zlacker

[parent] [thread] 1 comments
1. drewbu+(OP)[view] [source] 2018-02-15 13:04:07
Fwiw: I think you're being down voted because the citations you mention have all become a part of the controversy rather than being external evidence. Each of the scientists you mentioned above have at times before this controversy shown a willingness to say things specifically to get limelight.

In culture war topics, the only real citations that can count are people above reproach, or people who are unknown but experts in their fields, which is a fine needle to thread. Also raw data, but few of us here would be qualified to understand the raw data.

replies(1): >>drewbu+q2
2. drewbu+q2[view] [source] 2018-02-15 13:26:39
>>drewbu+(OP)
>[deleted]

I was mostly poking my head in to answer the question of why you're being down voted, IMO. I'm on the opposite side of your understanding of this research based on a cursory glance (nothing says 'unbiased' like including the phrase 'feminist campaigners' in the conclusion of a scientific publication).

This week's Weeds podcast has some interesting alternative theories based on the results from various Scandinavian countries where they legislated some gender equality stuff and it neither worked out as well as people on the left would like, nor as much of a disaster as people on the right predicted.

Reply to a reply, so I'm out, back to what I'm actually good at, building stuff for other humans to use.

[go to top]