That is true, but it can't be used to claim an absence of discrimination. Women will make choices about which careers to pursue on the basis of expected income so you'd expect them to be less likely to pursue careers where discrimination is an issue.
Yes, I think if statistics are worthless, the best thing we can do is keep pushing to make sure experiments into discrimination are rigorous and ones into gender differences are allowed to be talked about (and also rigorous, obviously)
-
-
Statistical evidence frequently cited to minimise the likelihood of direct discrimination is weaker than it ostensibly seems to the statistically less-informed. Basically, we can all agree that more research is needed, and that no candidate hypotheses should be off-limits.
-
Yes. If stats are no good here, then they are not. But then the conversation about stats are over. Outside of it, choices made are still relevant.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Absolutely. As a latecomer to this exchange I can't even tell where the disagreement lay. Discrimination can't be ruled out. Neither can different choices driven (at least in part) by biologically constructed gender-differences. Much evidence consistent with the latter exists (1)
-
Helen initially claimed that the wage gap had been debunked because it can be eliminated by introducing occupational controls. I believe we all agree now that this is incorrect: https://twitter.com/HPluckrose/status/1000914615717462016?s=19 …
This Tweet is unavailable.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.