5 ms·
Ignoring or repressing that there are differences in women and men doesn't seam wise. However, there are a few important things to keep in mind about it. The di
by chmike 9y ago
Ignoring or repressing that there are differences in women and men doesn't seam wise. However, there are a few important things to keep in mind about it. The difference is multivariate and some people may have some properties of the other gender. As a consequence, infering the capabilities of a person just from the gender written on the ID card is plain stupid. Another thing I want to say about this is that IT is a vast domain requiring various competences. Each gender has some properties that make it more fit for some of these competences. So in practice there is room for everybody.
The conclusion is to get the right person for the job. The gender shouldn't be considered because the reality is not black and white.
Base on this reasoning, complains about imbalance of gender quota or salaries are not acceptable. The salary is/should be attached to the job and performance, not the gender.
In France we have a similar issue with the porportion of black football players in the national team. People who complain about that don't understand that they just picked the best players. This gender debate is the same problem.
- gspetr 9y ago> In France we have a similar issue with the porportion of black football players in the national team. People who complain about that don't understand that they just picked the best players. This gender debate is the same problem. I'd argue that it's not the same problem. I'm not French, but I doubt that there are calls to make the Football team more representative of the population by forcefully limiting the number of black people in football teams starting at the junior level. Which is what we effectively are seeing in the US - Harvard class of 2021 will be <50% white, while the country obviously isn't.
- chmike 9y agoSorry, but you have to reconsider you doubt. Check this https://fdebranche.com/2016/03/29/racisme-ordinaire-un-soir-de-match-de-lequipe-de-francetrop-de-noirs-grand-remplacement/ https://fdebranche.com/2016/03/29/racisme-ordinaire-un-soir-... This is now recurrent in France. It is the same problem because the argument invoked is that the proportion of people of color should match the one of the french population. So the women proportion in context X or Y should match the one of the population. That argument would be valid if people were chosen randomly, but that's obviously not the case. So this argument is really bogus and falling for it is the real problem.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- twobyfour 9y agoLess than half of babies born in the US in 2012 were white. So while the demographics of the country as a whole haven't reached that point yet, due to a previously heavily white population that's aging but still alive, the demographics of kids born in 1999 and entering Harvard in 2017 are pretty darn close.
- gspetr 9y agoIIRC Harvard listed 2.5% of people graduating from that same class of 2021 as being Native American or indigenous people from Pacific Islands (don't remember what they were called precisely) which are actually 0.2% of general population. I strongly doubt you can make an argument that these people are there on merit alone.
- twobyfour 9y agoAgain: 0.2% of the general population? Or 0.2% of people born in 2000?
- gspetr 9y agoI don't have the exact data of births by race but I suppose we can make a reasonable extrapolation out of this: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/08/03/u-s-hispanic-population-growth-has-leveled-off/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/08/03/u-s-hispanic... If the most prolific group (Asians) has a growth of 2.9%, then the possibility of one group, even if minor to have had a growth of 1000%+ (0.2% to 2.5%) is virtually impossible. I think this proves my point that Native Americans (including Native Hawaiians and other peoples) are vastly overrepresented at Harvard.