ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 8th August 2017, 03:36 PM   #161
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,354
Originally Posted by cullennz View Post
Equating tolerance of one dudes, frankly pretty mild memo, to tolerance of sexual harrassment, which in some countries would be classified as sexual assault

That is some awesome grasping of straws

You'll want to trace that back a bit further. My post was in response to this idea that "political correctness" in general is equivalent to intolerance.
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 03:40 PM   #162
sir drinks-a-lot
Master Poster
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 2,930
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
I believe lynching was mentioned already. I'd call MacCarthyism right-wing violence. A small number of Trump supporters.
Sure, but I think CosCos was speaking about the current situation in the US.
__________________
I drink to the general joy o' th' whole table. --William Shakespeare
sir drinks-a-lot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 03:41 PM   #163
Delphic Oracle
Graduate Poster
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,859
Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd View Post
You'll want to trace that back a bit further. My post was in response to this idea that "political correctness" in general is equivalent to intolerance.
It is intolerant.

Not equivalent to, no. Is.

Otherwise you're trying to have it both ways.

ETA: I'm about as progressive as it gets, but this "our **** don't stink" attitude lately needs to end.

Last edited by Delphic Oracle; 8th August 2017 at 03:42 PM.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 03:46 PM   #164
Delphic Oracle
Graduate Poster
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,859
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
Sure, but I think CosCos was speaking about the current situation in the US.
Well now we have to arguably call into consideration acts of police violence condoned by the current right-wing figurehead.

Every family ripped apart when their deportation relief appeal is rejected without consideration (a consciously chosen governing policy)?

ETA: This tangent could easily unravel into half a dozen de-rails from here...

Last edited by Delphic Oracle; 8th August 2017 at 03:47 PM.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 03:47 PM   #165
Tony
Penultimate Amazing
 
Tony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 15,186
Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd View Post
Why do people keep insisting that the discouragement of bad behavior and alienation of those who engage in it is an example of negative intolerance?
I remember when the religious right made the same arguments and "bad behavior" included gays. It was a crap argument then and its a crap argument now. Do you have any arguments that don't rely on hollow moralizing?
__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle

Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company. - Mark Twain
Tony is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 03:55 PM   #166
Cavemonster
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,748
So I read the memo.

He certainly goes to a lot of effort to tell the reader that he isn't sexist and thinks loads of positive things about women!

So he's got that going for him...
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 04:00 PM   #167
d4m10n
Master Poster
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 2,645
Originally Posted by Spindrift View Post
He was not fired for sending a memo, he was fired for the content of the memo. He was fired “perpetuating gender stereotypes.”
Which ones, in particular? Is it so harmful to point out that women tend to value work/life balance more than men, on average? That women are generally more agreeable and cooperative? That men tend to seek status and risk more than women?

ETA: None of these "stereotypes" do my gender any credit, IMO.
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/

Last edited by d4m10n; 8th August 2017 at 04:05 PM.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 04:01 PM   #168
Tony
Penultimate Amazing
 
Tony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 15,186
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
It is intolerant.

Not equivalent to, no. Is.

Otherwise you're trying to have it both ways.

ETA: I'm about as progressive as it gets, but this "our **** don't stink" attitude lately needs to end.
Spot on. Leave the shaming and holier-than-thou BS to the fundies. If you cant convince me with reason but instead have to resort to shaming, you've already lost.
__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle

Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company. - Mark Twain
Tony is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 04:22 PM   #169
eeyore1954
Philosopher
 
eeyore1954's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,057
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
This is a person who believes a whole fraction of workers are inferior based on their genetics. That person is simply not a team player.
You got that out of that memo. Different slightly not inferior is what I get.
eeyore1954 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 05:15 PM   #170
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 17,204
Best not to defecate where you sleep
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 05:50 PM   #171
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 21,048
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
But this is proof that Google doesn't actually care about diversity. If they did, they would actually refute the claims in the letter. To simply fire him doesn't actually address if he is right or not.
This is like a young-earth creationist or a climate-denier claiming that if so-called "scientists" and self-proclaimed "skeptics" actually cared about factual accuracy and intellectual honesty, they would always engage in the debates that YECs and climate-deniers are continually trying to provoke, and "teach the controversy", rather than simply ignore them or prohibit teachers from discussing the material in school science classes.

