I wrote this on Nov 6, 2024. The day after said incident happened.
At around the one month mark(a few days ago), it came back to me again. (What can I say? I remember everything about how I felt that day.. in excruciating and exacting detail)
Since then I met with that VC. I wanted to. I asked for a meeting. I didn’t get my apology. There was no remorse.
It did make me wonder. WHY? and HOW?
So I did a neurological deep dive. To understand what might have been going on inside his brain.
It is in 6 Parts: A - F. The last one, PART F was my fav read.
It’s not the same as ‘I apologize’, but at least I can make some sense of it now.
P.S: It’s very long. 👇🏼
PART A: (my post)
The weight of the stones I carry…
At a recent agricultural open technology event in California(still ongoing), I experienced something that crystallized my journey as an immigrant female farmer/founder.
In full view of dozens of industry peers, I found myself on the receiving end of aggressive behavior and profanity from a male venture capitalist.
As I stood there, another industry figure joined in, showing immediate solidarity with his "bro" (his words) despite having no context of the situation. Event organizers had to intervene - a moment that will stay with me.
When I requested an apology for the public hostility, the first aggressor made a point to clarify that he hadn't "asked" me to F*** Off - he had "told" me to do so. The distinction, in his mind, seemed important enough to emphasize.
This weight sits heavy on my shoulders now, another stone added to my already burdensome collection. Each stone represents a moment where I am reminded of my place as "other" … immigrant, woman, outsider.
Some stones are large and jagged, like being publicly berated. Others are smaller but no less weighty: the subtle dismissals, the interrupted speeches, the explanations to my own lived experience, the assumption that I don't belong…
The heaviest stone isn't the public humiliation. It's the knowledge that tomorrow I must return to these spaces, navigate these power structures, pitch to these investors, and innovate in this industry that consistently signals that I am unwelcome.
The weight comes from knowing that for every public display of bias, there are dozens of quiet declinations, ignored emails, or silently closed doors.
As an immigrant female farmer and founder, I carry multiple weights. The weight of representation… knowing each mistake will be attributed not to human error but to my gender, my brown skin, my accent, my clothes, the bindi I wear on my forehead, my otherness.
The weight to prove excellence..this is the understanding that I must be twice(or more) as good to receive half the recognition.
The weight of vigilance..to be constantly reading rooms, adjusting behaviors, managing perceptions, and navigating cultural nuances.
In my experience, the tech industry speaks of meritocracy while showing hierarchy. They preach innovation while protecting status quo. DEI. Equity. Empty words. They claim diversity while defending homogeneity. Each contradiction becomes another stone in my basket.
What makes my weight particularly burdensome is its invisibility to others. Those who benefit from current power structures can't feel its presence. They have the luxury of forgetting incidents, moving on from confrontations, dismissing experiences that don't match their reality.
Yet I persist. I must. I continue to nurture my passion, develop tech, solve problems, and create value. I do this not despite being an immigrant woman, but because of who I am.
My perspective, shaped by leaving country and culture, crossing borders and breaking barriers..it enables me to see solutions others miss. My stubbornness, forged by carrying these weights, becomes my competitive advantage.
By sharing this personal experience, I hope to illuminate what often remains invisible…unseen in the shadows. My story is my own, but the patterns it reveals deserve examination.
When public behavior requires organizer intervention, when professional disagreement turns to profanity, when bystanders rush to defend power rather than examine conduct - these moments reveal the work still needed in our industry.
The incident will fade from memories. But its weight stays with me, transforming from burden to strength. It builds character, reveals truth, and forges determination. While others may forget their actions, I will remember the weight of the stones I was made to carry. And in that memory lies my power.
Their behavior reflects their limitations, not my worth. Their resistance reveals their fear, not my weakness. Their exclusion demonstrates their loss, not mine.
I carry this weight not because I must, but because I can. And in that capacity lies my grit.
/FIN
[..]
PART B
From a neuroscientific perspective, human behavior in socially charged situations—such as becoming aggressive over a perceived insult—often involves an interplay between various brain regions and neural circuits. While no single pathway completely explains complex, nuanced behavior, we can consider several key components:
1. Memory Retrieval and Emotional Context
• Hippocampus and Memory Recall: When the individual encountered what he believed to be an insult (even one from a year ago), his brain likely pulled the memory from storage. The hippocampus, a structure critical for long-term memory formation and retrieval, would have reactivated neural networks associated with that past event.
