3 ms·

It's pretty annoying to read articles like this about any topic - someone who doesn't appear to have thought through much of anything, let alone done a little r

It's pretty annoying to read articles like this about any topic - someone who doesn't appear to have thought through much of anything, let alone done a little research, bringing up 'thought provoking' ideas like 'did they consider that most of the submissions may have been from men?'. Well gee golly, if only anyone ever had looked at submission patterns across gender and ways to change them. Or there's the 'you think they dismissed awesome presentations from people who happen to wear a bra?' question, which is saying 'you must be accusing everyone involved of outright misgyny!'. Gee whillikers, if only anyone ever had studied the unconscious changes in reaction to a proposal submitted under a male name or a female name! etc etc. Do everyone a favour and do a little research before diving in to a controversial topic that already suffers so much from 'I'm a man/woman, I must know about this!' layman syndrome.

dreamfactory 14y ago
> Gee whillikers, if only anyone ever had studied the unconscious changes in reaction to a proposal submitted under a male name or a female name! According to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5554390 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5554390, women actually come off worse in this case.
jorgenev 14y ago
> Explanations for women's underrepresentation in math-intensive fields of science often focus on sex discrimination in grant and manuscript reviewing, interviewing, and hiring. Claims that women scientists suffer discrimination in these arenas rest on a set of studies undergirding policies and programs aimed at remediation. More recent and robust empiricism, however, fails to support assertions of discrimination in these domains. http://ateson.com/ws/r/www.pnas.org/content/108/8/3157.full http://ateson.com/ws/r/www.pnas.org/content/108/8/3157.full
- jacalata 14y ago
  That is interesting, and I hadn't read that - I was thinking of the hiring study that dreamfactory linked. I'd be interested in seeing some analysis showing whether the new study is considered flawed, or how else to understand the two together (on a superficial level, they seem totally contradictory results).
- magicalist 14y ago
  You misrepresent that study by quoting only that part. It continues: "Based on a review of the past 20 y of data, we suggest that some of these claims are no longer valid and, if uncritically accepted as current causes of women's lack of progress, can delay or prevent understanding of contemporary determinants of women's underrepresentation. We conclude that differential gendered outcomes in the real world result from differences in resources attributable to choices, whether free or constrained, and that such choices could be influenced and better informed through education if resources were so directed. Thus, the ongoing focus on sex discrimination in reviewing, interviewing, and hiring represents costly, misplaced effort: Society is engaged in the present in solving problems of the past, rather than in addressing meaningful limitations deterring women's participation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers today. Addressing today's causes of underrepresentation requires focusing on education and policy changes that will make institutions responsive to differing biological realities of the sexes. Finally, we suggest potential avenues of intervention to increase gender fairness that accord with current, as opposed to historical, findings." and what's with the spammy intermediate link? direct link: http://www.pnas.org/content/108/8/3157.full http://www.pnas.org/content/108/8/3157.full

dreamfactory 14y ago

> Gee whillikers, if only anyone ever had studied the unconscious changes in reaction to a proposal submitted under a male name or a female name! According to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5554390 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5554390, women actually come off worse in this case.

jorgenev 14y ago

> Explanations for women's underrepresentation in math-intensive fields of science often focus on sex discrimination in grant and manuscript reviewing, interviewing, and hiring. Claims that women scientists suffer discrimination in these arenas rest on a set of studies undergirding policies and programs aimed at remediation. More recent and robust empiricism, however, fails to support assertions of discrimination in these domains. http://ateson.com/ws/r/www.pnas.org/content/108/8/3157.full http://ateson.com/ws/r/www.pnas.org/content/108/8/3157.full

jacalata 14y ago
That is interesting, and I hadn't read that - I was thinking of the hiring study that dreamfactory linked. I'd be interested in seeing some analysis showing whether the new study is considered flawed, or how else to understand the two together (on a superficial level, they seem totally contradictory results).
magicalist 14y ago
You misrepresent that study by quoting only that part. It continues: "Based on a review of the past 20 y of data, we suggest that some of these claims are no longer valid and, if uncritically accepted as current causes of women's lack of progress, can delay or prevent understanding of contemporary determinants of women's underrepresentation. We conclude that differential gendered outcomes in the real world result from differences in resources attributable to choices, whether free or constrained, and that such choices could be influenced and better informed through education if resources were so directed. Thus, the ongoing focus on sex discrimination in reviewing, interviewing, and hiring represents costly, misplaced effort: Society is engaged in the present in solving problems of the past, rather than in addressing meaningful limitations deterring women's participation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers today. Addressing today's causes of underrepresentation requires focusing on education and policy changes that will make institutions responsive to differing biological realities of the sexes. Finally, we suggest potential avenues of intervention to increase gender fairness that accord with current, as opposed to historical, findings." and what's with the spammy intermediate link? direct link: http://www.pnas.org/content/108/8/3157.full http://www.pnas.org/content/108/8/3157.full