Not every viewpoint deserves an equal share of air time.

A letter that essentially declares that his female work colleagues shouldn't be working at the company because they are biologically incapable or unsuitable for their jobs doesn't have to be specially refuted, because the fact those women report to work every single day and perform their jobs to the same acceptable standard that the author presumably does, invalidates the letter's claim on its face.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002

Last edited by Checkmite; 8th August 2017 at 05:58 PM.
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 05:57 PM   #172
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 67,182
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
Sure, but I think CosCos was speaking about the current situation in the US.
I'm not aware of much violence on either side at the moment, save for some isolated incidents.
__________________
<Roar!>

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 05:58 PM   #173
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 67,182
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
So I read the memo.

He certainly goes to a lot of effort to tell the reader that he isn't sexist and thinks loads of positive things about women!

So he's got that going for him...
Hopefully you don't think that this somehow proves he thinks the opposite. If I thought my words were going to offend the easily offended I'd make sure to pre-empt that.
__________________
<Roar!>

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 06:04 PM   #174
Tony
Penultimate Amazing
 
Tony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 15,186
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
A letter that essentially declares that his female work colleagues shouldn't be working at the company because they are biologically incapable or unsuitable for their jobs doesn't have to be specially refuted, because the fact those women report to work every single day and perform their jobs to the same acceptable standard that the author presumably does, invalidates the letter's claim on its face.
I suppose it's a good thing he claims nothing remotely resembling that.
__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle

Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company. - Mark Twain
Tony is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 06:26 PM   #175
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
Originally Posted by Tony View Post
I suppose it's a good thing he claims nothing remotely resembling that.
That doesn't matter. All that matters is the narrative about what he said, and Checkmite has correctly described the narrative. The actual facts are irrelevant.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 06:33 PM   #176
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 67,182
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
A letter that essentially declares that his female work colleagues shouldn't be working at the company because they are biologically incapable or unsuitable for their jobs doesn't have to be specially refuted, because the fact those women report to work every single day and perform their jobs to the same acceptable standard that the author presumably does, invalidates the letter's claim on its face.
I think you read the wrong letter. Or perhaps you can point to where the highlighted is claimed? And please don't try to use the "essentially" that precedes it as an excuse.
__________________
<Roar!>

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 06:41 PM   #177
BobTheCoward
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,291
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
This is like a young-earth creationist or a climate-denier claiming that if so-called "scientists" and self-proclaimed "skeptics" actually cared about factual accuracy and intellectual honesty, they would always engage in the debates that YECs and climate-deniers are continually trying to provoke, and "teach the controversy", rather than simply ignore them or prohibit teachers from discussing the material in school science classes.

Not every viewpoint deserves an equal share of air time.

A letter that essentially declares that his female work colleagues shouldn't be working at the company because they are biologically incapable or unsuitable for their jobs doesn't have to be specially refuted, because the fact those women report to work every single day and perform their jobs to the same acceptable standard that the author presumably does, invalidates the letter's claim on its face.
Those deniers are right. If they did care they would engage.

It seems like part of the accusation is the acceptable standard is below what the standard would be with a more scientific based diversity plan.

Last edited by BobTheCoward; 8th August 2017 at 06:42 PM.
BobTheCoward is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 06:46 PM   #178
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 10,603
In fairness, all he claims is that women are more neurotic than men and maybe that's why they're not equally represented in leadership positions:
Quote:
Women, on average, have more: Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance). This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report on Googlegeist and to the lower number of women in high stress jobs.

