4 ms·

I don't think we can argue that it isn't natural. Before the last century or two it was rather natural, among other species it is quite common for genders to ha

by lethain 17y ago

I don't think we can argue that it isn't natural. Before the last century or two it was rather natural, among other species it is quite common for genders to have specialized roles as well, and there are certain roles which will always be imbalanced (childbearing, for one). As I understand it, in the end the objection to gender imbalance is that it constitutes an unfairness to either the minority (executives, programmer) or majority (nurses + school teaching during the period their wage/benefits were still severely depressed by gender imbalance). I don't think we can argue that unfairness is a threat to the system or to groups, it is universal. Rather, I think we just prefer not to realize it's there.

biohacker42 17y ago
Among other species exist all kinds of adaptations, for example birds can fly, and that's natural for THEM. Just because elephant herds consist of females and juveniles, while bull elephants roam alone, that doesn't make it natural for us hominids. The only time the sex ration goes well beyond 70/30 in great apes or monkeys it's because of some natural disaster. A century or two ago, women were property, and kept out of a lot of social life. Like they are today in Saudi Arabia. That also does not make it natural. While gender imbalance is often about economic discrimination, and especially has been in the past, I think today women have ample economic opportunities. So I don't perceive the lack of women in tech. as punitive to women. I think it's punitive to the (overwhelmingly) men and women who are in it today. It's just a weird environment, and that weirdness in itself has no benefit.