6 ms·

I think it's important to acknowledge that men and women are treated different socially but are also different biologically. We should work to equalize represen

by debacle 12y ago

I think it's important to acknowledge that men and women are treated different socially but are also different biologically. We should work to equalize representation and treatment from a social standpoint, but we also need to admit that the innate behavior of men could possibly play a huge factor in their roles in business. The factors themselves compound. We should not work to equalize men and women objectively. What we need to do is make sure that our daughters and sisters have the same opportunities that they would have if they were men, and aren't prejudiced by what society tells them to be.

mkal_tsr 12y ago
This short docu explores that a bit - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiJVJ5QRRUE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiJVJ5QRRUE
pron 12y ago
> but we also need to admit that the innate behavior of men could possibly play a huge factor in their roles in business That's a terrible way of thinking about it. Unless some difference is proven to be biological, we should certainly assume it is not. That's how we deal everything else that has to do with technology: unless something is proven to be impossible, we try as hard as we can to achieve it. Some people believe cryonic re-animation is possible, and some people believe in indefinite extension of life or even uploading one's mind to a computer. If those notions are credible enough for technologists to put a lot of effort into achieving, then surely something as simple as equal representation for all groups in the seats of power is something we must work towards, no?
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- debacle 12y ago
  > Unless some difference is proven to be biological Many differences have been proven to be biological. > unless something is proven to be impossible But what is your goal? Is your goal just for that number? What if parity is not better? What if the problem of parity is that there is something intrinsic in women that they're just not stupid enough to work 80 hours a week for 3-5 years to have a chance at a few million dollar exit? What if women just tend to not have the same values as men do during the time when their career priorities are most important? It's much more important that a woman can become a CEO if she has the skills and desire than that 50% of CEOs are women. > equal representation for all groups in the seats of power I think you start to tread into different territory here. While I don't believe that half of the women on the board of a company need necessarily be women, I do believe that half(ish) of the women on any sort of government body should be women.
  - pron 12y ago
    > Many differences have been proven to be biological. Absolutely none that are pertinent to the matter at hand. > What if the problem of parity is that there is something intrinsic in women that they're just not stupid enough to work 80 hours a week for 3-5 years to have a chance at a few million dollar exit? Sure. And what if it's impossible to find intelligence in the universe, create true AI and extend life? There are good signs that that's indeed the case. I guess you would argue we should stop pursuing those goals. > I do believe that half(ish) of the women on any sort of government body should be women. And don't you think Silicon Valley is a center of concentrated power?
    - debacle 12y ago
      > And what if it's impossible to find intelligence in the universe, create true AI and extend life? These are scientific endeavors. If you want to try and get to the heart of why men are so much more prevalent than women in successful SV exits, be my guest, but that would be a scientific goal. Trying to force the model of what you think the world should be is not scientific, it's ideological - even if that ideology were to be backed up by science. In your case, it isn't.
      - pron 12y ago
        > These are scientific endeavors. They are absolutely not (well, except for ETI)! They are technological goals, some funded by private businesses with monetary interests (i.e., they are driven by values). And besides, what is it that you're saying? That in order to increase our knowledge of the universe we must stop at nothing, but when it comes to sharing power and improving the lives of disenfranchised groups we must stop... well, right here would be good?
    - spacehome 12y ago
      >> Many differences have been proven to be biological. > Absolutely none that are pertinent to the matter at hand. Are you saying that a propensity for risk-taking is unrelated to gender or that it's not pertinent to entrepreneurship?
- defen 12y ago
  > That's a terrible way of thinking about it. Unless some difference is proven to be biological, we should certainly assume it is not. So unless I can scientifically prove that "men are better than women at American football" I should assume that talent is equally distributed? Your statement is very politically correct but it seems to me that your null hypothesis was selected due to ideology. The problem I have with it is that if you are incorrect, your statement is essentially unfalsifiable.
  - pron 12y ago
    > it seems to me that your null hypothesis was selected due to ideology. It's not a null hypothesis (we're not talking about conducting an experiment but deciding on a policy) but a value statement. Like all values -- including those at the core of startup culture and "disruption" -- it, too, is based on ideology. I believe this ideology is far superior to an alternative one (that would choose to preserve the current power structure where whole groups of people are allocated less power than some others).
    - defen 12y ago
      You can't just say that it's a value statement...I mean, do you think there are concrete steps that should be taken to fix the problems you've identified? > whole groups of people are allocated less power than some others I'm not sure if you're using "allocated" in a technical way that I'm not familiar with, but to me the word "allocated" implies some level of top-down distribution of a limited resource. I don't think it's an accurate way to think about things (wealth is not a zero-sum game).
      - pron 12y ago
        > I mean, do you think there are concrete steps that should be taken to fix the problems you've identified? Of course! But choosing to emphasize this value and to identify the exact nature of the problem (let alone acknowledge its undesired existence) are prerequisites. This[1] is a nice recent article showing the problem (and, by extension, suggesting solutions). > I'm not sure if you're using "allocated" in a technical way that I'm not familiar with, but to me the word "allocated" implies some level of top-down distribution of a limited resource. I don't think it's an accurate way to think about things (wealth is not a zero-sum game). I was not referring to a centralized distribution (and neither was I talking about wealth alone, though wealth, and probably power, while not quite "zero-sum" are probably quite finite), but to a property, a snapshot if you will, of our society as it currently exists. [1]: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2014/12/women_in_tech_and_the_sciences_how_to_make_sure_your_daughter_knows_she.html http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2014/12/wom...
- spacehome 12y ago
  I don't think we should assume things at all.
  - pron 12y ago
    I don't understand. Until you know something you must assume one way or another. Also, it's been proven that we already assume a lot when it comes to gender or racial biases.
moron4hire 12y ago
>> ...but are also different biologically. To what end, in programming, would this be important. To what end, in the field that women invented, would this be important?

