[–] Lipsy #bornnotworn 16 points Edited

This is a great point, but it's the LAST step—not the first—in fixing/rejiggering something that runs much deeper.

Female socialization tends to render a deep, jarring discomfort unto the whole entire notion of "owning" IDEAS, which is quite clearly the first and foremost priority of the blurb author here (the first person mentioned who's well-known for contributing anything other than intellectual property, regardless of whether stolen/misappropriated, is Usain Bolt—not mentioned until seventh).

I mean, I even see this in perfectly everyday contexts like my conversations with friends. Even when I come away from a nondescript get-together with some pretty profound new insights, it's comparatively rare for me to be able to pinpoint exactly which friend spoke those ideas originally.
And moreover, while my friends and I definitely appreciate being credited or thanked, none of us would possibly think to demand an attribution—or even to want one—if someone were to 'steal' those insights and take them to other exchanges.

I think the same dynamic, playing out on larger levels, contributes in large part to perpetuating this discrepancy into the current timeline, on which Zuckerberg et al have become known quantities. (If anybody needs an explanation of why there haven't been tons of names of Female creators passed down as patrimony from Mozart's time, I'm not sure I'd even know where to begin addressing that.)

It also provides a convenient explanation for why, for example, Amelia Earhart is so widely known. IME substantially more people know Ms. Earhart by name than Charles Lindbergh (arguably the closest thing to a male counterpart), although she still slightly trails the Wright brothers in the household name recognition dept.
What that ultimately comes down to is that Ms. Earhart did a thing, which can't readily be misattributed or transferred to another person the way an idea can.

Compounding the Female-socialization problem is the fact that ideas are just really, really easy to steal—which combines with the decidedly male tendencies to /1/ steal shit, and /2/ consider all of life as one giant contest, in unfortunately predictable ways.
Thusly we have, e.g., Watson and Crick being the names that most people associate with Rosalind Franklin's discovery of the double-helix DNA structure. Among however many thousands of similar examples.

[+] [Deleted] 4 points

I don't blame any woman for that aversion to the spotlight, not when they are both witness to the constant lack of praise, lack of belief in female achievement and the condemnation of women who shine too bright. Women in the spotlight for their achievements are made examples of. Women know this even if only subconsciously.

It’s proved that a lot of the men mentioned took ideas from other people and “had good business sense” (read into that what you will) to make them work.

Women are more likely to share and build on each other’s work, imho. When women weren’t allowed in the public sphere, they were still creating recipes, music, clothing etc. Just because it’s not profitable, it’s not seen as important, but all these things make life a lot richer in other ways.

[+] [Deleted] 15 points

This is from tumblr, so I hesitate to believe OP is talking about real women. I hope they are, though.

I can confirm that I took this screenshot on Radblr. OP is absolutely talking about real women and real women only.

Hell yeah, I nuked my old tumblr but might create a radblr account!