331–340 of 748 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not a sufficient explanation. There’s more women in law and medicine, which are equally, if not more demanding. There must be something else - the nature of work (more people, less machines), the atmosphere (less bro, more professional), the pay (STEM careers plateau quickly)...
Law and medicine don't Logan's run you out with a constantly and pointlessly changing tech stack every five years.
> And yet, if you ask leading women researchers like Nobel Laureate in Physics 2018, Professor Donna Strickland, or Canada Research Chair in Advanced Functional Materials (Chemistry), Professor Eugenia Kumacheva, they say that sexism was not a barrier in their careers.
— is such a bizarre argument to make. How can one conclude anything about sexism by asking leading women researchers whether whether it has been a barrier in their careers. The very fact that they’ve achieved leading positions says that it wasn’t; it says absolutely nothing of whether it was for those who have left.
_(I am not claiming anything about sexism; I was simply mystified by this paragraph)_
This seems like a really long argument just to end up at the main point being: "It really is sexism". The light bulb moment here is that it's not necessarily sexism on an individual level but on an institutional one. I believe there is an obvious difference men and women which, on a general level, incites women to weigh family responsibilities over career prospects. However, industrialized nations exacerbate that dif…
> more robust programs And by “more robust programs”, you mean more related confiscatory taxation. Meaning that, again, men must surrender even more, and accept even less, to accommodate women.
Why are childrens well-being not the concern of men? You have assumed something to be true, that I haven't, maybe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If a full time caregiver is needed at home, dads can step up as well. After being laid off shortly after we had our first kid, I decided to give my wife a chance to get back into her career while I stayed at home until the kid was ready for daycare. There is no reason to put all this burden on moms, dads have an equal part in this either way.
It is not a burden, it is a privilege. For dads to step up, as feminists demand, mothers would have to give up that privilege. And if you believe the feminist narrative that it is dads forcing mothers to take care of the kids, consider that most women chose their jobs and the expected salary long before they meet the future father of their kids. Man choose careers that pay less, so the fathers end up having to earn t…
> We spend billions of dollars training women in STEM. By not making full use of their skills, if we look at only the american economy, we are wasting about $1.5 billion USD per year in economic benefits they would have produced if they stayed in STEM. So here’s a business proposal: ... With all due respect, I don’t understand this call to action. Faculty position is basically a zero sum game. If more women end up as…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not a sufficient explanation. There’s more women in law and medicine, which are equally, if not more demanding. There must be something else - the nature of work (more people, less machines), the atmosphere (less bro, more professional), the pay (STEM careers plateau quickly)...
Law and medicine don't Logan's run you out with a constantly and pointlessly changing tech stack every five years.
The risk of a medical error rises by about 1% for every year a doctor is out of school.
Either AMA's continuing education requirements are lacking, or something else is at work.
I think it's still a form of sexism to assume women are the ones who need to care for a child. That's something that very few diversity-in-STEM folks are really thinking about. Many years ago an ex-girlfriend, who works in STEM academia (and is otherwise a liberal, progressive feminist), expressed concerns similar to the author about having kids. When I brought up that it wasn't written in stone that she would need t…
Why do we care that there are equal women and men again? Why does representation actually matter again? I would find it more exciting to see a field with no representation because I could make a greater impact! This whole ideology of having representation everywhere is very dumb and conformist.
Because countries where women are dominated by men both legally and culturally, have higher rates of birth, crime, poverty, etc., than countries where women have a level of social mobility similar to men.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> With all due respect, I don’t understand this call to action. Faculty position is basically a zero sum game. If more women end up as faculty, fewer men will. So, unless it costs more to train women than men, I doubt any “investment” would be saved The assumption is that aptitude for these positions is roughly the same between genders, so if there's a significant imbalance, society doesn't get the best people on the…
>The assumption is that aptitude for these positions is roughly the same between genders, so if there's a significant imbalance, society doesn't get the best people on the given set of seats. An assumption which I have to point out is absolutely not verified. In fact, there are mountains of circumstantial, statistical, and biological evidence to the contrary - which policy makers in the west are increasingly ignoring…