4 ms·

> The GP mentioned this in the context of sexism being a "tractable problem", that means it's a problem that can be solved, as opposed to an intractable problem

> The GP mentioned this in the context of sexism being a "tractable problem", that means it's a problem that can be solved, as opposed to an intractable problem. > It can be inferred that they're proposing a mechanism by which sexism can be eradicated, not just marginally improved. Otherwise it wouldn't be a tractable problem. Once again you're misrepresenting what they said. They said: "This is one of the big ways in which sexism is a much more tractable problem than racism and less potentially explosive." which contradicts your claim that "they're proposing a mechanism by which sexism can be eradicated"

avar 7y ago
Certainly for the benefit of doubt of the GP I'll concede that at this point, now that I seem to have two commentators disagreeing with me. I'm not a native English speaker, my understanding of the word "tractable" is "solvable". E.g. arranging some blocks on my desk with the tower of Hanoi algorithm using chopsticks is a tractable problem, doing so with my hands is more tractable, but the end result is the same. In any case, whether the GP meant "completely solved" or "partial progress can be made" I think the point I was trying to make stands regardless. That point is that even if you say achieve 100% equality of justice among jurors regardless of the sex of the defendant, you can't say you've achieved much if any progress on sexism in general.
- jamesrcole 7y ago
  They said much more tractable. That's a qualifier. And, they were saying it was much more tractable in comparison to racism. This says nothing specific about the degree to which it is tractable, nor that it is completely tractable. It is misrepresenting them to claim, as you're continuing to do ("even if you say achieve 100% equality of..."), that what they said is somehow an absolute statement, or that it was some statement just about juries.

avar 7y ago

Certainly for the benefit of doubt of the GP I'll concede that at this point, now that I seem to have two commentators disagreeing with me. I'm not a native English speaker, my understanding of the word "tractable" is "solvable". E.g. arranging some blocks on my desk with the tower of Hanoi algorithm using chopsticks is a tractable problem, doing so with my hands is more tractable, but the end result is the same. In any case, whether the GP meant "completely solved" or "partial progress can be made" I think the point I was trying to make stands regardless. That point is that even if you say achieve 100% equality of justice among jurors regardless of the sex of the defendant, you can't say you've achieved much if any progress on sexism in general.

jamesrcole 7y ago
They said much more tractable. That's a qualifier. And, they were saying it was much more tractable in comparison to racism. This says nothing specific about the degree to which it is tractable, nor that it is completely tractable. It is misrepresenting them to claim, as you're continuing to do ("even if you say achieve 100% equality of..."), that what they said is somehow an absolute statement, or that it was some statement just about juries.