Hey @slatestarcodex, in re your current post, do you realize that computer programming was nearly ONE HUNDRED PERCENT FEMALE originally?
-
-
What i'm ARGUING is, the way we frame professions matters. And that people define "systematizing" conveniently to exclude women's work.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Nurses have lots of great talents, including systematizing ones, but I think it's a people/empathizing profession in a way that tech isn't.
-
I agree this is hard to predict - ie it confuses me that women are well-represented in undergrad math but not undergrad CS.
-
I don't think a stereotypes story or a thing/people story can explain that one.
-
No. Somewhat less cultural opprobrium and somewhat less horrible harassment explains SOME of that. All? Who knows. But a LOT.
-
Here's some postmodernism: CHOOSING to focus on the biological factors rather than the (also well-documented) cultural sexism ISN'T NEUTRAL.
-
I would be perfectly happy for us to examine the bio preferences of various genders once we're SURE we've removed all the cultural factors!
-
Both can be discussed, though. You could argue that it's impossible to know how much is cultural until you
-
know what your baseline should be. Either way, the idea that it can't even be discussed is kinda nuts.
- 2 more replies
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.