• Emotional Coloring of Memories (Amygdala): Memories are not stored as sterile data points; they’re often laced with emotional salience. The amygdala—known for its role in emotion processing, especially fear, threat, and anger—can attach emotional significance to certain memories. If he had previously felt targeted, undervalued, or insulted by the social media post, the memory wouldn’t just recall facts; it would also trigger the emotional “tag” the brain had placed on that event.
2. Threat Perception and Social Evaluation
• Frontal-Subcortical Circuits in Social Cognition: Humans constantly evaluate social cues and intentions. When this individual came across you at the event, his brain may have automatically scanned the context—your presence, your body language, and any environmental hints—to interpret whether you were a “threat” or “ally.”
• Amygdala and Insult Detection: The perception of an insult often engages the amygdala again, this time as part of the threat-response system. Even if the threat is merely symbolic—an old post interpreted as disrespect—the emotional centers of the brain can respond as if the threat were current and real.
3. Emotional Reactivity and Impulsiveness
• Prefrontal Cortex (PFC) and Regulation: Typically, the prefrontal cortex, especially the ventrolateral and ventromedial areas, acts as a “brake” system to help us respond thoughtfully rather than impulsively. It mediates impulses and can help us see the bigger picture, regulate emotions, and maintain social norms.
• Reduced Inhibitory Control: If the situation was tense, if he was tired, stressed, or had consumed substances (like alcohol), his prefrontal cortex might have been less effective at modulating the amygdala’s emotional impulses. Impairment or momentary reduction in PFC function can lead to more impulsive, aggressive outbursts.
• Neurochemistry of Impulsivity: Neurotransmitters such as serotonin and dopamine also play roles. Low serotonin levels, for instance, have been associated with reduced impulse control and heightened aggression. In a heightened emotional state, shifts in these neurotransmitter balances could facilitate a quick jump to confrontation.
4. Cognitive Biases and Ruminations
• Confirmation Bias in the Brain: The brain tends to filter new information through existing beliefs. If the venture capitalist had already formed a narrative that you attacked his reputation, his memory circuits and perceptual processes would interpret your current presence through that lens—reinforcing the belief that you are a threat.
• Memory Reactivation and Emotional Loop: The recollection of a stressful memory can trigger physiological arousal (increased heart rate, tension), which the brain reads as “this is serious,” further locking the individual into a defensive or aggressive stance.
5. Aggression as a Behavioral Output
• Motor Systems and Language Centers: Once emotionally aroused and triggered, the frontal language areas (e.g., Broca’s area, medial prefrontal regions involved in language and social cognition) might channel that emotional energy into verbal aggression. At the same time, the motor cortex is readying the body for action (posturing, raising voice, gestures), though actual physical aggression is often modulated by the social and cultural norms embedded in the frontal cortex.
• Reduced Empathic Response: The circuitry involved in empathy and mentalizing—the ability to understand another person’s perspective—relies on parts of the medial prefrontal cortex and the temporoparietal junction. In a heated emotional state, these regions may be dialed down, making it harder for him to consider your feelings or motivations.
In summary:
When the venture capitalist perceived your past social media post as an insult, it likely triggered a cascade of neural events: old memories (hippocampus) loaded with negative emotional tags (amygdala) were reactivated. These emotional memories interacted with his current threat detection systems, biasing his interpretation of you as a danger to his self-image or status. Under stress, the prefrontal cortex’s regulatory influence may have weakened, allowing impulsive, aggressive verbal behavior to emerge. Neurochemistry and cognitive biases reinforced this cycle, culminating in an outburst instead of a measured, rational response.
/FIN
[..]
PART C
The perception of an insult involves more than just raw sensory input; it’s the brain’s interpretation of social cues, tone, context, and personal history. Even when the “insult” is not clear-cut—and might be entirely a misinterpretation—certain neural and cognitive processes can tip the scales toward perceiving it as personal affront:
1. The Role of Expectations and Biases
• Pre-existing Mental Frameworks: The brain uses prior experience, personality traits, and learned social norms as a filter to interpret new information. If someone already harbors feelings of insecurity or has had negative past experiences with criticism, their baseline interpretation of ambiguous remarks may skew more easily toward seeing them as threats or insults.
• Hostile Attribution Bias: Psychologically, some individuals have a heightened tendency to view others’ ambiguous actions as intentional provocations. This bias is associated with alterations in how the brain weighs social cues—particularly in regions involved in threat assessment and emotion (like the amygdala).
2. Emotional Tagging of Information
• Amygdala’s Threat Detection: The amygdala is constantly scanning the environment for potential dangers—physical or social. Even a subtle sign that could be construed as disrespect might trigger the amygdala into alert mode, leading the individual to feel “attacked.”
