The neat thing about this form of discrimination is that you can claim to be fixing "the pipeline" all you want and you can still maintain the discrimination, because the leak is after the pipeline. The dominant group isn't threatened by competition if they fund efforts to increase the number of underrepresented groups in grade school or college STEM education, as long as those college graduates aren't later competing for senior jobs on a level playing field.
https://aqicn.org/city/shanghai/
http://aqicn.org/city/california/san-francisco/san-francisco...
Keep in mind it’s also night in china ATM while it is noon in SF.
Shanghai is much worse than SF on average. It dips into the red zone more often, retreating when it rains. Shanghai is much better than the rest of china barring Shenzhen, Xiamen, and maybe Kunming, but it would still come across to an American visitor as smoggier than they were used to.
But what is their incentive to "maintain" discrimination. Even under a charitable interpretation, it seems to imply there is a group at the top which actively hates women and wants to suppress their influence? Maybe there is, Google is pretty scary and is in bed with the government https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D00006782..., but I think it would be good to dissect that statement to see what it points to.
Example: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/02/us/international-enrollme...
For more digestible information look around their website.
I guess it is my turn: What debunking are you talking about besides the more extremist men's rights advocates (which are different from the moderates that have very valid concerns)? "Implicit bias" is indeed only the start of a discussion, as one needs to consider its predictive value in non-test conditions, but if you are sincerely interested in pursuing this conversation, the website above is a good starting point.
Lots of bundling the "others" into one bin/box. If a liberal expresses opposition for DACA, then it is automatically assumed that they are a right leaning person, and several related policy attributes are attached to the person.
Often, simply being undecided and questioning a particular stance leads to the same effect.
I've seen it on HN: A general lack of tolerance for certain viewpoints, with perfectly valid questions resulting in accusations. Unfortunately, more often than I would like. Easy examples would be a lot of threads that involve Trump.
BTW, case in point is this other comment:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16127579
Just because the two are well correlated in the US does not make them the same, and if you come from abroad, you will find many things taken as a given in the US (like the conflation of conservatism with religion, or right leaning tendencies with conservatism) that will confuse you. I suspect their experience in SV has been that when they try to bring it up, they get labeled.
I'm guessing Europe has a lot of radically right wing folks who like their national health care just fine. Imagine they move to a very Republican part of the US, and ask "what's wrong with universal healthcare?" and then are labeled as being liberal. Now do that in reverse in SV.
If you've lived a lot in the rest of the world, you will probably easily find lots of examples where liberals are not acting according to their principles, and the same for conservatives. So when someone tries to be what they think is a "real" liberal (which may imply adopting stances that the "other" side is in favor of), then they'll feel unwelcome.
Some day I'll probably write a more thought-out piece on this. The above is just rambling.
This was a discussion a month ago. I'm mostly basing my opinion on it.
i.e. they arguee that social justice become the new status quo holder and that become the new conservative point of view, which can't change for better or worse. the old conservatives want change for the worse. I personally think they have a point in this article (about preventing changes for better too) but the reasoning is dumb and falls in the same paradoxal fallacies as the ones they acuse the old-liberals-turned-conservatives.
https://youtu.be/eieVE-xFXuo?t=2m50s
He also makes the argument that the issue isn't why there aren't more women in these jobs, but why are there so many men insane enough to spend 80 hrs a week doing them? Money != Happiness.
- the John/Jennifer study http://www.yalescientific.org/2013/02/john-vs-jennifer-a-bat...
- the chairs study http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.465...
- the police shooting armed people in VR study http://www.washington.edu/news/2003/07/08/blacks-more-likely...
- the general idea of "stereotype threat" (which becomes unrelated, not as much of an offshoot)
I am not expecting you to spend the time to vet every single of those links (and admittedly I used google, so some of the links might be overly editorialized), however I do believe these are good resources to consider for inclusion in your intellectual toolkit when you have the time.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=392347
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=658691
It's how HN has always worked, and in my opinion needs to. A site that cares about discussion quality needs those white blood cells.
"he country as a whole does not experience large-scale human capital flight as compared with other countries, with an emigration rate of only 0.7 per 1,000 educated people,[199] but it is often the destination of skilled workers migrating from elsewhere in the world.[200]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_capital_flight#United_St...
> The notion that the modern Chinese person is racist towards the Japanese is pretty laughable, for example.
It's hard to see how anyone with any familiarity with China who does not themselves hate Japanese would laugh at this.
Not only is there widespread hatred of Japan (including Japanese people whose parents weren't even born during WWII), but it's fanned by the government[1]. Anti-Japanese specials run on TV during national week and over 200 anti-Japanese films are produced in China every year. In some cases anti-Japanese films are censored for being too moderate. A well known example is the 2000s war film, Devils at the Doorstep, which was nationally banned for including a scene where one Japanese soldier was friendly with Chinese villagers.
Despite your implication that modern China suffers less from this, surveys have shown that anti-Japanese sentiment in China is higher among the current generation than among the Chinese who lived through the war occupation. [2]
Personal anecdote is the weakest form of argument in this kind of debate, but I'll also add that while living on the mainland, I've personally received criticism simply for having befriended several Japanese students during my uni days.
1) https://journals.sub.uni-hamburg.de/giga/jcca/article/view/1...
2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Japanese_sentiment_in_Chi...
I'll give you some real answers. Note the are plenty of exceptions to what I'm about to say, but the views are very commonly held. Also note, in this post generally, and when I say 'Chinese' or 'Chinese community' I'm specifically referring to people who grew up in mainland China and moved to other countries as adults for study/work, not to children of people of Chinese descent who grew up in another country. Anyway, on to the issues:
1) Gay rights/issues - although not likely to be discriminatory to gays they know personally, being gay is generally viewed by the Chinese as a degenerate lifestyle choice and/or mental illness. Not to mention thinking that it spits on the graves of generations of their ancestors (because it has the high potential to end family lines). For a representative and recent (but non US) example, Australia recently held a referendum on whether to legalise gay marriage. The Chinese community was one of the strongest opposing voices to this. There is a common view that general acceptance of the gay community could teach/persuade their children to be gay, which is something none of them want. [0]
2) Trans rights/issues. Take the Chinese community's stance on gay rights/issues and multiply it by 10. That's how they feel on trans issues. Again with a recent Australian example, there is program called 'safe schools' that aims "to create an inclusive and safe environment for their school community, including for LGBTI students, families and teachers". The Chinese community is also vociferously opposed to this, believing (rightly or wrongly) that it is teaching their children to be gay/trans. [1]
3) Traditional gender roles. Chinese are very proud to announce that 'woman hold up half the sky' and that there is equally between men and women. It's a strongly held belief, because they compare things to how they were a hundred years ago when woman had bound feet, couldn't go to school, and weren't allowed outside without a male chaperone, and so yes things are definitely more equal now. Patriarchal Confucianism still has a strong influence on society however and women are generally still expected to do most of the cooking, cleaning and child-rearing in a household (unless the wife is from Shanghai, and then her husband is probably going to be doing all of it), and despite it being illegal for doctors to tell prospective parents the sex of their unborn child, there is still plenty of selective abortion that happens thanks to a cultural preference for males combined with an only recently loosened one child policy. [2]
That's three to start it off - I could go on, but this post is already getting long enough. In short, it's a fair assessment to say that the overseas Chinese community is generally socially conservative (I would also say they are generally fiscally conservative also).
0: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-16/chinese-community-expr...
1: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-23/safe-schools-mp-lodges...
2: http://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/2119281/...