods of time. You might as well get used to it. Seeing a whole cadre of women lifting heavy and doing it fearlessly might really do you a lot of good from a psychological perspective.
Greg Glassman always said that the biggest adaptation a Crossfitter experiences is between their ears.
I'd strongly suggest not letting the fear of possible harassment deter you. Wait until it actually happens. Worst case, you complain to the front desk and homeboy gets out of his yearly contract 11 months early. (They usually have cameras everywhere, so it wouldn't even be a "he said, she said" issue.)
Most of the very large men have no need to harass random women - all they usually need to do is walk into a bar and say "hello". And I've never met a guy at the gym who would even be tolerant of such harassment, let alone participate.
tl;dr Fitness is too important to let a one-in-a-million bad event deter you. Statistically speaking, your biggest worries are poor fitness > harming yourself due to poor form/bad luck > getting harassed at the gym.
I would prefer a private office for me and my team, rather than totally isolated. I could do without hearing my other colleagues have phone calls and meetings at their desks.
However, working from home means I don't have to worry about my company's internet policy and I can just get my work done and have my fun. Pisses me right off that they block sites rather than get rid of unproductive workers.
> My wife still laughs about the day I took half an hour off to go to the barber and then raved about the awesome social experience.
I had the same experience working for a company where I was on my own and the people weren't friendly. I ended up loving the staff in the nearby Cafe Nero because they were friendly and asked me how I was and sometimes had a little chat. When I finally left that job, I left them a massive tip... I actually wanted to leave a gushing thank you card but at least I still retained some sense of perspective to know that that would have probably weirded them out.
All day I was on messenger and forums and had music playing but having no friendly contact with humans for hours has quite an effect.
It wouldn't have weirded them out--it probably would have made their day. Why not err on the side of maybe delighting someone? Worse case scenario, it weirds them out and you never see them again anyway!
Exactly. I consider my purchases as my investment in the kind of market I want. Small though my purchases usually are, it's all I've got to use for influence. This is why I will never fly Ryanair when there is another choice that isn't hundreds more in price... and if it is, I probably will just go somewhere else.
Flying between London and Dublin, I pretty much only have Aer Lingus and Ryanair to choose between. The difference in experience is like the difference between Requiem for a Dream and Amelie.
Aside from not having a car (don't need one in London), I'm usually going over for only a couple of days so it's not worth using up a full day for travelling and then being really tired from the drive when I get there and when I get back. You have to take in the price of petrol as well as the ferry, which stops it from being in any way cheaper and it's already not stress free. The ferry costs about £300 for one person travelling with a medium sized car, no roof rack, with no reserved seating. That's about 3 times as much as a flight and you'll have had to drive for half a day to get there.
If I got a train from London to Holyhead, then a ferry to Dublin, it's 8h 30m and about £40 and then I'm left in Dublin port to find a way home with my luggage. Transport within Dublin is pretty crappy so we avoid it when we're over there as we are normally running around visiting family and friends. So it's slightly cheaper but still half a day's travelling and a bit hassle once you arrive.
We fly and pick up a car at the airport - much shorter journey, much cheaper than a ferry, probably not that much difference in price from the train but easy to do and we can pretty much relax (aside from airport security) rather than drive for half a day.
SF to LA is 6-7 hours, and I prefer to fly. Given that the drive to the airport is around 25 minutes, I usually arrive at the airport no more than an hour before my flight, the flight time is around an hour, and getting out of the airport post-landing takes about 10 minutes (I never check bags), that's less than 3 hours, during one of which I get to sit and do nothing (nap, listen to music, watch TV), versus 6-7 where I have to concentrate on driving. With the driving option, I also have to deal with parking at my destination.
Sure, flying is probably still more expensive (though gas alone for the drive is probably at least $100), but I find it worth the added convenience.
American. Can't you drive under the sea, through a chunnel and into continental Europe? (Also, can't you take trains, likewise through a chunnel and into continental Europe?)
Generally I think if you're traveling city to city, you'd fly/take the train then use public transport at the other end. You only really need a car if you're venturing away from cities. Like there would be absolutely no point in driving to Paris and looking for a parking spot there when I could get the Eurostar straight to GdN. I'd even rather fly to Paris than drive, and no-one does that anymore...
Smart train operators like Eurostar realize that they are virtually airlines and behave as such.
Yeah, I just mentioned driving to point out the distances, because that's how Americans understand distance between cities. If you'd take the train to Paris why wouldn't you take the train to Dublin? (Or, well, to the ferry dock, and then the ferry to Dublin?)
While we're at it, you don't have any contact info in your profile, so I'll ask here--what made you assume I was Canadian and not American? :)
Dublin's a lot further than Paris, journey time wise. I can quite literally have breakfast at home and lunch in Paris and be back home in the evening (and have done that a few times). Travel to Dublin by rail/ferry is an entire day. And domestic rail travel in the UK is often not a pleasant experience. Even 1st class doesn't insulate you from the delays. And flying's likely cheaper too.
I dunno, based on my own friends, long roadtrips seem to be more of a Canadian thing, Americans seem to fly more :-) When I lived in the US catching the Delta service between Boston and NYC was "normal", that's only what, 3 hrs drive?
Closer to 4 hours, and American cities have rush hour twice a day 8 hours apart, and rush hour usually lasts 2-3 hours, and "no one drives in NYC, there's too much traffic" and we don't like passenger rail, so that explains all of that.
Right now I live 5 hours of driving away from the largest major city. Most of the American West is like that. 8 hours? I do that twice a month. People in built up areas on the East Coast see longer distances differently because a long distance actually gets you across three or four states, not less than one like it is out here.
Yeah, Canadian flight prices are more expensive than US domestic flight (even when going to the US), not by a huge amount but enough to dissuade frequent use.
> Rather, women with technical and/or entrepreneurial aspirations need to get over themselves, stop being so concerned about peer pressure or what anybody else will think, do what they love, and prove to others that it can be done.
I don't think it's that simple though. For a majority change, positive feedback is required along the lifecyle from knowing nothing to loving it and having entrepreneurial aspirations. I think the main problem is the mostly invisible peer pressure to do something else - not the peer pressure to not do something. This is why more female role models are needed and more tech-oriented schooling from a young age and more gender neutral literature, etc.
The assumption is that these women are just as capable as Y Combinator applicants, but that the program is biased against them. Even if you believe this, any time you restrict the applicant pool arbitrarily (by gender/etc), you will lose some of the best applicants. For example, you will likely at least double the great applicants by allowing 40+ y/o males to enter as well. Hence, it just doesn't make sense as an investor to participate in "XX Combinator."
I still don't get that this means 'lower the barrier' though. Doesn't it mean raise one impenetrable barrier, i.e. XY? If the same number of XXs exist then the number will still be the same but fewer people will apply. If more women apply as a result of good PR about it being woman-friendly then they still may not get accepted on the same grounds as any other.
Plus if you find a place that has decent, properly made coffee, the staff are probably into it and actually want to work there so the whole experience is just better and even educational. Quality begets quality.
Most of the sci-fi I've read have great female role models. Dan Brown is an awful writer so would be better to push better writers - get their films made! :)
So there's a silver lining but there's still a cloud.