• Emotional Amplification in Memory Encoding: When an event is perceived as negative or threatening, it’s often encoded more vividly due to the interplay between the amygdala and the hippocampus. This can transform a neutral or ambiguous remark into a strongly remembered slight.
3. Interpretation Through Social Hierarchies and Self-Concept
• Self-Identity and Status: If a person is invested in their social status, reputation, or perceived competence—common in high-stakes professional environments—any suggestion of challenge or belittlement can trigger a defensive posture. The brain responds not just to physical threats but also to perceived attacks on self-esteem or image.
• Mirror Neuron and Mentalizing Systems: Our brains try to understand others’ intentions by simulating their mental states. If this mentalizing process errs on the side of distrust or assumes negative intentions, it will produce a narrative of insult—even if none was intended.
4. Memory Reconstruction Over Time
• Memory as Reconstruction, Not Recording: Every time we recall an event, we effectively “rebuild” that memory. If the individual repeatedly thinks about the perceived slight (even subconsciously), the memory can become more certain and more negative over time.
• Confirmation Bias in Recall: We tend to remember details that confirm our beliefs. If the person came to believe you insulted them long ago, their brain will selectively retrieve cues and fragments of memory that reinforce that narrative, further cementing the perception of insult.
5. Neurochemical and Contextual Influences
• Stress and Elevated Arousal: High stress, fatigue, or even slight anxiety can prime the brain to interpret ambiguous stimuli negatively. In such states, the prefrontal cortex’s rational filtering is less effective, allowing the amygdala’s threat-driven interpretation to dominate.
• Serotonin and Regulation of Mood: Neurotransmitter balances—like serotonin—play roles in emotional regulation. Lower levels can make it easier for perceived insults to spark anger or anxiety.
In essence:
The brain perceives an insult not merely because of an external “fact” but through a complex interplay of emotional tagging, biases, personal insecurities, and prior experience. This internal landscape shapes how ambiguous social cues are read. Thus, even a neutral or benign comment can be construed as an affront when filtered through these subjective neural and psychological lenses.
[..]
PART D
The “fight-or-flight” response is highly relevant here. It’s the body’s built-in stress reaction, coordinated largely by the sympathetic nervous system and the release of stress hormones (like adrenaline and cortisol). When someone perceives a threat—be it physical or social—their body prepares them for rapid action. This preparation leads to various involuntary physiological changes, including:
1. Cardiovascular Changes
• Increased Heart Rate: The heart pumps faster to supply muscles and vital organs with oxygen-rich blood.
• Blood Pressure Rises: Constriction of certain blood vessels ensures that blood is directed toward essential areas like the brain and muscles, priming the body for quick movement.
2. Respiratory Adjustments
• Faster, Shallower Breathing: Respirations increase to deliver more oxygen to the bloodstream. The body anticipates a need for energy and rapidly increases oxygen intake.
3. Muscular Tension
• Readying the Muscles: Skeletal muscles receive more blood flow and become slightly more tense, preparing them for sudden action—either to run (flight) or confront the threat (fight).
4. Energy Mobilization
• Release of Glucose and Fatty Acids: The liver releases glucose into the bloodstream, and stored fats may be mobilized, providing a quick source of energy for intense activity.
• Increased Sweating: Sweating helps cool the body down in anticipation of exertion.
5. Changes in Sensory Processing
• Heightened Alertness: Pupils often dilate, increasing light intake for better vision. Hearing may become more acute.
• Tunnel Vision: In some cases, a narrowing of focus occurs, allowing the person to zero in on potential threats, though this can reduce broader situational awareness.
6. Redirection of Blood Flow
• Reduced Digestion and Other ‘Non-Essential’ Functions: Blood flow moves away from the digestive tract and other non-critical systems. This can manifest as a “knot in the stomach” or a dry mouth because digestive processes slow down.
• Reduced Immune Response (Short Term): While not as immediate, prolonged fight-or-flight states can modulate immune function, making the body less focused on healing and more on immediate survival.
7. Behavioral Changes
• Body Posture and Facial Expressions: The face might flush or become pale, muscles may tense visibly, and posture can shift to a more defensive or aggressive stance. Facial expressions might become more intense or stern, often without conscious intention.
Relevance to the Situation:
In a scenario where the individual perceived an old memory as a new, active insult, his brain could have triggered a subtle fight-or-flight response. Although the threat was social rather than physical, the body’s reaction can be similar. This would mean he was experiencing heightened arousal—his heart rate might have increased, muscles might have tensed, and his focus could have narrowed onto you as the perceived source of threat. These involuntary physiological shifts lay the groundwork for more aggressive or defensive verbal and nonverbal behavior, even though, rationally, there was no physical danger.