But otherwise, he totally supports diversity.
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 06:54 PM   #179
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 62,809
Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd View Post
You'll want to trace that back a bit further. My post was in response to this idea that "political correctness" in general is equivalent to intolerance.
Some but not all of it.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 07:01 PM   #180
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 62,809
Originally Posted by eeyore1954 View Post
You got that out of that memo. Different slightly not inferior is what I get.
Almost, but he stepped into the dark side with this conclusion:
Quote:
He added, “Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don’t have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership. Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business.”
Differences in distributions of traits: Yes, and denying that is inconsistent with the evidence.

But concluding then that it, "explain[s] why we don’t have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership" is pure ignorance. That's where the guy failed, IMO.

But they shouldn't have fired him, they should have opened the door for debate and let someone with views like mine present to him evidence of why his observations may have merit but his conclusions about the significance of those observations do not.

The above quote is from: 1. James Damore Accused Google of Silencing Conservative Opinions & Argued Biological Differences Play a Role in the Shortage of Women in Tech

Also worth a glance:
The Atlantic: The Most Common Error in Media Coverage of the Google Memo - Many headlines labeled the document “anti-diversity,” misleading readers about its actual contents.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 8th August 2017 at 07:03 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 07:19 PM   #181
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 21,048
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
I think you read the wrong letter. Or perhaps you can point to where the highlighted is claimed? And please don't try to use the "essentially" that precedes it as an excuse.
When he lists Google's initiatives to increase hires of women and minorities while asserting that they are "based on false assumptions" which he doesn't specifically describe, and that despite Google's claims that they are economically advantageous, they are actually "irreparably harmful" to Google for reasons he does not qualify beyond describing the initiatives as "veiled left ideology" (which context thus implies is intrinsically a bad thing), he is condemning employees that have ostensibly been hired by or have gained from those initiatives.

Logically, how is it even possible that hiring more women, for instance, can cause actual "harm" to the company? Simply: because concentrating on whether an applicant is "female" rather than "exceptionally good at coding" (just for example) must deprive Google of an exceptionally good coder. The fact that the hiring process is perfectly capable of weighing whether a candidate is both of course is ignored by the author, as it is by everyone who objects to diversity-goal hiring philosophies. Nevertheless, the implication is clear: Google's initiative to hire women must work to the company's detriment because it forgoes or compromises on the hiring of "the most skilled" computer-coders in favor of hiring more "female" coders. The hiring process is detrimental because the people who are hired by it are less suited for the position than those who presumably would've been hired had that initiative not been in place.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 07:19 PM   #182
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
In fairness, all he claims is that women are more neurotic than men
They are. Conversely, men are more violent than women. That's why there are more men in prison than women. Is that sexist to say?
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 07:20 PM   #183
d4m10n
Master Poster
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 2,645
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
In fairness, all he claims is that women are more neurotic than men...
Is he wrong?

ETA: Given that we are talking about a difference between population means.
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/

Last edited by d4m10n; 8th August 2017 at 07:31 PM.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 07:23 PM   #184
Fizil
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 563
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Almost, but he stepped into the dark side with this conclusion:

Differences in distributions of traits: Yes, and denying that is inconsistent with the evidence.

But concluding then that it, "explain[s] why we don’t have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership" is pure ignorance. That's where the guy failed, IMO.
See this is where I have always found myself diverging in opinions about innateness with the anti-feminist folks. While I am somewhat sympathetic because I see a lot of denial of science among feminists and other social justice types, I don't agree with the conclusions many anti-feminists draw from the science.

Like, say it is true that there is an underlying biological reason that men happen to be drawn more to software development (my field) than women:

First thing is that studies that indicate men might have a greater innate interest in mechanical things vs women having a greater interest in social things doesn't point to the 2-to-1 ratio of men to women in the field as being caused by that. All you could say based on such studies is that we might find some unquantified difference in interest leading to some unquantified imbalance in representation. So saying there is possibly some biological component doesn't in and of itself answer the question of why there are twice as many male software developers as female ones, you still have to determine what component of that difference is and isn't biologically motivated.