by debacle 12y ago

mkal_tsr 12y ago

This short docu explores that a bit - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiJVJ5QRRUE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiJVJ5QRRUE

pron 12y ago

> but we also need to admit that the innate behavior of men could possibly play a huge factor in their roles in business That's a terrible way of thinking about it. Unless some difference is proven to be biological, we should certainly assume it is not. That's how we deal everything else that has to do with technology: unless something is proven to be impossible, we try as hard as we can to achieve it. Some people believe cryonic re-animation is possible, and some people believe in indefinite extension of life or even uploading one's mind to a computer. If those notions are credible enough for technologists to put a lot of effort into achieving, then surely something as simple as equal representation for all groups in the seats of power is something we must work towards, no?

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
debacle 12y ago
> Unless some difference is proven to be biological Many differences have been proven to be biological. > unless something is proven to be impossible But what is your goal? Is your goal just for that number? What if parity is not better? What if the problem of parity is that there is something intrinsic in women that they're just not stupid enough to work 80 hours a week for 3-5 years to have a chance at a few million dollar exit? What if women just tend to not have the same values as men do during the time when their career priorities are most important? It's much more important that a woman can become a CEO if she has the skills and desire than that 50% of CEOs are women. > equal representation for all groups in the seats of power I think you start to tread into different territory here. While I don't believe that half of the women on the board of a company need necessarily be women, I do believe that half(ish) of the women on any sort of government body should be women.
- pron 12y ago
  > Many differences have been proven to be biological. Absolutely none that are pertinent to the matter at hand. > What if the problem of parity is that there is something intrinsic in women that they're just not stupid enough to work 80 hours a week for 3-5 years to have a chance at a few million dollar exit? Sure. And what if it's impossible to find intelligence in the universe, create true AI and extend life? There are good signs that that's indeed the case. I guess you would argue we should stop pursuing those goals. > I do believe that half(ish) of the women on any sort of government body should be women. And don't you think Silicon Valley is a center of concentrated power?
  - debacle 12y ago
    > And what if it's impossible to find intelligence in the universe, create true AI and extend life? These are scientific endeavors. If you want to try and get to the heart of why men are so much more prevalent than women in successful SV exits, be my guest, but that would be a scientific goal. Trying to force the model of what you think the world should be is not scientific, it's ideological - even if that ideology were to be backed up by science. In your case, it isn't.
    - pron 12y ago
      > These are scientific endeavors. They are absolutely not (well, except for ETI)! They are technological goals, some funded by private businesses with monetary interests (i.e., they are driven by values). And besides, what is it that you're saying? That in order to increase our knowledge of the universe we must stop at nothing, but when it comes to sharing power and improving the lives of disenfranchised groups we must stop... well, right here would be good?
  - spacehome 12y ago
    >> Many differences have been proven to be biological. > Absolutely none that are pertinent to the matter at hand. Are you saying that a propensity for risk-taking is unrelated to gender or that it's not pertinent to entrepreneurship?
defen 12y ago
> That's a terrible way of thinking about it. Unless some difference is proven to be biological, we should certainly assume it is not. So unless I can scientifically prove that "men are better than women at American football" I should assume that talent is equally distributed? Your statement is very politically correct but it seems to me that your null hypothesis was selected due to ideology. The problem I have with it is that if you are incorrect, your statement is essentially unfalsifiable.
- pron 12y ago
  > it seems to me that your null hypothesis was selected due to ideology. It's not a null hypothesis (we're not talking about conducting an experiment but deciding on a policy) but a value statement. Like all values -- including those at the core of startup culture and "disruption" -- it, too, is based on ideology. I believe this ideology is far superior to an alternative one (that would choose to preserve the current power structure where whole groups of people are allocated less power than some others).
  - defen 12y ago
    You can't just say that it's a value statement...I mean, do you think there are concrete steps that should be taken to fix the problems you've identified? > whole groups of people are allocated less power than some others I'm not sure if you're using "allocated" in a technical way that I'm not familiar with, but to me the word "allocated" implies some level of top-down distribution of a limited resource. I don't think it's an accurate way to think about things (wealth is not a zero-sum game).
    - pron 12y ago
      > I mean, do you think there are concrete steps that should be taken to fix the problems you've identified? Of course! But choosing to emphasize this value and to identify the exact nature of the problem (let alone acknowledge its undesired existence) are prerequisites. This[1] is a nice recent article showing the problem (and, by extension, suggesting solutions). > I'm not sure if you're using "allocated" in a technical way that I'm not familiar with, but to me the word "allocated" implies some level of top-down distribution of a limited resource. I don't think it's an accurate way to think about things (wealth is not a zero-sum game). I was not referring to a centralized distribution (and neither was I talking about wealth alone, though wealth, and probably power, while not quite "zero-sum" are probably quite finite), but to a property, a snapshot if you will, of our society as it currently exists. [1]: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2014/12/women_in_tech_and_the_sciences_how_to_make_sure_your_daughter_knows_she.html http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2014/12/wom...
spacehome 12y ago
I don't think we should assume things at all.
- pron 12y ago
  I don't understand. Until you know something you must assume one way or another. Also, it's been proven that we already assume a lot when it comes to gender or racial biases.

moron4hire 12y ago

>> ...but are also different biologically. To what end, in programming, would this be important. To what end, in the field that women invented, would this be important?