4 ms·
> That bias, by the way, exists today. Trying to justify it on the base of biological differences does nothing to fix You presupposed that the bias is why the
by kansface 9y ago
> That bias, by the way, exists today. Trying to justify it on the base of biological differences does nothing to fix
You presupposed that the bias is why the disparity exists in the first place. Its plausible that we completely fix all biases in the industry and the gender ratio does not change whatsoever, or even gets worse.
- dguaraglia 9y ago> You presupposed that the bias is why the disparity exists in the first place What in my comment tells you that? I made a conscious effort not to bring that up. > Its plausible that we completely fix all biases in the industry and the gender ratio does not change whatsoever, or even gets worse. This argument sounds like the global warming denier argument "What if it's not true? What if we make the world a better place to live for nothing?" It is plausible, but right now we have no way to measure it. We do, on the other hand, know that unconscious bias is affecting prospective female candidates. Why don't we focus on fixing the existing problem first?
- kansface 9y agoMy apologies. > Why don't we focus on fixing the existing problem first? Sounds good.
- nodamage 9y agoWell, really, the bias is the problem, not the disparity. So if we fix the bias, sexual harassment, and sexist behavior, that is a good outcome in and of itself, regardless of the gender ratio.