4 ms·

It's hard to distinguish bias from genuine preconceptions based on experience - for that one would need gender neutral data that is impossible to obtain. The re

by return0 14y ago

It's hard to distinguish bias from genuine preconceptions based on experience - for that one would need gender neutral data that is impossible to obtain. The reverse kind of gender bias could be found in divorce custody cases for example. Maybe one could do an experiment in online job marketplaces: change the gender of a large number of work providers and observe how payouts change. In any case this was a shallow and one-sided article. [But suitable for Sunday morning heated arguments over coffee and cookies] http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.174-1617.2000.tb00570.x/abstract http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.174-1617.2000.t... http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303592404577361883019414296.html http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230359240457736...

meredydd 14y ago
I almost wish the author had included this trope too: "If I begin a conversation about sexism I am experiencing, that means that sexism against men must immediately become part of the focus of the conversation". It's not that those issues are unimportant, but does it not strike you as strange that the very first comment doesn't discuss the content of the article directly, but does make sure to bring up sexism against men? It's not the first time this has happened, either, on HN or elsewhere. (And, sure, this may be the first time you've brought it up. But just like the other issues she's bringing up, the "what about the men who are discriminated against?" response is a durable and ubiquitous trend. Check any other HN thread that mentions sexism if you don't believe me. It therefore becomes very annoying to people trying to have a conversation about the persistent sexism against women in technology/maths/science spaces.)
- return0 14y ago
  No, my main point was that it's not pure bias, there might be real reasons why women get paid less and men are considered bad fathers (personally, i don't agree with both statements, but see the wsj article). I suggest, if we want to get rid of this bias, change the underlying situation that perpetuates it (e.g. not by introducing gender quotas, but by making childraising less time-consuming, or educating men to be better fathers and getting rid of ridiculous stereotypes that are perpetuated in mass culture).
  - shardling 14y ago
    You have (I hope unwittingly?) just fulfilled one of the specific tropes she does mention.
    - return0 14y ago
      ... And which she outright dismisses citing an irrelevant study. (I did mention it's a poor article, didn't i?) When we talk about real-life statistical evidence, that’s not conclusive, either, because all differences are explained by women having babies, other priorities, etc (Except they’re not, as the linked document explains very clearly.) The linked document is a report with some recommendations about how to measure pay gap Btw, can someone explain the usage of the word "trope" here?
      - shardling 14y ago
        A trope is a recurring theme. In this context, it refers to highly predictable responses to particular arguments. I don't think the post was super well written, but I also don't see how the cited study was irrelevant -- it shows the existence of a gender bias that operates completely independently of the choices of any individual woman: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2012/09/19/scientists-your-gender-bias-is-showing/ http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2012/09/19/...
- smsm42 14y ago
  Until this concern is taken seriously, I don't see why it should not be repeated. So far I only see it reflexively dismissed as "oh this, yet again". While the silent assumption is that only certain people and certain biases are discussed and "we are all biased" actually means only certain set of data is taken into account, and other data is dismissed as irrelevant. It's not about focus, it's about basic inclusion. Data about gender/discipline compositions in academic disciplines: http://www.aei-ideas.org/2013/01/college-class-of-2011-by-academic-discipline-and-gender-the-selective-concern-about-gender-imbalances-is-imbalanced/ http://www.aei-ideas.org/2013/01/college-class-of-2011-by-ac... I remember hearing a lot about sexism in disciplines which are 80+% male in this list. But I pretty much never hear about sexism in disciplines that are 80+% female. Now, I don't make any claims here about existence or non-existence of sexism one way or another just basing on the percentage data. Maybe there is sexism in one place, maybe there is not in another, even though percentages looks the same. That's not my point here. What I am questioning is that seeing 80% on one side is universally taken alone as supporting the claim of sexism, if not proving it completely, but the same study showing the same bias to the other side is not considered the base to the same claim. I think this is related to the content of the article.
crntaylor 14y ago
Maybe one could do an experiment in online job marketplaces: change the gender of a large number of work providers and observe how payouts change. Do you really think that the problem is that enough studies haven't been done? The linked article mentions a study on the gender pay gap in academia[0], the results section of which includes "After   accounting  for [ underrepresentation of women at the full Professor level allocation of faculty members across departmental units, and experience]  there  remains  an unexplained  female  pay  disadvantage  of  about  $3000.  This  finding  is  robust  to  alternative  specifications  of  the  gender  gap  decomposition." and later "... the  female  salary  disadvantage  found  in  the  study  can be  interpreted  as  a  lower  bound." There is a similar study based on results from the financial industry, which if anything is even more extreme[1]   "The gender pay gap for annual gross earnings in the sector is 60 per cent." "There is a gender gap of 80 per cent for performance-related pay" "The gender pay gap in finance sector companies cannot be explained away as a historical legacy. Analysis of salaries for new recruits shows that in 86 percent of the cases reported to us, women have lower salaries than men." "In 63 per cent of cases more than half of all job grades/categories exhibited a significant gender pay gap." [0] http://www.facultyassociation.ubc.ca/docs/news/GenderPayEquity_UBCV%20Report%20Recommendation%20Committee2012-07.pdf http://www.facultyassociation.ubc.ca/docs/news/GenderPayEqui... [1] http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/financial_services_inquiry_report.pdf http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/financial_...
- return0 14y ago
  I know there is a gender pay gap. The question is: how do we know it's not justified? Presumably the pay reflects the work done
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
    - smsm42 14y ago
      It's a huge presumption, but it's equally huge presumption that every person on the planet secretly hates women and isn't even aware of it. Either one needs proof to be called true, and neither is proven by just stating the statistics and postulating that one's favorite explanation is the right one.
fhars 14y ago
If you actually had read the linked "shallow" article, you would have noticed that the author cited exactly the kind of study you want to see. In the very first paragraph.
- return0 14y ago
  That's not the kind of study i meant. We need a way to observe whether men deserve to be paid more because they work more or not.
  - ivanmilles 14y ago
    ...if they work more /as evaluated by men/.

