Research finds no gender bias in academic science • Hacker News Board

Re: Research finds no gender bias in academic science

#21

Post by kenjackson » Sun, Apr 30, 2023, 2:30 PM UTC

2devnull wrote: post #17

kenjackson wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But then how do you define poor? I ask because you do enter a new identity politics discussion. Blacks tend to have much lower wealth, even when you control for income. So it’s in the interest of whites to push income and blacks to push wealth. I also think there’s an optics issue. As you note the poor white males may be getting passed over now. So many would say that it’s really convenient that NOW we want to help a…

This is daft. Treating wealth as a measure of poverty wouldn’t work. Think about why. It pretends families don’t exist. Total non-starter.

Doesn’t income have the same issue?

Re: Research finds no gender bias in academic science

#22

Post by kenjackson » Sun, Apr 30, 2023, 2:31 PM UTC

rajin444 wrote: post #13

kenjackson wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NBA cares. In terms of bottom line, they are helped by having diverse players. Yao Ming opened the game up to a billion audience market. Top jersey sales often go to rising white stars in the game. Ones of the pushes in the league is to make foreign European players appeal more to white Americans. We’re not trying to have the league match US demographics, but make no mistake that diversity is a big deal to the NB…

Diversity should only matter in that it furthers the level of basketball being played. Diversity because it opens up additional markets is an awful incentive. That they only care about diversity because it makes them richer is very telling. On top of that, the NBA is always going to have a problem with height diversity. I don’t think this is a problem, but viewed with an equity lens it is.

I think you underestimate how single minded business is. In fairness they probably also have some other reasons to care about diversity, but money is the biggest issue.

Re: Research finds no gender bias in academic science

#23

Post by jandrewrogers » Sun, Apr 30, 2023, 2:32 PM UTC

letrowekwel wrote: post #9

onos wrote: post #3

“It’s important to get a grip on what’s going on today and not what was going on in 1985,” Amen. Some don’t agree though. They say we should favor historically mistreated groups because it’s important context. Yet, in higher ed this often entails favoring the child of doctors who will help diversity numbers over the poor white male. I believe the culture wars would decrease dramatically if we’d drop the identity poli…

I agree. Old school leftists were smart enough to understand that being rich is the ultimate privilege, nothing else comes close. Help the poor, and you will also help minorities which are poor due to historical racism, slavery and so on. Help people based on their skin colour/ethnicity, and you'll unnecessarily make all the poor, unprivileged people not included very bitter, increasing political divisions, racism an…

> It's not even that hard. Make taxation more progressive, and give extra funding to neighbourhoods and schools in poorer parts of the country/cities.

The US already does this. Taxation is more progressive than Europe and large amounts of money are redistributed to poor and troubled schools, in some cases as much as twice the European average. It is not correlated with any of the outcomes you are imagining.

Throwing money at the problem doesn’t work. The US has been doing that for decades with nothing to show for it.

Re: Research finds no gender bias in academic science

#24

Post by giaour » Sun, Apr 30, 2023, 2:33 PM UTC

rajin444 wrote: post #13

kenjackson wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NBA cares. In terms of bottom line, they are helped by having diverse players. Yao Ming opened the game up to a billion audience market. Top jersey sales often go to rising white stars in the game. Ones of the pushes in the league is to make foreign European players appeal more to white Americans. We’re not trying to have the league match US demographics, but make no mistake that diversity is a big deal to the NB…

Diversity should only matter in that it furthers the level of basketball being played. Diversity because it opens up additional markets is an awful incentive. That they only care about diversity because it makes them richer is very telling. On top of that, the NBA is always going to have a problem with height diversity. I don’t think this is a problem, but viewed with an equity lens it is.

> On top of that, the NBA is always going to have a problem with height diversity

When I was a kid, I recall people loving Muggsy Bogues because he was a short guy thriving in a tall man's game. It was really dramatic to watch him start when everybody else on the court was 2+ feet taller.

Professional sports are a performance, and it's ludicrous to say managers and league execs shouldn't take things like viewership and ticket sales into account when planning a season or expanding a team's roster. The "home team" dynamic deliberately encourages spectators to identify with players with whom they share an affinity (even if it's just that they live in the same city), so it's unsurprising that the dynamic extends to nationality, gender, religion, race, etc, too.

Re: Research finds no gender bias in academic science

#25

Post by giaour » Sun, Apr 30, 2023, 2:36 PM UTC

2devnull wrote: post #17

kenjackson wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But then how do you define poor? I ask because you do enter a new identity politics discussion. Blacks tend to have much lower wealth, even when you control for income. So it’s in the interest of whites to push income and blacks to push wealth. I also think there’s an optics issue. As you note the poor white males may be getting passed over now. So many would say that it’s really convenient that NOW we want to help a…

This is daft. Treating wealth as a measure of poverty wouldn’t work. Think about why. It pretends families don’t exist. Total non-starter.