Second thing is that, even if the entire difference in representation is because of biologically-based differences in inherent interests, that doesn't mean it is therefore OK. I see many anti-feminists harp on about the naturalistic fallacy, but saying "The difference is due to sexual dimorphism, so it is OK" is also appealing to the naturalistic fallacy. My brain has evolved to absolutely love fat and sugar. Whenever I eat cheesecake my brain says "THIS IS GREAT, EAT MORE!!!!!!!" but I know that overeating is actually bad for me, no matter what my evolved instincts are telling me. Likewise, even if there is an evolved tendency of some sort in women that ultimately causes them to prefer non-technical people-oriented jobs, that doesn't mean such tendencies are optimal for women's long-term happiness in a modern society. If such a tendency does exist, that means perhaps we should work against it, just like we work against over-eating.

Now it could be that none of the above is true, my point is simply that often innateness is used by anti-feminists as a reason that we shouldn't bother trying to fix the representation of different genders in STEM. I think innateness makes it more crucial to do more to correct it, since innate biases like that can be that much harder to correct that simple culturally developed biases.
Fizil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 07:29 PM   #185
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
Originally Posted by Fizil View Post
Now it could be that none of the above is true, my point is simply that often innateness is used by anti-feminists as a reason that we shouldn't bother trying to fix the representation of different genders in STEM. I think innateness makes it more crucial to do more to correct it, since innate biases like that can be that much harder to correct that simple culturally developed biases.
Why does a gender imbalance caused by something other than discrimination need any correcting at all? I've never even seen an argument for that. But if it needs correcting for STEM, why doesn't it need correcting in fields like elementary school education? That's got a HUGE gender gap, but nobody seems to care. But that actually seems even more consequential to society at large than the STEM imbalance.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 07:36 PM   #186
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 10,603
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
They are. Conversely, men are more violent than women. That's why there are more men in prison than women. Is that sexist to say?
If someone told you weren't equipped for a certain job because you're a man and men are more prone to violence, would you think that was sexist?
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 07:38 PM   #187
Fizil
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 563
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Why does a gender imbalance caused by something other than discrimination need any correcting at all? I've never even seen an argument for that. But if it needs correcting for STEM, why doesn't it need correcting in fields like elementary school education? That's got a HUGE gender gap, but nobody seems to care. But that actually seems even more consequential to society at large than the STEM imbalance.
I'd say such innate differences might need fixing where-ever they are found. Of course you are right that they might not as well. It depends on whether those innate tendencies are sub-optimal in a modern society. I personally think that in our modern technological cultures, any innate tendency in some large segment of the population to not want to be involved in that job sector, is a problem worth solving. You might think differently, fine. That is a political question, not a scientific question.

edit: To restate my point more clearly: Innateness isn't a reason to wash your hands of issue, you then have to argue why that innate tendency isn't itself a problem.

Last edited by Fizil; 8th August 2017 at 07:46 PM.
Fizil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 07:40 PM   #188
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
If someone told you weren't equipped for a certain job because you're a man and men are more prone to violence, would you think that was sexist?
Nobody said that, or its equivalent. What the memo author said was the equivalent of what I said. Except he even went beyond that to make it explicit that group averages don't tell you much of anything about any individual. So not only did he not say what you're saying, he specifically and explicitly argued against it.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 07:43 PM   #189
Tony
Penultimate Amazing
 
Tony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 15,186
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
The fact that the hiring process is perfectly capable of weighing whether a candidate is both of course is ignored...
"Fact"? Can you demonstrate this fact? I would submit that the fact that these "diversity initiatives" exist suggest that their hiring process is incapable of identifying candidates who are both female and competent coders.
__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle

Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company. - Mark Twain
Tony is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 07:47 PM   #190
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
Originally Posted by Fizil View Post
I'd say such innate differences might need fixing where-ever they are found.
But why?

