Re: libreplanet-discuss Digest, Vol 113, Issue 22

Re: libreplanet-discuss Digest, Vol 113, Issue 22

[Cinder Roxley]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1562 bytes --]


On September 18, 2019 at 5:38:58 AM,  Isaac David <isacdaavid@isacdaavid.info> wrote:

The latter isn't necessarily a consequence of the former, which you seem to imply. Evidence shows there's a negative correlation between the fairer a society is for women and the amount of women getting into STEM. This would be explained by biologicaly-rooted dimorphic interests that flourish the best under free conditions. _Most_ (cis) women would rather excel at other areas if given the opportunity, and that's fine. Men aren't discriminated against just because women dominate fields such as psychology and nursing.


It's a bare fact in psychology that _sex_ produces differences in domain-specific intelligences, even though general intelligence may be the same (at least for our species).
Utter nonsense given that it was women who pioneered computer programming. “Tedious” computing and calculating was seen as “woman’s work” for most of the 20th century. Software development was considered “soft work” and for women supposedly because men had "biologicaly-rooted dimorphic interests” in the higher paying “hard work” hardware engineering sector. There was no gender disparity in software until the 1980’s not coincidently around the same time that corporations realized proprietary software could generate massive profits for them. There were no "biologicaly-rooted dimorphic interests” in software development until it was a huge moneymaker, and then as per their modus operandi, became dominated by white American males.


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 1677 bytes --]

   On September 18, 2019 at 5:38:58 AM,  Isaac David
   <[1]isacdaavid@isacdaavid.info> wrote:

   The latter isn't necessarily a consequence of the former, which you
   seem to imply. Evidence shows there's a negative correlation between
   the fairer a society is for women and the amount of women getting into
   STEM. This would be explained by biologicaly-rooted dimorphic interests
   that flourish the best under free conditions. _Most_ (cis) women would
   rather excel at other areas if given the opportunity, and that's fine.
   Men aren't discriminated against just because women dominate fields
   such as psychology and nursing.

   It's a bare fact in psychology that _sex_ produces differences in
   domain-specific intelligences, even though general intelligence may be
   the same (at least for our species).

   Utter nonsense given that it was women who pioneered computer
   programming. “Tedious” computing and calculating was seen as “woman’s
   work” for most of the 20th century. Software development was considered
   “soft work” and for women supposedly because men had
   "biologicaly-rooted dimorphic interests” in the higher paying “hard
   work” hardware engineering sector. There was no gender disparity in
   software until the 1980’s not coincidently around the same time that
   corporations realized proprietary software could generate massive
   profits for them. There were no "biologicaly-rooted dimorphic
   interests” in software development until it was a huge moneymaker, and
   then as per their modus operandi, became dominated by white American
   males.

References

   1. mailto:isacdaavid@isacdaavid.info

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss