4 ms·

> Because gender discrimination is rife Please stop making these unqualified statements on very touchy subjects

by peak_body_yo 9y ago

mattmanser 9y ago
It's not unqualified, we know that's the cause. It's like claiming climate change isn't real.
- steego 9y ago
  I realize you're very busy and can't be bothered to support your claims, but you should actually try to demonstrate some knowledge rather than countering with the equivalent of, "but I'm really really certain."
steego 9y ago
Let's qualify it by posting a link which demonstrates gender bias when people read the same resume with a different name. http://gender.stanford.edu/news/2014/why-does-john-get-stem-job-rather-jennifer http://gender.stanford.edu/news/2014/why-does-john-get-stem-... This is hardly the only study. There are many more. My favorite was the law students from second tier schools where males who signaled coming from middle class backgrounds had a huge statistically disadvantage from males signalling wealth. The kicker? Wealth killed opportunities for women. https://hbr.org/2016/12/research-how-subtle-class-cues-can-backfire-on-your-resume https://hbr.org/2016/12/research-how-subtle-class-cues-can-b... Bias and prejudice are real and evaluating people is hard. To make things worse, your brain likes to save energy by substitution rigorous evaluation with heuristic evaluation and then convince itself it did the rigorous work. The problem isn't gender discrimination is rife, it's that thousands of forms of discrimination is rife because heuristic-based discrimination is what we excel at, not rigorous evaluation. I hope that didn't make it more touchy.
- ThomPete 9y ago
  If you add middle eastern sounding names the same result happens. Yes we have biases all of us but they are certainly not by any metrics confined to only women. Try being +40 in Silicon Valley, try being black or latino male on WallStreet, try making it as a hip-hop artist as a black guy. Try being fat in the fashion industry, try being a nerd in high-school. The world is rife with bias and prejudice against all sorts of "these are not like me" but the solution is not and have never been to force quotas through whether in board rooms or on the job market. If you want to change things changes them at their root cause. Push your girls to start their own companies to build their own networks so that they are less depending on existing ones. Teach them not to excel at school as that doesn't really matter but to learn how to sell themselves. Teach them that if a job posting names 10 skills and they have all but two it's still a job for them. These are the real barriers to entry not modern day companies light biases.
- peak_body_yo 9y ago
  > The kicker? Wealth killed opportunities for women. Yeah because lower class women do much better compared to lower class men. The study is flawed. It used male hobbies for both males and females. Rich females don't generally sail. I think their stereotypical activity would be humanitarian efforts. And if it wasn't flawed, what conclusions do you draw from the study? Lower class women did 5 times better than lower class men. The lower class is many times larger than the upper class, so only a tiny percent of men enjoy the the upper class privilege while most men are doing terribly. Looking at the big picture by aggregating the lower and upper class, women do better than men. > http://gender.stanford.edu/news/2014/why-does-john-get-stem-.. http://gender.stanford.edu/news/2014/why-does-john-get-stem-.... I'll give this some legitimacy but it's one study and not completely convincing. It can't be generalized outside of science research positions. One bias that I'm concerned about is that most gendered social experiments are hoping to find bias against females. It's a big echo chamber as the manifesto guy would say.
  - ThomPete 9y ago
    Exactly. What most people forget that while men are in the top of society they are also in the bottom.
    - peak_body_yo 9y ago
      I think that there is a decent case that upper class men do enjoy gender based privileges. But then people use that as evidence that all males are privileged and it's just not true. I mean it would be great if there was a chance that I could become a CEO or an exec, but 99.99% of people won't so it doesn't matter to most males if all execs and CEOs are male. On the disparate power dynamic, I doubt the males with power care about the wellbeing of the other 99.99% of males. They will look out for the interests of super high class males which may not overlap with the interests of lower class males. I think that non high class females benefit much more than non high class males from the power of super high class males. The super high class males will spend time around females and make transfer payments in the services industry. Sugar babes, prostitutes, strippers, webcaming, regular waitresses, etc. They are more likely to enjoy the wealth of high power males and have a much easier time forming a relationship (romantic or platonic) with a super high class male.

> Because gender discrimination is rife Please stop making these unqualified statements on very touchy subjects

mattmanser 9y ago

It's not unqualified, we know that's the cause. It's like claiming climate change isn't real.

steego 9y ago
I realize you're very busy and can't be bothered to support your claims, but you should actually try to demonstrate some knowledge rather than countering with the equivalent of, "but I'm really really certain."

steego 9y ago

Let's qualify it by posting a link which demonstrates gender bias when people read the same resume with a different name. http://gender.stanford.edu/news/2014/why-does-john-get-stem-job-rather-jennifer http://gender.stanford.edu/news/2014/why-does-john-get-stem-... This is hardly the only study. There are many more. My favorite was the law students from second tier schools where males who signaled coming from middle class backgrounds had a huge statistically disadvantage from males signalling wealth. The kicker? Wealth killed opportunities for women. https://hbr.org/2016/12/research-how-subtle-class-cues-can-backfire-on-your-resume https://hbr.org/2016/12/research-how-subtle-class-cues-can-b... Bias and prejudice are real and evaluating people is hard. To make things worse, your brain likes to save energy by substitution rigorous evaluation with heuristic evaluation and then convince itself it did the rigorous work. The problem isn't gender discrimination is rife, it's that thousands of forms of discrimination is rife because heuristic-based discrimination is what we excel at, not rigorous evaluation. I hope that didn't make it more touchy.

ThomPete 9y ago
If you add middle eastern sounding names the same result happens. Yes we have biases all of us but they are certainly not by any metrics confined to only women. Try being +40 in Silicon Valley, try being black or latino male on WallStreet, try making it as a hip-hop artist as a black guy. Try being fat in the fashion industry, try being a nerd in high-school. The world is rife with bias and prejudice against all sorts of "these are not like me" but the solution is not and have never been to force quotas through whether in board rooms or on the job market. If you want to change things changes them at their root cause. Push your girls to start their own companies to build their own networks so that they are less depending on existing ones. Teach them not to excel at school as that doesn't really matter but to learn how to sell themselves. Teach them that if a job posting names 10 skills and they have all but two it's still a job for them. These are the real barriers to entry not modern day companies light biases.
peak_body_yo 9y ago
> The kicker? Wealth killed opportunities for women. Yeah because lower class women do much better compared to lower class men. The study is flawed. It used male hobbies for both males and females. Rich females don't generally sail. I think their stereotypical activity would be humanitarian efforts. And if it wasn't flawed, what conclusions do you draw from the study? Lower class women did 5 times better than lower class men. The lower class is many times larger than the upper class, so only a tiny percent of men enjoy the the upper class privilege while most men are doing terribly. Looking at the big picture by aggregating the lower and upper class, women do better than men. > http://gender.stanford.edu/news/2014/why-does-john-get-stem-.. http://gender.stanford.edu/news/2014/why-does-john-get-stem-.... I'll give this some legitimacy but it's one study and not completely convincing. It can't be generalized outside of science research positions. One bias that I'm concerned about is that most gendered social experiments are hoping to find bias against females. It's a big echo chamber as the manifesto guy would say.
- ThomPete 9y ago
  Exactly. What most people forget that while men are in the top of society they are also in the bottom.
  - peak_body_yo 9y ago
    I think that there is a decent case that upper class men do enjoy gender based privileges. But then people use that as evidence that all males are privileged and it's just not true. I mean it would be great if there was a chance that I could become a CEO or an exec, but 99.99% of people won't so it doesn't matter to most males if all execs and CEOs are male. On the disparate power dynamic, I doubt the males with power care about the wellbeing of the other 99.99% of males. They will look out for the interests of super high class males which may not overlap with the interests of lower class males. I think that non high class females benefit much more than non high class males from the power of super high class males. The super high class males will spend time around females and make transfer payments in the services industry. Sugar babes, prostitutes, strippers, webcaming, regular waitresses, etc. They are more likely to enjoy the wealth of high power males and have a much easier time forming a relationship (romantic or platonic) with a super high class male.