[..]
PART E
Cultural background and gender socialization can significantly influence both the perception of an insult and the ways individuals respond to perceived threats. While the underlying neurobiological processes are fairly universal, the interpretation of social cues and the behavioral responses are often filtered through cultural norms, learned gender roles, and societal expectations.
1. Cultural Norms and Interpretations
• Varying Definitions of Insult: Different cultures have unique social norms, communication styles, and etiquette guidelines. A gesture or comment considered insulting in one culture may be viewed as neutral or even respectful in another. For instance, direct eye contact might be seen as a challenge or affront in some cultures but as a sign of honesty and engagement in others.
• Honor Cultures vs. Dignity Cultures: Cultures described as “honor cultures” (found historically in parts of the Middle East, Mediterranean regions, and U.S. Southern states) often place a premium on personal and family reputation. Perceived insults in these contexts may trigger stronger, more immediate fight-or-flight responses, with more aggressive counters to save face. In “dignity cultures,” where self-worth is considered inherent and not contingent on external validation, people may experience perceived insults differently—often responding less aggressively and more diplomatically.
• Communication Styles and Directness: Some cultures value direct confrontation to resolve misunderstandings, while others prefer indirectness and harmony. In the latter, subtle cues might be interpreted as insults when they break unwritten rules of politeness. The amygdala and related structures still handle threat detection, but what triggers them can vary widely depending on cultural interpretation.
2. Gender Socialization and Emotional Expression
• Men and Aggression Norms: In many societies, men are socialized to display confidence, assertiveness, and sometimes aggression as acceptable (or even expected) responses to challenges. This can lower the threshold for perceiving ambiguous social cues as insults worth fighting back against. Neural circuits underlying threat perception (amygdala, hypothalamus, etc.) respond similarly across genders, but men might be more likely to act on these impulses due to learned norms and peer expectations.
• Women and Social Harmony: Women are often socialized to maintain social harmony, to be more empathetic, and to use more indirect communication strategies. Thus, while women’s brains are equally capable of perceiving insults and triggering fight-or-flight responses, cultural pressures might encourage them to respond less overtly aggressively and more through withdrawal, social maneuvering, or verbal de-escalation. This doesn’t mean the internal fight-or-flight response is any less intense—just that the outward manifestation might differ due to cultural conditioning.
• Variability and Overlapping Distributions: It’s important to note that these gender tendencies are broad patterns, not absolute rules. Individual personality, cultural subgroups, and context can produce a wide range of responses. Gender roles are increasingly fluid, and social expectations that once strictly dictated responses are evolving.
3. Intersection of Culture, Gender, and Individual Differences
• Cultural Values and Gender Roles Intersect: In a culture that strongly enforces male honor, men’s fight-or-flight responses to perceived insults might be both more intense and more socially sanctioned. In contrast, in societies where equality and open communication are emphasized, both men and women may feel freer to interpret, question, and discuss perceived insults rather than reacting impulsively.
• Neurobiological Universals, Cultural Specifics: While the amygdala, hippocampus, and prefrontal cortex function similarly across humans, the triggers that set them off and the ways impulses are modulated can be heavily influenced by cultural scripts and gender norms. Essentially, the hardware is the same, but cultural and gender “software” shape how it’s used.
In summary:
The biological fight-or-flight mechanism and the neural circuitry underlying perceived threats are universal. However, whether a particular gesture or comment registers as an insult and how one responds—through aggression, diplomacy, withdrawal, or appeasement—is significantly shaped by cultural context and gender role socialization. These factors influence the threshold for perceiving an insult, the meaning assigned to it, and the socially acceptable ways of managing the ensuing emotional and physiological arousal.
[..]
PART F
Let’s break down a hypothetical, moment-by-moment sequence of what might happen in a person’s brain upon seeing you at the event, given that they already have a memory (accurate or not) of being insulted by you in the past. Note that while this is a simplified model, it synthesizes what we know from neuroscience about perception, memory, and emotion:
1. Initial Sensory Input (Milliseconds to Seconds):
• Visual Processing in the Eye and Early Visual Cortex:
When the person first sees you, light reflecting off your face and body enters his eyes, hitting the retina at the back of each eye. Photoreceptors (rods and cones) convert this light pattern into neural signals.
These signals travel along the optic nerve to the lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN) of the thalamus and then to the primary visual cortex (V1) in the occipital lobe. Here, basic features like edges, contrast, and motion are extracted.
