141–150 of 520 posts
At the risk of posting a reflexive comment, what should we be doing here? It seems like everything has unintended consequences (not on a cost-benefit basis): - Minority affinity groups pull people from majority groups and decrease integration. - Anti-discrimination/sexism/etc. movements often add social barriers to interactions (e.g. things I do within my identity group would be misperceived if done across) - Affirma…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is important to understand the reasons for that negative correlation. If you do, your conclusions would be quite the opposite - sex imbalance is not something to accept, but rather to fix. Many authoritarian regimes are expanding their economic base by enabling women to pursue professional careers. In some developed countries there’s no such pressure, so they are simply stuck in the past. They are not doing better…
> It is important to understand the reasons for that negative correlation. Agreed 100% > If you do, your conclusions would be quite the opposite This is where you lose me. Your statement here suggests the following: 1. That you know, for a conclusive fact, what those reasons are 2. That the reasons suggest something ominous Furthermore, you haven't explained what you consider to be the reasons, let alone offered expl…
which to my knowledge is a male dominated profession. so good on her!
There is an expression which I think is fitting, in a weird way - a successful marriage does not have to last forever. For some reason, we always tend to imagine that, once a company or organization is created, it must last forever. That for it to ‘close its doors’ or ‘wind down’ is somehow a failure. And that’s just not true; a professional athletes career does not last forever, and neither does the lifespan of most…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have seen data presented multiple times showing the relation between a country’s wealth and/or economic freedom and women’s participation in stem fields. It’s a negative correlation. I often wonder if we should just be focused on maximizing individual freedom and let the chips fall where they may. This will result in some professions with extreme sex imbalance, and we should accept that outcome.
> This will result in some professions with extreme sex imbalance, and we should accept that outcome. We do accept it, for the most part. I don't see many Men-as-Teachers or Men-in-Nursing advocacy groups.
I'm always suspicious of "you don't see much of x" in spaces where x isn't the demographic being catered to. This isn't Nursing News or Teacher News, not to say that Nurses and Teachers can't also be hackers, technologists, etc. but this is clearly not a space oriented towards all things teaching or nursing, so questioning community advocacy within their communities strikes me as the wrong place.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would require an monetary investment into DEI, which has become a negative investor signal for many large companies. It's a shame, because I've met several developers who benefited from Girls in Tech's work.
monetary investment into DEI, which has become a negative investor signal for many large companies can you please explain that or point to some articles about it?
https://www.axios.com/2024/04/02/dei-backlash-diversity
etc. There is a backlash underway against any effort to expand workplace diversity beyond the representative fractions circa 1990.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have seen data presented multiple times showing the relation between a country’s wealth and/or economic freedom and women’s participation in stem fields. It’s a negative correlation. I often wonder if we should just be focused on maximizing individual freedom and let the chips fall where they may. This will result in some professions with extreme sex imbalance, and we should accept that outcome.
It is important to understand the reasons for that negative correlation. If you do, your conclusions would be quite the opposite - sex imbalance is not something to accept, but rather to fix. Many authoritarian regimes are expanding their economic base by enabling women to pursue professional careers. In some developed countries there’s no such pressure, so they are simply stuck in the past. They are not doing better…
in the west they already have more freedom, and so the downside of having to endure sexism does not make it worth the effort.
not sure if that is true, but it makes sense to me
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have seen data presented multiple times showing the relation between a country’s wealth and/or economic freedom and women’s participation in stem fields. It’s a negative correlation. I often wonder if we should just be focused on maximizing individual freedom and let the chips fall where they may. This will result in some professions with extreme sex imbalance, and we should accept that outcome.
It is important to understand the reasons for that negative correlation. If you do, your conclusions would be quite the opposite - sex imbalance is not something to accept, but rather to fix. Many authoritarian regimes are expanding their economic base by enabling women to pursue professional careers. In some developed countries there’s no such pressure, so they are simply stuck in the past. They are not doing better…
Consider that when you talk about women doing what makes them happy and what they see as important work (because it is) as being "stuck in the past" or in a form of slavery, it might be you who's devaluing them. We both received a lot of that rhetoric growing up, and it took until well into adulthood to really understand how wrong and harmful it is.
At the risk of posting a reflexive comment, what should we be doing here? It seems like everything has unintended consequences (not on a cost-benefit basis): - Minority affinity groups pull people from majority groups and decrease integration. - Anti-discrimination/sexism/etc. movements often add social barriers to interactions (e.g. things I do within my identity group would be misperceived if done across) - Affirma…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have seen data presented multiple times showing the relation between a country’s wealth and/or economic freedom and women’s participation in stem fields. It’s a negative correlation. I often wonder if we should just be focused on maximizing individual freedom and let the chips fall where they may. This will result in some professions with extreme sex imbalance, and we should accept that outcome.
> I have seen data presented multiple times showing the relation between a country’s wealth and/or economic freedom and women’s participation in stem fields. This lines up with my experiences as well. I know plenty of eastern european women, asians and latinas working as programmers. on top of that I've talked to many that didn't know how to code but would ask me to teach them as soon as they heard I was a programmer…
Gender parity in STEM is a sign of the economic desperation of a countries people. This is a sociological fact which ruffles feathers when it’s stated out loud.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This will result in some professions with extreme sex imbalance, and we should accept that outcome. We do accept it, for the most part. I don't see many Men-as-Teachers or Men-in-Nursing advocacy groups.
>or Men-in-Nursing advocacy groups. thats been changing. mostly because there are more obese people now so you need male nurses to help them move around.