3 ms·

> Let's assume that you're correct in that anti-women practices were in place in medicine and law, but were subsequently dismantled (which I don't agree with).

> Let's assume that you're correct in that anti-women practices were in place in medicine and law, but were subsequently dismantled (which I don't agree with). Nor do I. I just gave two citations demonstrating that sexism has not been dismantled in medicine and law. You merely repeated your implication that no sexism exists today. You also failed to explain by what mechanism these fields changed from being "massively male-dominated" (your words). Did men suddenly lose their enhanced interest in "career paths with prestige and high earnings"? I also very explicitly referred to "high-paying careers" in my original reply, which is the only sensible way to look at sexism, since delegating the more menial, lower-paying work to women is not equal representation.

mdorazio 9y ago
Please don't do that. I went to great lengths to explicitly say multiple times that I do not believe sexism is non-existent. I said that I do not believe sexism is the primary cause of the current gender gap in tech. You went and turned the conversation around to fit your own narrative, and now you're asking literally the exact same question I asked you, back to me? Come on. You're the one that thinks there is a massive concerted effort to keep women out of tech. It's on you to explain how tech is unique in this regard, when other professions are not nearly as affected. It's also on you to explain how sexist tactics used 30 years ago are keeping women from pursuing CS degrees today. > I also very explicitly referred to "high-paying careers" in my original reply, which is the only sensible way to look at sexism What??? That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Here's what you're saying if we follow your logic: If male person A wants to pursue a high-paying job, and female person B wants to pursue a low-paying job, sexism is keeping person B out of a high-paying career. That's not how sexism works. You're just arguing in circles here without showing me how the hypothesis that maybe women don't want to work in tech at the same rate as men is incorrect.

mdorazio 9y ago

Please don't do that. I went to great lengths to explicitly say multiple times that I do not believe sexism is non-existent. I said that I do not believe sexism is the primary cause of the current gender gap in tech. You went and turned the conversation around to fit your own narrative, and now you're asking literally the exact same question I asked you, back to me? Come on. You're the one that thinks there is a massive concerted effort to keep women out of tech. It's on you to explain how tech is unique in this regard, when other professions are not nearly as affected. It's also on you to explain how sexist tactics used 30 years ago are keeping women from pursuing CS degrees today. > I also very explicitly referred to "high-paying careers" in my original reply, which is the only sensible way to look at sexism What??? That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Here's what you're saying if we follow your logic: If male person A wants to pursue a high-paying job, and female person B wants to pursue a low-paying job, sexism is keeping person B out of a high-paying career. That's not how sexism works. You're just arguing in circles here without showing me how the hypothesis that maybe women don't want to work in tech at the same rate as men is incorrect.