CSTA: Google Surveying Educators On Unconscious Biases of Students, Parents 173
theodp writes: According to a Computer Science Teachers Association tweet, Google is reportedly asking educators to assess the unconscious bias of students and their parents for the search giant. "We are in the early stages of learning how unconscious bias plays out in schools, and who would benefit most from bias busting materials," begins the linked-to 5-page Google Form, which sports a ub-edu@google.com email address, but lists no contact name. "This survey should take 15 minutes to complete, and your responses are confidential, meaning that your feedback will not be attributed to you and the data will only be used in aggregate form." The form asks educators to "list the names of organizations, tools, and resources that you have used to combat unconscious bias," which is defined as "the attitudes or stereotypes that affect our understanding, actions, and decisions in an unconscious manner." A sample question: "Who do you think would benefit most from unconscious bias training at your school (or program)? Rank the following people in order (1=would most benefit to 5=would benefit least) training: Student, Parent (or guardian), Teacher (or educator), Guidance counselor, Principal." Google deflected criticism for its lack of women techies in the past by blaming parents' unconscious biases for not steering their girls to study computer science, suggesting an intervention was needed. "Outreach programs," advised Google, "should include a parent education component, so that parents learn how to actively encourage their daughters."
Please Stop. Enough. (Score:5, Insightful)
There is nothing in western society stopping women from pursuing technical careers except women themselves. They are given every possible advantage.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
You mean like wearing the wrong shirt or telling the wrong joke?
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Say it LOUD !
Men and women are different and like doing different things, and the feminazi thought police cannot change that.
Haven't you guys see the *TRUE* picture yet? (Score:2, Insightful)
Folks, it is time you guys see beyond what is shown on the screen
This "female have been discouraged from STEM" thing is just a decoy
The power that be is using it to push for something MUCH MORE HEINOUS - total mind control
First of all I need to stress that I am not good in explaining thing, but please do allow me to try ...
The 'unconscious bias' thing is something very worrisome --- it is a tool for TPTB to average out all the thought pattern of the masses
You see, first they came up with 'hate speec
Re:Haven't you guys see the *TRUE* picture yet? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
I was with you up until "total mind control."
It is a conspiracy. A C-O-N...spiracy, but not mind control. Just that Zuck and Billy and pals are tired of having to pay, ugh, middle class American wages to fucking software developer plebeians when they could be raking in more sweet sweet billions. So all the "women in STEM!" "teach all kids teh codez!" crap is designed to 1) get more H1-Bs now to drive down wages and 2) get more coders later to drive down wages.
"Learn to code" is this generation's version of
Re: (Score:2)
My first tech job was as a support tech for DSL, when I applied there were fewer candidates than positions and the interviewers were asking me if I knew anyone else that went to my school looking for a job. The vo-tech and state university here have been pumping out computer related degrees like an assembly line since I went to school and now when I see people interviewing for new positions there are hundreds of associated degrees and dozens of bachelors lining up.
If you told me their goal was to flood the
Re: (Score:2)
So your solution is NOT to "learn to code" and start with the burger flipping job right away? Any other idea where to get a "sweet 32k/year gig" without college?
Doesn't change anything about you being spot-on right.
But I wish I could give my kids some more reliable career advice than "Drop out of school and become the next Mark Zuckerberg". Well, I know the American Dream where anyone can make it from rags to riches with hard work, but so could anyone get struck by lightning or anyone could win the lottery.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't recall offering a solution.
But I would say just going straight programmer is a bad choice. Specialize in something else, but also learn to code.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you simply not believe women when they talk about gender related harassment or discrimination?
Re: (Score:2)
I love slashdot sometimes:
Article: link to a reasonably detailed study on a nuanced topic.
AC: you're wrong!!! +5 insightful
Re: (Score:2)
Go to a cooking expo. Guess what you're going to see?
You're a prime example of political correctness gone to far. I like sexy woman. I find them attractive. By the very definition I'm sure that I'm sexist.
Recently, a cosmetics company stepped in as a big sponsor for a worldwide robotics competition. Some of the competitors complained because "makeup objectifies women - the very thing
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
This right here.
