4 ms·

"It's not an assertion because this isn't something up for debate." If he hasn't seen any compelling evidence of [Issue X], then for him it remains unresolved.

"It's not an assertion because this isn't something up for debate." If he hasn't seen any compelling evidence of [Issue X], then for him it remains unresolved. Rather than being offended that his mind isn't made up the right way, you might consider sharing whatever evidence makes you convinced that [Issue X] is a problem. --- assertion - a positive statement or declaration, often without support or reason (from dictionary.com) That seems like a perfectly fitting word to me.

ceol 15y ago
If you assumed I was offended by his post, you're far off. I'm only disappointed. The evidence is this blog post and the countless ones like it saying how tough it is for a woman to get into programming without being bombarded with negative attention just because of their gender. As I said in the other reply, there is no way to perfectly measure discrimination. If you don't trust the various testimonies by women in the tech industry and would rather plug your ears, please do not further this discussion. Links to check out: http://www.stubbornella.org/content/2010/07/26/woman-in-technology/ http://www.stubbornella.org/content/2010/07/26/woman-in-tech... http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/edlife/12STABINE.html http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/edlife/12STABINE.html http://www.bluepoof.com/Colloquium/attitudes.html http://www.bluepoof.com/Colloquium/attitudes.html http://web.mit.edu/fnl/women/women.html http://web.mit.edu/fnl/women/women.html
- patricklynch 15y ago
  Fine; replace 'offended' with 'disappointed.' My point--which you seem to have missed--is the same. I'm not addressing the issue of gender discrimination. I'm saying that your rhetorical approach, which seems to be "loudly proclaim that everyone should magically see things the same way I do," is ridiculous.
  - ceol 15y ago
    What part is magic? I'm saying to take the testimony of women who are either in the field or have attempted to join as evidence. Were you just nit-picking at my use of "it's not up for debate"?
- yummyfajitas 15y ago
  Your first link does not show evidence of discrimination. It claims that women are not present in computing because women are different from men in ways that make them poorly suited to a role in computing: "CS education works best for people who already know how to code before they begin. CS teaches the theory behind a practice in which they assume you already have some skill..." "CS education also focuses a lot of effort on puzzles and very abstract concepts..." "Women are less likely to jump up and say “me! me! me!” " "Recognize the need for work-life balance. Most women still have primary responsibility for children and home." I didn't bother with your other links.
  - ceol 15y ago
    You should have read the entire article. "I believe CS and Web Development currently select for certain masculine qualities that are largely unrelated to someone’s prowess as a coder. I believe it is these tangential code-cowboy qualities women are unable or unwilling to emulate, and not their skill or capacity for abstraction, problem solving, creative thinking, or communication — All of which actually make them better developers." "Scholarships like the one Google proposes aren’t meant to give women of lower merit something they don’t deserve, they are meant to circumvent the discrimination that extremely talented women still face." You also pulled your quotes completely out of context.
    - yummyfajitas 15y ago
      Could you explain how context changes the substance of my quotes? I realize the author doesn't believe that spending time on your work, improving your skills and solving abstract puzzles matter. Maybe she's right, though I prefer employees who don't need hand holding. But that's irrelevant - rewarding autodidacts, puzzle-lovers and hard workers is not discrimination.
      - ceol 15y ago
        She wasn't talking about reasons why women are "poorly suited to a role in computing". She was talking about ways which CS could be bettered in general. For the first part you quoted, gender isn't even mentioned. The second quote? Full context: "CS education also focuses a lot of effort on puzzles and very abstract concepts when practical applications where you can see the why and how might work better for women (and a hell of a lot of men). I like yummy algorithms, but we could make CS education more accessible by putting them in context." Your third quote has to do with the environment that exists— not because women don't inherently participate.

ceol 15y ago

If you assumed I was offended by his post, you're far off. I'm only disappointed. The evidence is this blog post and the countless ones like it saying how tough it is for a woman to get into programming without being bombarded with negative attention just because of their gender. As I said in the other reply, there is no way to perfectly measure discrimination. If you don't trust the various testimonies by women in the tech industry and would rather plug your ears, please do not further this discussion. Links to check out: http://www.stubbornella.org/content/2010/07/26/woman-in-technology/ http://www.stubbornella.org/content/2010/07/26/woman-in-tech... http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/edlife/12STABINE.html http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/edlife/12STABINE.html http://www.bluepoof.com/Colloquium/attitudes.html http://www.bluepoof.com/Colloquium/attitudes.html http://web.mit.edu/fnl/women/women.html http://web.mit.edu/fnl/women/women.html

patricklynch 15y ago
Fine; replace 'offended' with 'disappointed.' My point--which you seem to have missed--is the same. I'm not addressing the issue of gender discrimination. I'm saying that your rhetorical approach, which seems to be "loudly proclaim that everyone should magically see things the same way I do," is ridiculous.
- ceol 15y ago
  What part is magic? I'm saying to take the testimony of women who are either in the field or have attempted to join as evidence. Were you just nit-picking at my use of "it's not up for debate"?
yummyfajitas 15y ago
Your first link does not show evidence of discrimination. It claims that women are not present in computing because women are different from men in ways that make them poorly suited to a role in computing: "CS education works best for people who already know how to code before they begin. CS teaches the theory behind a practice in which they assume you already have some skill..." "CS education also focuses a lot of effort on puzzles and very abstract concepts..." "Women are less likely to jump up and say “me! me! me!” " "Recognize the need for work-life balance. Most women still have primary responsibility for children and home." I didn't bother with your other links.
- ceol 15y ago
  You should have read the entire article. "I believe CS and Web Development currently select for certain masculine qualities that are largely unrelated to someone’s prowess as a coder. I believe it is these tangential code-cowboy qualities women are unable or unwilling to emulate, and not their skill or capacity for abstraction, problem solving, creative thinking, or communication — All of which actually make them better developers." "Scholarships like the one Google proposes aren’t meant to give women of lower merit something they don’t deserve, they are meant to circumvent the discrimination that extremely talented women still face." You also pulled your quotes completely out of context.
  - yummyfajitas 15y ago
    Could you explain how context changes the substance of my quotes? I realize the author doesn't believe that spending time on your work, improving your skills and solving abstract puzzles matter. Maybe she's right, though I prefer employees who don't need hand holding. But that's irrelevant - rewarding autodidacts, puzzle-lovers and hard workers is not discrimination.
    - ceol 15y ago
      She wasn't talking about reasons why women are "poorly suited to a role in computing". She was talking about ways which CS could be bettered in general. For the first part you quoted, gender isn't even mentioned. The second quote? Full context: "CS education also focuses a lot of effort on puzzles and very abstract concepts when practical applications where you can see the why and how might work better for women (and a hell of a lot of men). I like yummy algorithms, but we could make CS education more accessible by putting them in context." Your third quote has to do with the environment that exists— not because women don't inherently participate.