Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 29

Author Topic: Gender quotas  (Read 37382 times)

mainiac

  • Bay Watcher
  • Na vazeal kwah-kai
    • View Profile
Re: Gender quotas
« Reply #135 on: January 14, 2016, 06:06:57 pm »

I'd prefer someone called me a prick than weasel-word around it.

Maybe but I find that when I act like a prick people are very unappreciative of my candor.
Logged
Ancient Babylonian god of RAEG
--------------
[CAN_INTERNET]
[PREFSTRING:google]
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value"
« Last Edit: February 10, 1988, 03:27:23 pm by UR MOM »
mainiac is always a little sarcastic, at least.

Helgoland

  • Bay Watcher
  • No man is an island.
    • View Profile
Re: Gender quotas
« Reply #136 on: January 14, 2016, 06:25:56 pm »

Yeah, mainiac, you in particular are at your best right after someone whips you into grudgingly agreeing to keep your reader in mind. The conscious effort you make really shows! It's much better than people who are nice all the time, because one can always sense beneath the surface what you really wanted to post, making the plaintext much more visible.
Logged
The Bay12 postcard club
Arguably he's already a progressive, just one in the style of an enlightened Kaiser.
I'm going to do the smart thing here and disengage. This isn't a hill I paticularly care to die on.

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH
Re: Gender quotas
« Reply #137 on: January 14, 2016, 06:28:33 pm »

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

O spaghetti
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Truly truly Malaysiaaaa

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Trust me I'm a sociologist

Ironically I reckon because Universities are so oversaturated and their quality so low, more men being pushed out of higher education and into immediately seeking a job puts them ahead of women leaving a Uni with a degree but no experience
Only exception would be the STEM subjects where you have to be qualified via a Uni, where its domd by men on that career path

Quote
The Guardian UK 300, the largest ever overview of UK employers and their potential graduate recruits, suggests that while the professional ambitions of male and female graduates are converging, women still appear to have significantly different priorities. "The survey confirms and confounds prejudices simultaneously," says Steve James of TargetJobs, which carried out the research. "Men show a bias towards science and IT-based professions, whereas women are much more into the public sector, which surprised me."
Some 17,000 graduates were asked to name the companies they would most like to work for. Although the big beasts, such as PricewaterhouseCoopers, Deloitte and GlaxoSmithKline, rank high on both wishlists, TeachFirst, the charity that fast-tracks top graduates into the classrooms of underperforming schools, was the second choice of women, whereas it trailed at number 33 for men.
In third place for women was the NHS Graduate Scheme, rated 34th by men. The women questioned also revealed a pronounced social conscience – a fifth of their named employers are charities; good works make up only 5% of male ambitions. The obvious conclusion is that stereotypes are resistant to progress. Despite three years of academic rigour, women are still guided by the nurturing instinct whereas men pursue big bucks.
GMG the bleach for me
I can never understand why making everyone the same has been so high on the list of progressive agendas, like someone switched the definitions of equality with conformity along the line, that everyone must be the same person
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Behavioural collapse can't happen faster

Some blokes go for some high stress, some high pay, some individualist careers, or some industrious, some low pay, some hard labour and then also some kill someselves in higher numbers because I man I alone I is Island e.t.c.

Yeah, mainiac, you in particular are at your best right after someone whips you into grudgingly agreeing to keep your reader in mind.
That's some Orwellian shit right there

The conscious effort you make really shows!
Fear is the mind killer

It's much better than people who are nice all the time, because one can always sense beneath the surface what you really wanted to post, making the plaintext much more visible.
How is being vaguer clearer, how the someone do you sense someone's intent if they are more obscuring, are we going backwards in time to go forwards in time, how do you make plaintext visible by redacting it?

mainiac

  • Bay Watcher
  • Na vazeal kwah-kai
    • View Profile
Re: Gender quotas
« Reply #138 on: January 14, 2016, 06:46:04 pm »

Yeah, mainiac, you in particular are at your best right after someone whips you into grudgingly agreeing to keep your reader in mind. The conscious effort you make really shows! It's much better than people who are nice all the time, because one can always sense beneath the surface what you really wanted to post, making the plaintext much more visible.