• Higher-Level Visual Recognition (V2, V4, Inferotemporal Cortex):
From V1, the information flows forward through a hierarchy of visual areas (V2, V4) that process increasingly complex attributes (shapes, colors), eventually reaching the inferotemporal cortex (IT). IT is involved in recognizing objects and faces.
As soon as the system identifies a face, specialized “face-selective” areas (like the fusiform face area) help confirm that it’s a human face and may even recognize if it’s a face seen before.
2. Linking Visual Input to Memory (Within Seconds):
• Hippocampus and Associative Recall:
Once the face is recognized, the brain quickly checks memory archives (primarily via the medial temporal lobe structures, including the hippocampus) to see if this face has been encountered previously.
If a match is found—a memory of you from before—neuronal networks that encode that prior interaction become reactivated. This process is not a simple replay; it’s a reconstruction of stored sensory details, context, and any emotional valence tied to that memory.
• Amygdala and Emotional Tagging:
Alongside the hippocampus, the amygdala is crucial for evaluating the emotional content of that memory. If the previously stored memory of you is tagged as negative (e.g., “This person insulted me” or “This person poses a threat to my reputation”), the amygdala will light up, signaling that the recalled memory carries emotional weight.
3. Interpretation and Appraisal (Within a Few Seconds):
• Prefrontal Cortex (PFC) Involvement:
The prefrontal cortex, especially the ventromedial and orbitofrontal regions, evaluates the significance of this recognized individual. It takes the raw emotional data from the amygdala (“Threat!” “Insult!”) and tries to contextualize it: Is the perceived threat real right now? How should I respond socially?
If the person is already on edge or predisposed to interpret ambiguous cues negatively, their PFC may lean into the amygdala’s warning rather than override it.
• Cognitive Bias and Confirmation:
The PFC might also be influenced by confirmation bias. If the individual already formed a narrative—“This person once insulted me”—the brain is scanning your current expression, body language, and any subtle cues for evidence that confirms that belief. This can reinforce the perception of threat or disrespect.
4. Emotional Arousal and Physiological Preparation (Seconds):
• Hypothalamus and Autonomic Nervous System Activation:
As the emotional interpretation (insult, threat) becomes more concrete, the hypothalamus initiates the “fight-or-flight” response. Through the sympathetic nervous system, adrenal glands release adrenaline (epinephrine), increasing heart rate and preparing muscles for action.
Cortisol might be released if the stress persists, further solidifying the feeling of tension and readiness for confrontation.
5. Behavioral Tendency Formation (Seconds to Minutes):
• Striatum and Action Selection:
The basal ganglia (including the striatum) help integrate emotional and cognitive information to select a response pattern—approach or avoidance, aggression or diplomacy.
Given the heightened threat perception, the chosen behavioral tendency might skew toward confrontation (verbal aggression) rather than calm communication.
• Reduced Empathy Circuits Activation:
Regions involved in empathy and understanding others’ mental states (e.g., medial prefrontal cortex, temporoparietal junction) may be dialed down if the threat response is strong. This makes it harder for him to consider your perspective and see that maybe there’s been a misunderstanding.
6. Translation into Actual Behavior (Immediate Outcome):
• Motor Cortex and Language Production Areas:
As the decision to confront or respond aggressively takes shape, motor areas in the frontal lobe prepare the muscles for speech, changes in body posture, and possibly defensive gestures.
Language-related regions (like Broca’s area and supplementary motor areas) help form the words—possibly profanity or heated accusations—that burst out as a verbal attack.
7. Reinforcement and Memory Update (After the Fact):
• Memory Reconsolidation:
After the encounter, the brain will “save” the updated memory. Now the memory isn’t just the old insult; it’s also this new, heated exchange. The neural connections in the hippocampus and related cortical areas are strengthened or altered to reflect both the initial event and this recent reaction.
The emotional intensity caused by the fight-or-flight hormones makes the updated memory even more vivid and ingrained, potentially making future encounters with you even more fraught.
In Sum:
From the moment he glimpsed you, his brain moved from basic visual detection (occipital and temporal lobes) to memory retrieval (hippocampus), emotional tagging (amygdala), threat assessment (prefrontal cortex, amygdala), physiological arousal (hypothalamus, sympathetic nervous system), and, finally, behavioral expression (motor cortex, language areas). Cultural norms, personal biases, and neurotransmitter balances modulate this process, but at the core, it’s a rapid, interplay of perception, memory, emotion, and action—all translating into the outward display of aggression.
[..]