Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gender, race, and entrepreneurship: A randomized field experiment on investors

papers.ssrn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 162 posts

Re: Gender, race, and entrepreneurship: A randomized field experiment on investors

#131

Post by ativzzz »

tinyhouse wrote: post #33

I never understand why classify people on their looks. Talking primarily about the US. There is such a wide spectrum of white people coming from different cultures. Also, you're considered Asian if you're a Chinese immigrant but also if you were born in the US to Chinese descent let's say. The main common thing between the two groups is looks. Same for Africans and African Americans who are both classified as blacks…

> I never understand why classify people on their looks.

Because it's easy. Our brains are expert pattern matching machines. The things we see immediately cause our brain to act and match based on the prior data it holds. What's the easiest thing to see about a person that relays the most information to our brain? The color of their skin, what they're wearing, their hairstyle, etc.

Re: Gender, race, and entrepreneurship: A randomized field experiment on investors

#132

Post by sombremesa »

ArkanExplorer wrote: post #10

Same thing with job applications: "In an attempt to increase workplace diversity, the Australian public service implemented a .. trial removing all mention of gender and ethnicity from applications. It was found that removing gender from thousands of applications made women less likely to advance through the recruitment process compared to cases where gender was visible. The trial found that a woman's name on an appl…

Organizations hire for their needs, not to have exactly equal numbers of people across arbitrary metrics. The issue with "maximum 10% of the total yearly intake from any one country" is that it's a feel good statistic on paper, but it ends up having the real effect that it instantly puts top talent out of reach for US companies (all other things being equal, countries with more population will have more people of exceptional talent).

http://paulgraham.com/95.html

Re: Gender, race, and entrepreneurship: A randomized field experiment on investors

#133

Post by dennis_jeeves »

CyberRabbi wrote: post #110
68020 wrote: post #92

As a 'white' father of 3 who has been unemployed for the past few years I can tell you that this paper is sole crushing. Its a monument to how backwards common perception is to reality. Its a declaration from academia to never stop finding ways at punishing (me, my wife and 3 daughters) for my sin of being born white/male/pre1990. From what I have seen, people like me are under-represented in most office environments…

You’re not alone. Many of us feel the same way. This system will always hate us, we have to start supporting each other. Give it time. We’re going to make it friend.

> we have to start supporting each other. Give it time. We’re going to make it friend.

This won't happen. In my opinion they are too 'principled' to support each other. Supporting each other has the connotations of a union or a mob. 'White' men, who in my opinion is statistically among the most capable category are collectively their own enemies, by bending backward to accommodate the 'minority' even when individuals from these 'minorities' are incompetent.

Re: Gender, race, and entrepreneurship: A randomized field experiment on investors

#134

Post by somedude895 »

68020 wrote: post #92

As a 'white' father of 3 who has been unemployed for the past few years I can tell you that this paper is sole crushing. Its a monument to how backwards common perception is to reality. Its a declaration from academia to never stop finding ways at punishing (me, my wife and 3 daughters) for my sin of being born white/male/pre1990. From what I have seen, people like me are under-represented in most office environments…

As a non-American this is so bizarre to me. You get people so full of concern for the hypothetical woman in banking making 100k a year who just can't get that promotion, or the hypothetical black Harvard graduate who gets rejected from tech jobs, while they only show disgust for the unemployed guy living in a trailer with his family and friends ODing dropping dead like flies, simply because of the color of his skin.

Re: Gender, race, and entrepreneurship: A randomized field experiment on investors

#135

Post by CyberRabbi »

smt88 wrote: post #128
CyberRabbi wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re not alone. Many of us feel the same way. This system will always hate us, we have to start supporting each other. Give it time. We’re going to make it friend.

> we have to start supporting each other Do you currently feel that white men are not supportive of one another? Or were you referring to a subcategory of white men? > Give it time What do you expect time to change?

White men especially in America tend to pathologically see the world through an individualistic lens and ignore their identity. Things will change as more and more of us start to become conscious of the identity for which the system hates us.

