The problem with the argument is that the data doesn't really support it. There were better arguments to make from the jump, and we whiffed.
-
-
I say we because I did it too. Argument should have been something like "There are differences, but data says they are relatively small." +
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
+ "There is zero evidence to conclude those small differences would actually make one better in stated field."
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Also, differences may account for some of distribution, but likely cultural bias (ie sexism) may account for even more
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Coolbeit @charlescwcooke
Okay sure. Observed differences are mostly/largely/overwhelmingly due to socialization, not biology. Some people add the adverb, sure.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @csilverandgold @charlescwcooke
It's important. Most on the left were insisting "no difference" and even suggesting biological difference was sexist
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Coolbeit @charlescwcooke
I mean, okay? I don't really care that deeply about the adverb, I just care that people recognize the very very basic argument being made.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
and that people know a movement based on equality for women is not claiming that men and women are already equal in practice. Like, what?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @csilverandgold @charlescwcooke
That's a good argument. It's not the one most of the people I saw were making
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Coolbeit @charlescwcooke
well you don't have to explicitly say "my movement for equality does't think we're already equal in practice"...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
because any human w\ basic logic skills can deduce that by applying 1/5th of a brain cell, which apparently too much for the editor of NRO!
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.