3 ms·

> exercising their own agency and choosing different fields. If we accept this as true, fields dominated by women should receive the same grace.

Manuel_D 4y ago
And they are, right? How many times have you seen people push for quotas among pediatrician, veterinarians, or crime scene investigators? I certainly haven't seen any. And even if such agendas exist, they rarely manifest in overt discrimination like I've not only witnessed, but actively instructed to carry out.
nostromo 4y ago
You're conflating two issues: discrimination and self-selection. Discrimination is never ok. If a woman applies to a job as a developer, she should absolutely not be discriminated against because of her gender. Self-selection is always ok. If women in aggregate are more interested in biology than computer science, that is fine. This paper is evidence of discrimination, not self-selection.
- okwubodu 4y ago
  I understand that. But if we have no problem hand waving discrimination away as self-selection when the exact same conclusion is drawn for other groups, I don’t see how this is suddenly different. Half the top comments on this very thread decry DEI efforts while calling this wrong without the slightest hint of irony.
  - Manuel_D 4y ago
    > But if we have no problem hand waving discrimination away as self-selection when the exact same conclusion is drawn for other groups We're not hand-waving away discrimination as self selection. If we saw higher call back rates among male applications as compared to identical female applications then there would be a case for discrimination. When we study the call-back rates in tech companies, the results typically show no bias and sometimes show bias in favor of women [1]. What's happening is that people are alleging discrimination on account of nothing except for disparities in representation in tech. You're right: tech shouldn't be any different. Do we conclude that veterinarians must be rife with anti-male discrimination because they're 80% women? Why do we make the same arguments about tech? 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25069644 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25069644
- colinmhayes 4y ago
  > If women in aggregate are more interested in biology than computer science, that is fine. Do you think there is something innate in women that makes them less interested in computer science? Personally I find that extremely unlikely. The only other explanation for why they would self-select away from tech is that they feel they're being told to. That might be fine by you, but I think it's a problem.
  - teakettle42 4y ago
    > Personally I find that extremely unlikely Why? Do you believe that men and women are biologically differentiated, but mentally identical? If so, do you also not believe in transgender identity, as the entire concept is rooted in there existing a mental difference between genders?
  - AdrianB1 4y ago
    There are several differences in interests between sexes, just google for studies and you will find plenty. It is a fact, not extremely unlikely.

Manuel_D 4y ago

And they are, right? How many times have you seen people push for quotas among pediatrician, veterinarians, or crime scene investigators? I certainly haven't seen any. And even if such agendas exist, they rarely manifest in overt discrimination like I've not only witnessed, but actively instructed to carry out.

nostromo 4y ago

You're conflating two issues: discrimination and self-selection. Discrimination is never ok. If a woman applies to a job as a developer, she should absolutely not be discriminated against because of her gender. Self-selection is always ok. If women in aggregate are more interested in biology than computer science, that is fine. This paper is evidence of discrimination, not self-selection.

okwubodu 4y ago
I understand that. But if we have no problem hand waving discrimination away as self-selection when the exact same conclusion is drawn for other groups, I don’t see how this is suddenly different. Half the top comments on this very thread decry DEI efforts while calling this wrong without the slightest hint of irony.
- Manuel_D 4y ago
  > But if we have no problem hand waving discrimination away as self-selection when the exact same conclusion is drawn for other groups We're not hand-waving away discrimination as self selection. If we saw higher call back rates among male applications as compared to identical female applications then there would be a case for discrimination. When we study the call-back rates in tech companies, the results typically show no bias and sometimes show bias in favor of women [1]. What's happening is that people are alleging discrimination on account of nothing except for disparities in representation in tech. You're right: tech shouldn't be any different. Do we conclude that veterinarians must be rife with anti-male discrimination because they're 80% women? Why do we make the same arguments about tech? 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25069644 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25069644
colinmhayes 4y ago
> If women in aggregate are more interested in biology than computer science, that is fine. Do you think there is something innate in women that makes them less interested in computer science? Personally I find that extremely unlikely. The only other explanation for why they would self-select away from tech is that they feel they're being told to. That might be fine by you, but I think it's a problem.
- teakettle42 4y ago
  > Personally I find that extremely unlikely Why? Do you believe that men and women are biologically differentiated, but mentally identical? If so, do you also not believe in transgender identity, as the entire concept is rooted in there existing a mental difference between genders?
- AdrianB1 4y ago
  There are several differences in interests between sexes, just google for studies and you will find plenty. It is a fact, not extremely unlikely.