Rather than concluding that the parents are screwing up, we should conclude that girls and boys are different and there is nothing wrong with an unequal number of men and women in particular jobs.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Yeah, blame the parents (Score:4, Insightful)
Instead, I have concluded that the only reason this is a problem for people is because it's a desk job with more men than women.
No one is researching the bias leading to medical schools with 90% women.
No one is researching the bias leading to 99% male construction workers, or garbage men.
That's the reason for my disdain for these people.
They don't care about equality. They care about being seen to care about equality.
Re: (Score:2)
And thus I conclude, that t
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Yeah, blame the parents (Score:5, Informative)
No one is researching the bias leading to medical schools with 90% women.
Actually there are people researching that. Lack of male nurses is a problem. The American Assembly for Men in Nursing offers support and scholarships in the US, for example.
No one is researching the bias leading to 99% male construction workers, or garbage men.
I spent five seconds searching for this on Google and it turns out that actually there is plenty of research and academic discourse on this subject, as well as newspaper articles and the like:
http://www.arcom.ac.uk/-docs/p... [arcom.ac.uk]
http://www.academia.edu/634834... [academia.edu]
http://www.equalityhumanrights... [equalityhumanrights.com]
http://www.theguardian.com/sus... [theguardian.com]
http://www.theguardian.com/sus... [theguardian.com]
People do care, you are just too lazy to even type a few words into Google.
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently a woman thinks you're wrong. So wrong she started a company creating a working clothes line for women [covergallsworkwear.com]. Specifically, she worked in the mining industry and was forced to put on the standard safety equipment. Which works great for men, but not so much for women (notably, using the facilities requires taking it all off).
So the fact she's able to create a clothing line for working women and build a company out of
Re:Yeah, blame the parents (Score:4, Insightful)
What is obvious to a discerning person, is that Google is engaged in a social engineering campaign, not terribly dissimilar to the campaign waged by Kellogs in the late 1800's and early 1900's. http://mentalfloss.com/article... [mentalfloss.com]
You say, ". . . assumption that their differences are significant to influence . . ." And, I say that you are being judgemental and subjective. When 80% of a group of people tell you that they are not interested in something, THAT IS SIGNIFICANT! It's alright for you, and Google, to try to understand WHY that group of people are uninterested in $activity. It is NOT acceptable for you and Google (or Kelogg's) to try to force changes in those people.
Unproven assumption? How about empirical data?
Historically, males have been the risk takers, and females have by choice taken fewer risks. Guys do outrageous shit, and girls seldom do anything terribly outrageous. That's the way it is.
I say, "Fuck off, Google!"
All of that said - if there are any of you who overtly or covertly DISCOURAGE girls/women from working in STEM careers, you can fuck off right along with Google and company. Freedom. Freedom is all about doing whatever the hell you WANT TO DO!
Re: (Score:2)
Historically, males have been the risk takers, and females have by choice taken fewer risks. Guys do outrageous shit, and girls seldom do anything terribly outrageous.
Pursuing a career in a field that has high demand and better than average pay is neither risky nor outrageous.
When your 'facts'* have nothing to do with what you're arguing for, you should probably step back and reconsider whether your position makes any sense or not.
*scare quotes because the so-called facts presented are gender stereotypes enforced by society which are being held up as evidence that those stereotypes must be natural.
Re: (Score:2)
"Pursuing a career in a field that has high demand and better than average pay is neither risky nor outrageous."
Oh, yeah. Now - where is this demand that you speak of? How do you spell "H1B" and "illegal alien"? The education department is busy dumbing down the population, and here you are proposing that STEM workers are in high demand.
And, all the while, I'm still bitching that all the SJW's are busy with their social engineering agenda. One more time, JUST LET THE GIRLS DO WHATEVER THE HELL THEY WANT
Re: (Score:2)
Why can't she decide for herself?
Let's look at a recent survey [businesswire.com]:
* More than half of girls (53 percent) ages 16 to 24 feel they lacked the confidence to do whatever they wanted to do after puberty.
* Almost all girls (89 percent) feel there is pressure to conform to the way they're supposed to feel and act.
* Sixty percent of girls believe that society's expectations have a negative impact on their life.
