5 ms·

Is the optimal outcome 50/50 representation in every walk of life? Or do certain career preferences naturally skew? How can we tell?

by dTal 5y ago

dagmx 5y ago
I don't think 50/50 is a realistic goal. For one, it assumes a very binary split, when demographics are very diverse and combinatorial. What instead should be the case, IMHO, is two fold: - at each milestone level (school, college, hiring, promotions etc...) , we should aim to be within a certain small percentage of the previous milestone. E.g if a class in college starts with 20% Indian women, then it should ideally graduate with ~20% Indian women. The next milestones after that (hiring, promotion) should ideally be reflective of that to some degree. - we should analyze the percentage of people entering fields of education, and see how that represents similar demographic locally, and at the state and federal levels. Using that data we should see why certain demographics are skewed towards and against those fields. Using that we should see if there's any systemic issues keeping them away, and try and balance society accordingly.
- DeathArrow 5y ago
  >Using that we should see if there's any systemic issues keeping them away, and try and balance society accordingly. What's wrong in letting the society balance itself?
  - dagmx 5y ago
    How would society balance itself if there's no tools for introspection? Would women have the right to vote if someone didn't say "hey this demographic here is not being represented". Would Black people in America be free? Society needs to self reflect and introspect before it can balance. Numbers are a means to achieving that introspection.
- 3maj 5y ago
  >if a class in college starts with 20% Indian women, then it should ideally graduate with ~20% Indian women So you want to make college classes easier for certain groups so that they don't drop out? I personally believe that everyone should have an equal opportunity... But an equal outcome inherently involves being unfair and disadvantaging a certain group for the advantage for another.
  - dagmx 5y ago
    That's not what I said at all, and you're purposefully trying to put words there that aren't. We should be aiming for close to equal results, and trying to understand why we aren't getting those. I never said how one should achieve equal results on both the input and output. I just said that's the more realistic goal. I even say that it's not going to be exact. The point is to analyze, and come up with well formed opinions based on data. If a certain demographic is dropping out at a higher rate, maybe it's worth understanding why? Are they simply not as good? Do they have societal pressures from their homes? Do they face harassment from other majority demographics? Do they have other factors like lack of health support? There's many factors that play into it. We need the data to understand the discrepancy, and then to start understanding why that discrepancy exists.
    - 3maj 5y ago
      Except it's not a realistic goal. Because most of the things you're talking about tracking are 100% subjective and unquantifiable. To some a hard home life is their parents not letting them drink while to others is their parents kicking them out at 18. To some discrimination is a rude comment while to others its something that's actually discrimination. The list goes on. You have kids that didn't get any financial support from their families because the family couldn't afford it (much like myself) that did perfectly fine in school, while others who came from millionaire parents ended up dropping out. This game of "lets see who has it the worst and then try to help them by making life easier for them" never f*cking work. It's a never ending loop. The most you can do is make the standards for acceptance across the board fair and then provide the tools required for success to every student.
bluGill 5y ago
Hard to say. However if we are not close to 50/50 we should ask questions. Any imbalance could be a sign of something deeper being wrong - perhaps there is some discrimination of some sort? If the answer finds a genetic reason that males prefer engineering, then that is okay, so long as the genetic influence's affect are equal to the affect on society. Right now I have no idea. I don't think there is a genetic reason for females to not become engineers, but I haven't studied it so I have to remain neutral on the question.
- seph-reed 5y ago
  Supposedly multitasking and hyper-focus are two distinct and differently useful skills that can't be done at the same time. Hyper-focus tends to lean towards STEM. Boys tend to lean towards hyper-focus. Whether this is cultural or biological is questionable, but given the natural duties of the common sexes (male/female)... it's definitely not unfeasible that the critic with options (and children) would multi-task, while the performer would be more focused on a single task.

Is the optimal outcome 50/50 representation in every walk of life? Or do certain career preferences naturally skew? How can we tell?

by dTal 5y ago

Is the optimal outcome 50/50 representation in every walk of life? Or do certain career preferences naturally skew? How can we tell?

dagmx 5y ago

I don't think 50/50 is a realistic goal. For one, it assumes a very binary split, when demographics are very diverse and combinatorial. What instead should be the case, IMHO, is two fold: - at each milestone level (school, college, hiring, promotions etc...) , we should aim to be within a certain small percentage of the previous milestone. E.g if a class in college starts with 20% Indian women, then it should ideally graduate with ~20% Indian women. The next milestones after that (hiring, promotion) should ideally be reflective of that to some degree. - we should analyze the percentage of people entering fields of education, and see how that represents similar demographic locally, and at the state and federal levels. Using that data we should see why certain demographics are skewed towards and against those fields. Using that we should see if there's any systemic issues keeping them away, and try and balance society accordingly.

DeathArrow 5y ago
>Using that we should see if there's any systemic issues keeping them away, and try and balance society accordingly. What's wrong in letting the society balance itself?
- dagmx 5y ago
  How would society balance itself if there's no tools for introspection? Would women have the right to vote if someone didn't say "hey this demographic here is not being represented". Would Black people in America be free? Society needs to self reflect and introspect before it can balance. Numbers are a means to achieving that introspection.
3maj 5y ago
>if a class in college starts with 20% Indian women, then it should ideally graduate with ~20% Indian women So you want to make college classes easier for certain groups so that they don't drop out? I personally believe that everyone should have an equal opportunity... But an equal outcome inherently involves being unfair and disadvantaging a certain group for the advantage for another.
- dagmx 5y ago
  That's not what I said at all, and you're purposefully trying to put words there that aren't. We should be aiming for close to equal results, and trying to understand why we aren't getting those. I never said how one should achieve equal results on both the input and output. I just said that's the more realistic goal. I even say that it's not going to be exact. The point is to analyze, and come up with well formed opinions based on data. If a certain demographic is dropping out at a higher rate, maybe it's worth understanding why? Are they simply not as good? Do they have societal pressures from their homes? Do they face harassment from other majority demographics? Do they have other factors like lack of health support? There's many factors that play into it. We need the data to understand the discrepancy, and then to start understanding why that discrepancy exists.
  - 3maj 5y ago
    Except it's not a realistic goal. Because most of the things you're talking about tracking are 100% subjective and unquantifiable. To some a hard home life is their parents not letting them drink while to others is their parents kicking them out at 18. To some discrimination is a rude comment while to others its something that's actually discrimination. The list goes on. You have kids that didn't get any financial support from their families because the family couldn't afford it (much like myself) that did perfectly fine in school, while others who came from millionaire parents ended up dropping out. This game of "lets see who has it the worst and then try to help them by making life easier for them" never f*cking work. It's a never ending loop. The most you can do is make the standards for acceptance across the board fair and then provide the tools required for success to every student.

bluGill 5y ago

Hard to say. However if we are not close to 50/50 we should ask questions. Any imbalance could be a sign of something deeper being wrong - perhaps there is some discrimination of some sort? If the answer finds a genetic reason that males prefer engineering, then that is okay, so long as the genetic influence's affect are equal to the affect on society. Right now I have no idea. I don't think there is a genetic reason for females to not become engineers, but I haven't studied it so I have to remain neutral on the question.

seph-reed 5y ago
Supposedly multitasking and hyper-focus are two distinct and differently useful skills that can't be done at the same time. Hyper-focus tends to lean towards STEM. Boys tend to lean towards hyper-focus. Whether this is cultural or biological is questionable, but given the natural duties of the common sexes (male/female)... it's definitely not unfeasible that the critic with options (and children) would multi-task, while the performer would be more focused on a single task.