So, if someone has a low or nonexistent income and vast inherited wealth, you would consider them to be poor?

Re: Research finds no gender bias in academic science

#26

Post by newswasboring » Sun, Apr 30, 2023, 2:45 PM UTC

kenjackson wrote: post #6

onos wrote: post #3

“It’s important to get a grip on what’s going on today and not what was going on in 1985,” Amen. Some don’t agree though. They say we should favor historically mistreated groups because it’s important context. Yet, in higher ed this often entails favoring the child of doctors who will help diversity numbers over the poor white male. I believe the culture wars would decrease dramatically if we’d drop the identity poli…

But then how do you define poor? I ask because you do enter a new identity politics discussion. Blacks tend to have much lower wealth, even when you control for income. So it’s in the interest of whites to push income and blacks to push wealth. I also think there’s an optics issue. As you note the poor white males may be getting passed over now. So many would say that it’s really convenient that NOW we want to help a…

No political issue can be solved if all people care about is optics.

Re: Research finds no gender bias in academic science

#27

Post by NalNezumi » Sun, Apr 30, 2023, 2:45 PM UTC

jandrewrogers wrote: post #23

letrowekwel wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. Old school leftists were smart enough to understand that being rich is the ultimate privilege, nothing else comes close. Help the poor, and you will also help minorities which are poor due to historical racism, slavery and so on. Help people based on their skin colour/ethnicity, and you'll unnecessarily make all the poor, unprivileged people not included very bitter, increasing political divisions, racism an…

> It's not even that hard. Make taxation more progressive, and give extra funding to neighbourhoods and schools in poorer parts of the country/cities. The US already does this. Taxation is more progressive than Europe and large amounts of money are redistributed to poor and troubled schools, in some cases as much as twice the European average. It is not correlated with any of the outcomes you are imagining. Throwing…

Can you cite a source for the statement in second paragraph?

I'm not from the states, but to my limited understanding, funding for school comes primarily from district and state level and in the form of property tax. Meaning rich areas have enormous advantage. Meanwhile the federal proportion of the funding for a school is less than 10% [1]

[1] https://youtu.be/VZx-rLoV4do timestamp 3:00

Re: Research finds no gender bias in academic science

#28

Post by gambiting » Sun, Apr 30, 2023, 2:46 PM UTC

giaour wrote: post #25

2devnull wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is daft. Treating wealth as a measure of poverty wouldn’t work. Think about why. It pretends families don’t exist. Total non-starter.

So, if someone has a low or nonexistent income and vast inherited wealth, you would consider them to be poor?

Not unheard of - people inherit great houses in fantastic locations that they have no money to keep and which they can't sell otherwise for various legal reasons. You're poor despite living in prime estate and despite theoretically having a net worth into 6 digits.

Re: Research finds no gender bias in academic science

#29

Post by 2devnull » Sun, Apr 30, 2023, 2:46 PM UTC

kenjackson wrote: post #21

2devnull wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is daft. Treating wealth as a measure of poverty wouldn’t work. Think about why. It pretends families don’t exist. Total non-starter.

Doesn’t income have the same issue?

Income isn’t perfect but it’s used for a reason. Think about the problems inherent in defining “wealth”. It’s too squishy a concept to use for policy reasons, or else they would. Is somebody who makes seven figures but spends it all on food, entertainment and travel really poor? No.

Re: Research finds no gender bias in academic science

#30

Post by Levitz » Sun, Apr 30, 2023, 2:47 PM UTC

ramraj07 wrote: post #15

onos wrote: post #3

“It’s important to get a grip on what’s going on today and not what was going on in 1985,” Amen. Some don’t agree though. They say we should favor historically mistreated groups because it’s important context. Yet, in higher ed this often entails favoring the child of doctors who will help diversity numbers over the poor white male. I believe the culture wars would decrease dramatically if we’d drop the identity poli…

The report only concluded that women didn’t have worse outcomes in acadrmia _after_ getting their PhDs. How are you taking this as a vindication of all affirmative action? Given through my decade long academic journey I barely saw any African American PIs in biomedical sciences, I don’t think that it’s a solved problem yet for other cases. Even within gender biases, the moment you include PhD enrollment and graduatio…

>Even within gender biases, the moment you include PhD enrollment and graduation rates you’ll likely see a massive difference anyway.

Might as well go all the way and start caring about college enrollment and graduation rates at that point no?

That'd find gender bias. Against men.