Quote:
Of course you are right that they might not as well. It depends on whether those innate tendencies are sub-optimal in a modern society.
Suboptimal for what purpose? And what's the evidence that they are?

Quote:
I personally think that in our modern technological cultures, any innate tendency in some large segment of the population to not want to be involved in that job sector, is a problem worth solving.
But you still haven't told me why it's a problem at all.

Quote:
You might think differently, fine. That is a political question, not a scientific question.
Well, no, it's not fine. If you can't even tell me why you want to do something, then why should that convince anyone, even on political grounds?

Sure, there are political questions which don't have scientific answers (for example, abortion). But whatever side you take, you should still be able to explain your reasons, even if they depend on something like religious faith. But you haven't give me any reason at all, not even a non-scientific one.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 07:50 PM   #191
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
Originally Posted by Tony View Post
"Fact"? Can you demonstrate this fact? I would submit that the fact that these "diversity initiatives" exist suggest that their hiring process is incapable of identifying candidates who are both female and competent coders.
I disagree. I think it suggests that their hiring process is incapable of finding enough competent female coders. Enough for what purpose? There's the rub. Proponents would probably say something like enough to offer equality of opportunity to women and men. The cynic in me says enough to appease the braying "diversity" mob.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 07:52 PM   #192
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 10,603
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Is he wrong?

ETA: Given that we are talking about a difference between population means.
I don't know. But the sexism isn't in making certain true or untrue generalizations. It's in using those generalizations to make specious and dismissive assertions.
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 07:54 PM   #193
Tony
Penultimate Amazing
 
Tony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 15,186
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I disagree. I think it suggests that their hiring process is incapable of finding enough competent female coders. Enough for what purpose? There's the rub. Proponents would probably say something like enough to offer equality of opportunity to women and men. The cynic in me says enough to appease the braying "diversity" mob.
Good point. Consider my position altered.
__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle

Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company. - Mark Twain
Tony is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 07:55 PM   #194
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 21,048
Originally Posted by Tony View Post
"Fact"? Can you demonstrate this fact?
It would be like demonstrating the sky exists. It is entirely possible to have a form with both a "female" and a "coding skill equal or above X" tick-box on it. If you don't believe me, draw one yourself and you will see how easy it is.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 07:58 PM   #195
Fizil
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 563
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
But why?
Suboptimal for what purpose? And what's the evidence that they are?
Suboptimal for the average long term happiness of the gender involved. I felt that was fairly obvious from my first post.

No, I don't have any evidence, as I said this could be true or false, I don't know. The point is that it is important to figure that out. You can't just point to innateness as good by default, most of our psychology evolved in a far different environment than we are in now.

BTW, this is the problem I have with many feminists and other social justice types: the denial of innate human psychology makes research into this area almost taboo. I think it is important to identify what sort of innate psychological tendencies we have evolved to have, good and bad, so we can encourage the good ones, and try to minimize and work around the ones we consider bad.

Last edited by Fizil; 8th August 2017 at 08:06 PM.
Fizil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 08:10 PM   #196
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 10,603
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Nobody said that, or its equivalent.
Sure he did. I quoted him specifically linking female neuroses to their underrepresentation in certain types of jobs.

Quote:
What the memo author said was the equivalent of what I said.
Your comparison was a poor one.

A more valid comparison would be to a profession in which men are underrepresented because of how violent they are. Got any examples?

Quote:
Except he even went beyond that to make it explicit that group averages don't tell you much of anything about any individual. So not only did he not say what you're saying, he specifically and explicitly argued against it.
"Some of my best friends are black..."
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 08:10 PM   #197
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
Originally Posted by Fizil View Post
Suboptimal for the average long term happiness of the gender involved. I felt that was fairly obvious from my first post.
Why would people be happier doing things they aren't as good at or as interested in? That doesn't make any sense. It's an extraordinary claim, and requires extraordinary evidence.