It's like when you go to a bear baiting the day after he mauled someone.  You have a palpable excitement that normally isn't there.
Logged
Ancient Babylonian god of RAEG
--------------
[CAN_INTERNET]
[PREFSTRING:google]
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value"
« Last Edit: February 10, 1988, 03:27:23 pm by UR MOM »
mainiac is always a little sarcastic, at least.

RedKing

  • Bay Watcher
  • hoo hoo motherfucker
    • View Profile
Re: Gender quotas
« Reply #139 on: January 14, 2016, 06:52:53 pm »

LW is like the Dr. Kevorkian of heated threads.
Logged

Remember, knowledge is power. The power to make other people feel stupid.
Quote from: Neil DeGrasse Tyson
Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you.

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH
Re: Gender quotas
« Reply #140 on: January 14, 2016, 08:05:40 pm »

LW is like the Dr. Kevorkian of heated threads.
You give me too much credit, you guys kill threads and report people with or without me; just look at rip prog thred, 150 posts without LW and it turned into semantic bickering, concern trolling and a hurricane shit-storm. That is the world without LW, the monsterous cushion someone lurking within someonekind's mind. When I arrived like a muffled checki brecki in the distance it was already doomed, shame that because I actually put effort into them posts and they didn't even live long enough to be shatpost on by you someones xD

RedKing

  • Bay Watcher
  • hoo hoo motherfucker
    • View Profile
Re: Gender quotas
« Reply #141 on: January 14, 2016, 08:15:33 pm »

I'm not saying you kill threads, I'm saying you come in to threads that are already on life support and put them out of their misery, smothering it in a warm comfortable blanket of ayyy lmao. It's a public service, really.
Logged

Remember, knowledge is power. The power to make other people feel stupid.
Quote from: Neil DeGrasse Tyson
Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you.

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH
Re: Gender quotas
« Reply #142 on: January 14, 2016, 08:21:46 pm »

I'm not saying you kill threads, I'm saying you come in to threads that are already on life support and put them out of their misery, smothering it in a warm comfortable blanket of ayyy lmao. It's a public service, really.
How absolutely horrifying, what is that, skatamethanasia? Shitpostdeath? I didn't choose this life, I wish LSP were still here to do that for me

Antioch

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Gender quotas
« Reply #143 on: January 14, 2016, 08:32:49 pm »

What part of:

Just drop the issue and get back on topic.

Do you not understand.

I am so sick and tired of discussions being derailed for no reason.

I find this topic, and many previous "controversial" ones that have been locked interesting and I refuse to let it get locked because of people bickering over nothing.

If you want to discuss who is ruining what make your own thread for it or discuss it by pm



derailment ends NOW, or I will view anyone who is making further accusatory posts as the sole continuing perpetrator and discuss their conduct with Toady.


You will NOT reply to this post.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2016, 08:56:54 am by Antioch »
Logged
You finish ripping the human corpse of Sigmund into pieces.
This raw flesh tastes delicious!

Reelya

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Gender quotas
« Reply #144 on: January 14, 2016, 08:33:10 pm »

Actually, the sheer difference in the number of women at college compared to men could explain some differences. If it's correct that 2/3 Americans attend college, and it's 60% women there, that is 80% of the female population and 53% of the male population at college in any one college-aged cohort.

Just assuming complete gender-equality of all talents, and a normal distribution of talent within each gender, the "top 50%" of one gender is clearly better, in terms of averages, than the "top 80%" of the other gender. So, comparing the bulk of male college students to female college students might not be as unbiased as we think: you'd expect the smaller cohort to be more selective, and perform better.

