This comment only shows that those who talk most online about how people are mistreated based on gender are the ones who are the most sexist.

Step back for a minute and think about how this relates to sexism at all. It is you who associated these two concepts together. You are the one who's being sexist. Once you take off your sexist glasses and see things clearly, you'll realize you are making as huge logical fallacy as the one you're criticizing.

Sexism needs to stop but comments like this are what makes it hard.

I don't know what gender made the most money on Polyvore, it doesn't matter. The point was she enriched her friends. The price made waves at the time:

https://techcrunch.com/2015/07/31/why-polyvores-jess-lee-sol...

> "Yahoo bought Polyvore in what we’ve heard could be anywhere from a $25 million* to $60 million"

Quickly followed up by an update revealing it was actually ~10x more!

I think the OP is just skeptical. Where is the anti-female bias?

How is that in any way related to gender? I also "marginalized" Tumblr and Summly, was that me throwing shade towards men?

They didn't make money.

Yahoo doesn't break out the numbers so we don't know how much revenue any of the companies they acquired are bringing in (profit would be even more difficult because of shared resources). Regardless, none of this has anything to do with gender. I chose a large, medium and small example from a list of Yahoo's acquisitions.

He asked how is that related to gender?

So, if someone posits that a business venture is frivolous, actual profitability aside, that is anti-female (or anti-male) statement/view?

I still don't understand. Can you please elaborate?

If someone posits that a profitable business venture is frivolous, it's not about whether it's good business or not. Also, you do understand.

Back to the point: what does any of that have to do with sex or gender? Maybe you will elaborate, if OP won't.