Quote:
You can't just point to innateness as good by default, most of our psychology evolved in a far different environment than we are in now.
The point about innateness is not that the outcomes are good by default. There are instead two other reasons it's relevant.

The first is that there's general agreement that it's bad to be discriminated against for this sort of job on the basis of sex, so if the cause is anything other than discrimination, then the standard justification for these diversity program vanishes.

The second reason is more practical and more specific to innateness. If the differential hiring is due to innate factors, then strategies meant to remove discrimination simply won't work. Just like bandaging someone's arm won't help if they're bleeding from the leg. Furthermore, if it's innate, there is very little you even CAN do, short of quotas (which there's broad consensus are a bad idea, because that's also discrimination on the basis of sex), to "fix" the "problem". Attempts to change human nature generally fail.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 08:12 PM   #198
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 62,809
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Is he wrong?

ETA: Given that we are talking about a difference between population means.
Oh Dameon, I had better hopes for you before that post.

No we're not more neurotic. That's plain ignorance. I know plenty of male drama queens and other odd personalities.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 08:15 PM   #199
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
A more valid comparison would be to a profession in which men are underrepresented because of how violent they are. Got any examples?
Sure. Kindergarten teacher.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th August 2017, 08:21 PM   #200
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 62,809
Originally Posted by Fizil View Post
See this is where I have always found myself diverging in opinions about innateness with the anti-feminist folks. While I am somewhat sympathetic because I see a lot of denial of science among feminists and other social justice types, I don't agree with the conclusions many anti-feminists draw from the science.

Like, say it is true that there is an underlying biological reason that men happen to be drawn more to software development (my field) than women:
Right here is where you go wrong, attributing the current state of software development to male traits.

No, just no. The only reason it seems that way is because men developed their little version of software. And guess what, lots of men buy the products.

But that leaves a vast untapped market of female consumers.

Originally Posted by Fizil View Post
First thing is that studies that indicate men might have a greater innate interest in mechanical things vs women having a greater interest in social things doesn't point to the 2-to-1 ratio of men to women in the field as being caused by that. All you could say based on such studies is that we might find some unquantified difference in interest leading to some unquantified imbalance in representation. So saying there is possibly some biological component doesn't in and of itself answer the question of why there are twice as many male software developers as female ones, you still have to determine what component of that difference is and isn't biologically motivated.
This is ********, once again attributing nurture to nature. You tried not to, but failed.

Originally Posted by Fizil View Post
Second thing is that, even if the entire difference in representation is because of biologically-based differences in inherent interests, that doesn't mean it is therefore OK. I see many anti-feminists harp on about the naturalistic fallacy, but saying "The difference is due to sexual dimorphism, so it is OK" is also appealing to the naturalistic fallacy. My brain has evolved to absolutely love fat and sugar. Whenever I eat cheesecake my brain says "THIS IS GREAT, EAT MORE!!!!!!!" but I know that overeating is actually bad for me, no matter what my evolved instincts are telling me. Likewise, even if there is an evolved tendency of some sort in women that ultimately causes them to prefer non-technical people-oriented jobs,
I don't believe this is nature, I believe it is nurture.

Originally Posted by Fizil View Post
that doesn't mean such tendencies are optimal for women's long-term happiness in a modern society. If such a tendency does exist, that means perhaps we should work against it, just like we work against over-eating.
Huh?

Originally Posted by Fizil View Post
Now it could be that none of the above is true, my point is simply that often innateness is used by anti-feminists as a reason that we shouldn't bother trying to fix the representation of different genders in STEM. I think innateness makes it more crucial to do more to correct it, since innate biases like that can be that much harder to correct that simple culturally developed biases.
Innateness needs to be corrected? OMG!

How about Google recognizes the differences and exploits both equally? Think of the market potential.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 8th August 2017 at 08:22 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:22 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.