Some people make a big deal out of the fact that many degrees done by women aren't very rigorous academically. But when you have 80% of a target population doing degrees, it's physically impossible to have them all doing rocket science. There's just a big bunch of dummies in there to put it bluntly, and a lot of them will have to study easy shit. The equivalent dummies on the male side just aren't going to college in the first place. In other words, women are equally capable as men, but the female college population just represents such a large chunk of the female population that they're hitting rock bottom with ability. How dumb do you think someone at the 20th percentile from the bottom is compared to someone at the 50th percentile?

And then you have the non-college community. Conversely to the college population, that represents the "bottom 50% of men" and the "bottom 20% of women". Now, clearly, the "bottom 20%" of one gender is going to be objectively much more shit than the "bottom 50%" of the other gender, so this could go partways to explaining the deficit between non-college educated men and women's wages. The number of men who don't go to college is 2.5 times as large as the number of women who don't, and includes more people of average ability, who would be doing degrees if they'd been women.
« Last Edit: January 14, 2016, 08:44:13 pm by Reelya »
Logged

Antioch

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Gender quotas
« Reply #145 on: January 14, 2016, 08:48:50 pm »

In general I think the entire field is one where causation is very hard to make up out of correlation.

I wonder what would happen with the results if you were to check them with personality (yes I do think men and women on average have differences in their personalities) to see if men and women with similar personality traits also show an income disparity.
Logged
You finish ripping the human corpse of Sigmund into pieces.
This raw flesh tastes delicious!

jaked122

  • Bay Watcher
  • [PREFSTRING:Lurker tendancies]
    • View Profile
Re: Gender quotas
« Reply #146 on: January 14, 2016, 09:32:40 pm »

In general I think the entire field is one where causation is very hard to make up out of correlation.

I wonder what would happen with the results if you were to check them with personality (yes I do think men and women on average have differences in their personalities) to see if men and women with similar personality traits also show an income disparity.


I've been trying to not post anything here(I think), but this is more or less what I believe.


I think that there are causative factors in the selection of certain majors over others that are gender based. I don't think we really understand what those issues are, so trying to treat them is like giving Tylenol to someone with Ebola. It's not going to fix them, it might not even make them feel better, but it sure as hell won't fix it.


If it is because these majors are "dominated"(in a negative way other than being filled proportionally by men), then we need to work with the men to encourage inclusive behavior, if not, then we need to find out what the causes are, and then determine if fixing them is worth it. What in our society causes gender roles, and what else is built on top of them? If we remove the gender roles, we must take care to fix the institutions (here I mean behaviors, social trends, etc) that have some functionality that is based upon the gender roles, otherwise our society might degrade somewhat.


That's not to say that we should not try to make a society which is gender-blind, but that we must take care in dismantling the things that are gender based so that we don't end up with unforeseen consequences.


Not that it may be such that a course of action with limited repercussions exists, but we should try and find it. Strive for it.


So what causes are there for there being less women proportionally going into tech fields? I am able to inform you that there are not equal admissions in Computer Science, which is a bit odd, but I've heard from friends majoring in math that their major has even fewer women? What is it about these fields that makes these fields less attractive to women?


Or is the attractiveness of the field not even the issue?


Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Gatleos

  • Bay Watcher
  • Mournhold... City of Light... City of MAGIC!
    • View Profile
    • Someone Sig This
Re: Gender quotas
« Reply #147 on: January 14, 2016, 10:21:42 pm »

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

But yeah, I agree that causation is both the most important bit of information here, and the hardest to conclusively prove. It might be difficult to tell if any progress is being made at all. What if our society reaches a point in the future where the education system and job market are completely gender-blind? Would anybody be able to tell? What if a field like computer science ends up leveling out at a 70/30 ratio between men and women, and this actually represents the average interests of men and women? That situation might be indistinguishable from one where the 70/30 ratio is due to some kind of discrimination.
Logged
Think of it like Sim City, except with rival mayors that seek to destroy your citizens by arming legions of homeless people and sending them to attack you.
Quote from: Moonshadow101
it would be funny to see babies spontaneously combust
Gat HQ (Sigtext)
++U+U++ // ,.,.@UUUUUUUU

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH
Re: Gender quotas
« Reply #148 on: January 14, 2016, 10:25:55 pm »

Actually, the sheer difference in the number of women at college compared to men could explain some differences. If it's correct that 2/3 Americans attend college, and it's 60% women there, that is 80% of the female population and 53% of the male population at college in any one college-aged cohort.

