4 ms·
The problem as always is that, every time a field or industry has tried to argue "well, (insert underrepresented group here) just aren't interested in/aren't as
by ubernostrum 10y ago
The problem as always is that, every time a field or industry has tried to argue "well, (insert underrepresented group here) just aren't interested in/aren't as good at what we do", no matter how many attempts they make to justify it with weird evolutionary arguments, they usually end up being proven wrong when someone finds a way to remove bias from the entry process of that field or industry.
Seriously, go read about stuff like the blind auditions for orchestras (and applications of the same technique to other fields) and how they blew up any notion of meritocratic processes and gender/racial imbalance being purely due to lack of interest or ability from the groups being excluded.
- gspetr 10y agoThis is an interesting analogy and there is evidence that it works, as long as you somehow negate the gatekeeper: Biases from interviewers. Does it still hold when there is no gatekeeper? I'm not seeing that many minority or women as entrepreneurs. Can you hypothesize why is that? For example if the oft cited gender pay gap is really as wide as 23%, where are the all female companies with female CEOs exploiting the market inefficiencies?
- ubernostrum 10y agoYou really really really want to read this: http://danluu.com/tech-discrimination/ http://danluu.com/tech-discrimination/
- gspetr 10y agoI have read your comment's link. I wish I hadn't. Why? Because you haven't read mine. You replied to a strawman. I was talking about female CEOs, not female employees. Where are the female Zuckerbergs and Bill Gates' who dropped out of college and went on to build tech empires?