Re: Gender, race, and entrepreneurship: A randomized field experiment on investors

#136

Post by john_moscow »

68020 wrote: post #92

As a 'white' father of 3 who has been unemployed for the past few years I can tell you that this paper is sole crushing. Its a monument to how backwards common perception is to reality. Its a declaration from academia to never stop finding ways at punishing (me, my wife and 3 daughters) for my sin of being born white/male/pre1990. From what I have seen, people like me are under-represented in most office environments…

That's because you probably value independence and critical thinking. You are probably teaching your kids to focus on personal growth, learn from the work environment, look for opportunities, be competitive and keep increasing their own bargaining power. At least, that's what I'm teaching mine.

Except, this makes you a threat to the corporations. They don't want you. They want to have someone replaceable, who will fulfill their corporate duties at the minimum possible rate. Who will never challenge their superior, and will be thankful for the opportunity to join the ranks, rather than thinking on how to go independent.

Re: Gender, race, and entrepreneurship: A randomized field experiment on investors

#137

Post by throwaway894345 »

koonsolo wrote: post #100
throwaway894345 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your summary is incorrect. They are not taking their results to indicate that their assumption is incorrect, but rather that the anti-female bias must be even stronger elsewhere to overcome the significant pro-female bias at initial stages.

> that the anti-female bias must be even stronger elsewhere Where does it mention that there is an overall anti-female bias?

> Combating bias requires understanding how and where it manifests. In light of the substantial gender imbalance in real-world investments, our results suggest a larger-than-expected bias against female entrepreneurs in other settings.

The reasoning appears to be something like, "Because there is a disparity, there must be an anti-female bias somewhere and since there's only a pro-female bias here, the elsewhere anti-female bias must be so strong as to overcome the pro-female bias here to produce the disparity". There seems to be an implicit assumption that disparities are proof of bias when in fact bias is one of many potential causes of disparities.

Re: Gender, race, and entrepreneurship: A randomized field experiment on investors

#138

Post by ttt0 »

freeflight wrote: post #67
musingsole wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arguably that's why the US has less severe racism/classism than much of the rest of the world (despite whatever pop narrative).

I don't understand how that follows from the parent comment? The comment rightfully points out that in the US people are mostly classified by their superficial looks vs their actual ethnicity. Which leads to the situation that quite a diverse field of ethnicities and cultures are boiled down to very generalized "white/black/yellow/whatever" groups. Case in point: The recent shooting in a Colorado grocery store was, r…

You could make a similar argument about ethnics groups instead of race. Every categorization is a generalization until you get down to a single individual.

Races are just as valid as specific ethnic groups, they just have a broader definition. You don't have to list and compare each and every ethnic group separately to say that the European culture(s) are overall much different from, let's say, African culture(s).

Re: Gender, race, and entrepreneurship: A randomized field experiment on investors

#139

Post by ip26 »

klyrs wrote: post #90
icare_1er wrote: post #85

Many similar studies have been done and almost always destroy the leftists dogmas about X, Y or Z being oppressed. Belonging to a minority actually appears to boost your chances of being hired (shown by studies leaving, or hiding, the name of the applicants). Being a women in a company with a boss, reduces the gender paygap compared to what it is for freelancers: the more women are on their own (dentists, baker, foun…

> ... destroy the leftists dogmas ... Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity.

In a sense you might argue HN culture relishes the destruction of all dogmas. Left or otherwise.

Re: Gender, race, and entrepreneurship: A randomized field experiment on investors

#140

Post by klyrs »

ip26 wrote: post #139
klyrs wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... destroy the leftists dogmas ... Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity.

In a sense you might argue HN culture relishes the destruction of all dogmas. Left or otherwise.

No, I might have argued that about usenet when I was first exposed to the internet in the early 90s, but I'm not nearly so naive today. Endless flamewars that never change minds. The same people saying the same shit time and time again. Dogmas don't die, they simply fade away when their adherents do.
Post reply on HN