Just assuming complete gender-equality of all talents, and a normal distribution of talent within each gender, the "top 50%" of one gender is clearly better, in terms of averages, than the "top 80%" of the other gender. So, comparing the bulk of male college students to female college students might not be as unbiased as we think: you'd expect the smaller cohort to be more selective, and perform better.

Some people make a big deal out of the fact that many degrees done by women aren't very rigorous academically. But when you have 80% of a target population doing degrees, it's physically impossible to have them all doing rocket science. There's just a big bunch of dummies in there to put it bluntly, and a lot of them will have to study easy shit. The equivalent dummies on the male side just aren't going to college in the first place. In other words, women are equally capable as men, but the female college population just represents such a large chunk of the female population that they're hitting rock bottom with ability. How dumb do you think someone at the 20th percentile from the bottom is compared to someone at the 50th percentile?
Gonna borrow the wigglary and say some as capable as some, we wouldn't characterize all men as capable as all men
And looking at variability, there's more variability in men than women, less average men and more on the low or high end. The articles I linked earlier brought this up, where in Malaysia or Britain there's more men in prison, more men in high stations, more men taking employable degrees, more men dropping out e.t.c.

And then you have the non-college community. Conversely to the college population, that represents the "bottom 50% of men" and the "bottom 20% of women". Now, clearly, the "bottom 20%" of one gender is going to be objectively much more shit than the "bottom 50%" of the other gender, so this could go partways to explaining the deficit between non-college educated men and women's wages. The number of men who don't go to college is 2.5 times as large as the number of women who don't, and includes more people of average ability, who would be doing degrees if they'd been women.
Point I'm making with all these talks of wages and shit is that if you don't go for some career path that requires your degree (STEM and a few others, like those damn agronomists) you'd have been better off joining your career at a young age and getting experience in it
I should add as well not all STEM subjects are equal, I found out early in my life if I wanted to do Biology and make a living doing it I'd have better chances doing anything but Biology and hiring impoverished Biology grads to do it for me
Even in humanities there's a hierarchy, you know like how they say if you want to do Journalism don't take a Journalism degree, take English, or if you want to take sociology, don't
What can I do with my degree?
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Some of these require no higher education qualifications and just require talent and perseverance (the latter being far more crucial - the talented and lazy are smashed by the untalented and diligent), and some of them can go far (dear gods if you managed to rise up in one of the big charities you make scandalous amounts of money) but most of them are £20k band and may hover to around £34k band, enough to live by and raise maybe two kids, send one off to a good school, but your bank's always going to be hard pressed and you'll have to look for jobs elsewhere eventually or else settle for the same wage versus inflation

The result you'd end up with is more men dropping out of higher education to immediately pursue a trades job, some job like brokerage, or the armed forces, where long term practice and early adoption is a definite prerequisite to rising in the ranks, or more pursuing shit like STEM, where if they're not siphoned off by med people, have wide employment prospects with high salaries and in some cases, also high advancement

Really I don't like including med and nursing because they're odd ones, they never get paid enough for their work considering their line of work literally consumes your life, at least in the UK. 2 years a level, 5 years med school, 2 years foundation, 8 years to a consultant and 20 years a consultant to reach the highest pay grade of £100k annual, if you're that hard working and intelligent and you're doing it for the money you could've done anything else. Also our nurses vary on pay, I know a nurse who prides herself on earning more than her doctor peers because she also became a manager for clinical trials, but for the most part the majority plateau on around £34-50k, so earn more than junior doctors but unless they've spent a long career (especially after cuts) only the top brass will make it to the £100k mark, compare this to say going to work for some north sea gas firm diving in their rigs; you might die, become infertile or develop some other health condition and so on but you can earn £300k a year right off the bat, or joining the armed services from the start and having accommodation/food/healthcare sorted whilst you learn skills that make you employable when you leave (also high paid ones factoring in as well reduced expenses, though again you might die). I suppose less extreme and less risky are engineering degrees, economic degrees and so on where the risk of dying is pretty much tied to how much you eat, as you'll stand a good chance of leaving with a £23k-£50k job with lots of chances of future advancement (where on the high end the money is ridiculous)

