Or, you know, leave everyone to their own devices, and let people choose the fields that engage them.
Males and females are not equal, in metabolism, strength, ability, or anything else. They have equal rights, but this does not mean that they deserve equal representation in all fields. Those with the highest merit deserve representation. Trying to fight this simple fact is the height of folly.
While it's true that women and men aren't the same, I think that there are good reasons to believe the level of inequality we have now is not due solely to natural inclination. This video of Neil deGrasse Tyson on minorities and science is apropos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7ihNLEDiuM
> When female scientists talked to other female scientists, they sounded perfectly competent. But when they talked to male colleagues, Mehl and Schmader found that they sounded less competent.
Could it be that they, comparatively, are?
Nah. That would make too much sense.
Let's blame it on the all-powerful patriarchy, which we can't even prove to exist.
Yes, and the researchers aren't even considering the possibility that these women sound incompetent when talking to men, because they actually, comparatively, are.
They discount the most obvious explanation without even testing for it, and expect to be taken seriously. What a joke.
I was responding to your post: Yes, and the researchers aren't even considering the possibility that these women sound incompetent when talking to men, because they actually, comparatively, are. The researchers were investigating how much of the perceived competence difference was real and how much was a difference in perception only. So they controlled for actual differences, and found a large difference in the way equally-competent men and women are perceived.
But aside from that, wouldn't you like to get the women are are actually good at math and science to get into STEM fields, even if they are a minority? I think that's a question we can actually do something about, even if we can't change how good women are at science. http://www.macleans.ca/general/girls-good-at-math-half-as-li... I'd like to encourage good female programmers, however many of them there are, to go into programming jobs.
You answered a question about comparative scientist competence (which is highly objective, because it's judged on the basis of peer review of published work) with stats about elementary school grades handed out by teachers (which is highly subjective, because it's a virtually unchecked power, almost never judged by any outside auditor), not to mention the difference in age, task, environment -- basically every single criterion is different. It's not a question of liking anything. You're simply trying to move goalposts.
Judging by the various forms of intellectual dishonesty you've attempted thus far, I would gladly do my utmost to prevent anyone the least bit like you from finding employment anywhere near me for as long as I live.
This thread started with drz saying we should leave everyone to their own devices, and "those with highest merit deserve representation". I agree that this should be happening, but I disagree that it is happening. drz then claimed that you can't dictate interest. I disagreed. drz claimed that only taking and passing CS courses can "show interest". This is obviously false; if ever a woman was interested but then discriminated against, she might not pass the CS course. I submitted an article on stereotype threat, which is one reason that competent women might not succeed in class or industry. I think drz took this to mean that I thought women were, on average, as competent as men. I admit to getting confused at that last change in topic since I don't think it's relevant or interesting. No one in the original article, or anyone else in this conversation, has made that claim.
Programming is abstract reasoning. Apart from some syntax memorization, there's nothing more to it. Even design patterns are optional, and can be independently discovered.
Or, you know, leave everyone to their own devices, and let people choose the fields that engage them.
blacks and whites are not equal, in metabolism, strength, ability, or anything else. They have equal rights, but this does not mean that they deserve equal representation in all fields. Those with the highest merit deserve representation. Trying to fight this simple fact is the height of folly.
Males and females are not equal, in metabolism, strength, ability, or anything else. They have equal rights, but this does not mean that they deserve equal representation in all fields. Those with the highest merit deserve representation. Trying to fight this simple fact is the height of folly.