by return0 14y ago

meredydd 14y ago

I almost wish the author had included this trope too: "If I begin a conversation about sexism I am experiencing, that means that sexism against men must immediately become part of the focus of the conversation". It's not that those issues are unimportant, but does it not strike you as strange that the very first comment doesn't discuss the content of the article directly, but does make sure to bring up sexism against men? It's not the first time this has happened, either, on HN or elsewhere. (And, sure, this may be the first time you've brought it up. But just like the other issues she's bringing up, the "what about the men who are discriminated against?" response is a durable and ubiquitous trend. Check any other HN thread that mentions sexism if you don't believe me. It therefore becomes very annoying to people trying to have a conversation about the persistent sexism against women in technology/maths/science spaces.)

return0 14y ago
No, my main point was that it's not pure bias, there might be real reasons why women get paid less and men are considered bad fathers (personally, i don't agree with both statements, but see the wsj article). I suggest, if we want to get rid of this bias, change the underlying situation that perpetuates it (e.g. not by introducing gender quotas, but by making childraising less time-consuming, or educating men to be better fathers and getting rid of ridiculous stereotypes that are perpetuated in mass culture).
- shardling 14y ago
  You have (I hope unwittingly?) just fulfilled one of the specific tropes she does mention.
  - return0 14y ago
    ... And which she outright dismisses citing an irrelevant study. (I did mention it's a poor article, didn't i?) When we talk about real-life statistical evidence, that’s not conclusive, either, because all differences are explained by women having babies, other priorities, etc (Except they’re not, as the linked document explains very clearly.) The linked document is a report with some recommendations about how to measure pay gap Btw, can someone explain the usage of the word "trope" here?
    - shardling 14y ago
      A trope is a recurring theme. In this context, it refers to highly predictable responses to particular arguments. I don't think the post was super well written, but I also don't see how the cited study was irrelevant -- it shows the existence of a gender bias that operates completely independently of the choices of any individual woman: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2012/09/19/scientists-your-gender-bias-is-showing/ http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2012/09/19/...
smsm42 14y ago
Until this concern is taken seriously, I don't see why it should not be repeated. So far I only see it reflexively dismissed as "oh this, yet again". While the silent assumption is that only certain people and certain biases are discussed and "we are all biased" actually means only certain set of data is taken into account, and other data is dismissed as irrelevant. It's not about focus, it's about basic inclusion. Data about gender/discipline compositions in academic disciplines: http://www.aei-ideas.org/2013/01/college-class-of-2011-by-academic-discipline-and-gender-the-selective-concern-about-gender-imbalances-is-imbalanced/ http://www.aei-ideas.org/2013/01/college-class-of-2011-by-ac... I remember hearing a lot about sexism in disciplines which are 80+% male in this list. But I pretty much never hear about sexism in disciplines that are 80+% female. Now, I don't make any claims here about existence or non-existence of sexism one way or another just basing on the percentage data. Maybe there is sexism in one place, maybe there is not in another, even though percentages looks the same. That's not my point here. What I am questioning is that seeing 80% on one side is universally taken alone as supporting the claim of sexism, if not proving it completely, but the same study showing the same bias to the other side is not considered the base to the same claim. I think this is related to the content of the article.

crntaylor 14y ago

Maybe one could do an experiment in online job marketplaces: change the gender of a large number of work providers and observe how payouts change. Do you really think that the problem is that enough studies haven't been done? The linked article mentions a study on the gender pay gap in academia[0], the results section of which includes "After   accounting  for [ underrepresentation of women at the full Professor level allocation of faculty members across departmental units, and experience]  there  remains  an unexplained  female  pay  disadvantage  of  about  $3000.  This  finding  is  robust  to  alternative  specifications  of  the  gender  gap  decomposition." and later "... the  female  salary  disadvantage  found  in  the  study  can be  interpreted  as  a  lower  bound." There is a similar study based on results from the financial industry, which if anything is even more extreme[1]   "The gender pay gap for annual gross earnings in the sector is 60 per cent." "There is a gender gap of 80 per cent for performance-related pay" "The gender pay gap in finance sector companies cannot be explained away as a historical legacy. Analysis of salaries for new recruits shows that in 86 percent of the cases reported to us, women have lower salaries than men." "In 63 per cent of cases more than half of all job grades/categories exhibited a significant gender pay gap." [0] http://www.facultyassociation.ubc.ca/docs/news/GenderPayEquity_UBCV%20Report%20Recommendation%20Committee2012-07.pdf http://www.facultyassociation.ubc.ca/docs/news/GenderPayEqui... [1] http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/financial_services_inquiry_report.pdf http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/financial_...

return0 14y ago
I know there is a gender pay gap. The question is: how do we know it's not justified? Presumably the pay reflects the work done
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
  - smsm42 14y ago
    It's a huge presumption, but it's equally huge presumption that every person on the planet secretly hates women and isn't even aware of it. Either one needs proof to be called true, and neither is proven by just stating the statistics and postulating that one's favorite explanation is the right one.

fhars 14y ago

If you actually had read the linked "shallow" article, you would have noticed that the author cited exactly the kind of study you want to see. In the very first paragraph.

return0 14y ago
That's not the kind of study i meant. We need a way to observe whether men deserve to be paid more because they work more or not.
- ivanmilles 14y ago
  ...if they work more /as evaluated by men/.