3 ms·

But we still need to factor in X and Y sometimes because there will always be areas where that X or Y advantage will cause disparity. Are we going to draw a har

But we still need to factor in X and Y sometimes because there will always be areas where that X or Y advantage will cause disparity. Are we going to draw a hard line and say the military should be exactly 50/50 representation of men and women? That nursing, teaching, and other female-dominated fields should be 50/50 male/female and that engineering, computing should be 50/50 male/female? That doesn't sound like equality. That sounds like the type of compromise reached between parties that would other engage in violence against each other, not the sexes that are mutually necessary for human existence.

Lawtonfogle 11y ago
>But we still need to factor in X and Y sometimes because there will always be areas where that X or Y advantage will cause disparity. But why do we care about gender anymore than disparities that are the result of different X and Y when the population is divided by f. Why is f = gender treated differently than f = height, eye color, parental income, weight, amount of time spent playing games per week > 10, number of veggies grown in the garden last year < 20, or any other metric we can come up with? 10% of people have gene ABC123, then 10% of every group must be made up of people with that gene? Only madness lies down that path.