zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. read_i+(OP)[view] [source] 2019-08-08 12:34:56
> Studies show otherwise

That’s a bold claim.

> the gut reaction of those who read that discussion also shows that at least some developers felt that way, if not in general, then at least in that particular case.

I can’t follow you here.

replies(1): >>pron+t7
2. pron+t7[view] [source] 2019-08-08 13:34:04
>>read_i+(OP)
> That’s a bold claim.

No, I think this is the consensus scholarly view.

replies(1): >>nailer+Y7
◧◩
3. nailer+Y7[view] [source] [discussion] 2019-08-08 13:37:09
>>pron+t7
Wait: read_if_gay_'s claim was:

> ...because if a man’s achievement is highlighted, the fact that a man did it isn’t highlighted, which isn’t exactly the case for women (apparently a woman in the team suffices for an achievement to be credited to a woman), making these two kinds of articles about fundamentally different things: “X was achieved” vs. “A woman achieved X”.

You dispute that claim, and say the consensus scholarly view is otherwise?

[go to top]