Heck, just look at autism. Autism is linked with fantastic skill in fields of science, engineering, music, drawing and painting, albeit at the cost of poor communication skills which fucks you out of managing and business pretty quick. And there's a gender difference in autism ranging from 2:1 to 16:1 against men. They also bring up that girls may be more severely impaired by autism when they have it, but that just might be a result of under-diagnosis so no conclusion there.
Quote
Francesca Happé of King's College, London, is one of them. As she observes, obsessional interests and repetitive behaviours would allow someone to practice, albeit inadvertently, whichever skill they were obsessed by. Malcolm Gladwell, in a book called “Outliers” which collated research done on outstanding people, suggested that anyone could become an expert in anything by practising for 10,000 hours. It would not be hard for an autistic individual to clock up that level of practice for the sort of skills, such as mathematical puzzles, that many neurotypicals would rapidly give up on.
Attention to detail, practice makes perfect e.t.c.

And the most obvious, bleedingly obvious thing is hormones, influencing people's behaviours in ways that would influence their future life choices in response to the environment. Experiments where they give women testosterone and see what happens are hilarious and educational and more should be done.

But yeah, I agree that causation is both the most important bit of information here, and the hardest to conclusively prove. It might be difficult to tell if any progress is being made at all. What if our society reaches a point in the future where the education system and job market are completely gender-blind? Would anybody be able to tell? What if a field like computer science ends up leveling out at a 70/30 ratio between men and women, and this actually represents the average interests of men and women? That situation might be indistinguishable from one where the 70/30 ratio is due to some kind of discrimination.
SWEDES

jaked122

  • Bay Watcher
  • [PREFSTRING:Lurker tendancies]
    • View Profile
Re: Gender quotas
« Reply #149 on: January 14, 2016, 10:34:39 pm »

--snip-
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

But yeah, I agree that causation is both the most important bit of information here, and the hardest to conclusively prove. It might be difficult to tell if any progress is being made at all. What if our society reaches a point in the future where the education system and job market are completely gender-blind? Would anybody be able to tell? What if a field like computer science ends up leveling out at a 70/30 ratio between men and women, and this actually represents the average interests of men and women? That situation might be indistinguishable from one where the 70/30 ratio is due to some kind of discrimination.

Precisely, if we forced a certain percentage of women into these majors to "even them out", what would that result in? A horrible mix of frustration at the system that placed them there, maybe a few of them would find they preferred it, but would that justify forcing them?

Ultimately quotas do the same in reverse. That's what I think. If I owned a business and I had not seen any women qualified applying, I would be frustrated at these measures, but if I had the applications of women who are as qualified as the next best man, or better qualified if you prefer, then it would not affect me as a business owner.

I think I may have gone a bit off track, but what I mean to say is that causation is the most important point here. If there are differences between the psychologies of men and women and these differences affect which major they choose or which field they enter, it is in conflict with their very natures to force them where they do not wish to go. Natures are often reinforced by environment, but they are rarely changed by them.

This graphic is about phenotypic plasticity, but if you generalize phenotype to psychology, the we must quantify certain psychological aspects as plastic to various degrees or nonplastic. This may vary by individual, I don't know, but I think it might be applicable here.
Spoiler: phenotype (click to show/hide)

Everyone varies, where do they vary though? Which pieces of their psychology are set in stone, and which change as the wind?

If I'm a bit indelicate in this part, I'm a bit inebriated, so please don't take this as a flaming attack on your beliefs, should they be applicable here.
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 29