* Girls are almost twice as likely as boys to say they did not feel comfortable doing an activity in school because of their gender.
Why can't
Re: (Score:2)
One thing about the status quo - it doesn't stay quo for long. Do you have ANY idea how much society has changed in the past few decades? Even in the past fifteen years, with our current "war on terra"?
Supposing that I gave you the benefit of the doubt, and agreed that women are held down against their will - WTF gives a corporation the right to start a social engineering campaign like this? Social change should be a grass roots thing, not something imposed by a corporation. If social change isn't grass
Re: (Score:2)
Translation: The status quo doesn't stay the status quo for long, but here's all the reasons why I think it should!
Re: (Score:3)
Uhhh, no, that's your biased translation.
Let me state this as bluntly as possible. I support women, not Google. Google has no business interfering in social issues, whether those issues are the legalization of pot, gay rights, or women's issues. Liberal minded Google has no more right to do so, than any of the more conservative minded oil companies. It pisses me off that rich people can throw a few millions around, and thereby change the way all of us common folk have to live, and do business.
Google's r
Re: (Score:2)
This appears to be Google trying to gather data on a plausible hypothesis. Why don't they have a right to do this? If they don't find unconscious bias, then nothing needs to be changed. If they do, then people have an opportunity to improve things. I don't see how Google is changing things in ways you don't like.
Besides, Google already changed how I live and do business, by offering various services, primarily excellent Internet search.
Re: (Score:2)
JUST LET THE GIRLS DO WHATEVER THE HELL THEY WANT TO DO!
So I take it you are in favour of this article then? That after all is what it's about. Letting them dowhat they want and not be pressured in all sorts of ways by various biases in society etc.
Or by your shouty catchpharase do you actually mean we should let them do what they're pushed in to?
Re: (Score:2)
In favor of this article? No, I'm not. How do I make it clear to you that Google is engaged in unethical social engineering?
Re: (Score:2)
The bit where you said "let them do whatever they want". That was the unclear bit.
These initiatives are precisely for that. It's so they can in fact do whatever they want. So you are actively against google helping to in fact do whatever they want?
You also haven't made it clear why what google is doing is unethical.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you've failed to understand the whole social engineering thing. Google, among other corporations, are bending over backward to attract women into their workforce. They are going so far as to go into the schools, trying to influence girl's choices. They are trying to change the world. That IS NOT "let them do whatever they want to do" at all. That is in effect, an attempt to replace parental and other inputs, to change the results to something closer to what Google wants.
Google wants women - but
Re: (Score:2)
Google wants women - but women don't necessarily want Google. (How many of us males could say the same thing?)
Not a problem I seem to suffer from.
them to reject what society is teaching them.
And therein lies the problem. You are presenting what society is doing as the neutral choice. That is far from the case. In fact you've highlighted the point. Society IS teaching them. That means that they're not necessarily doing what they want, they're doing what they're guided into by society.
Don't TELL THEM what th
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe they're not interested in the current workforce dominated by males with sexist attitudes and L337 approaches?
Citation needed that the world is actually like this, please. I see this assertion everywhere with no evidence whatsoever to back it up.
When engineering projects are made that catter to the specific differences and interests of females (such as toy construction sets that are less centered on their pure mechanical structure and more on their usage and applications, [kickstarter.com]) the approval rate of girls towards is shown to increase. (The pink color seems to help in this case, BTW). This may very well a chicken-and-egg problem: women are not interested in science and tech because nowadays there's nothing interesting in it for them.
Nowadays?
People are interested in what they are interested in. They'll gravitate towards the things they fancy. If they don't want Legos, pink or otherwise, they'll find something else to do. That's the way it's always been.
I admit I don't know the full effect of a thing being pink has on girls in general, but on girls who are actually interested in building things, the
Re: Yeah, blame the parents (Score:1)
Women don't technically need to do outrageous things because of intrinsic gendered value. Men don't have intrinsic value, they can't spontaneously reproduce and they need to achieve something to be deemed "worthy". See Male Disposability.
Women don't need to prove anything, they're the judge, jury and executioner of genetic continuity. Nearly 100% of women will enjoy reproductive success, some lesser (and declining) number of men will.
To understand a lot of behaviors it's easiest to talk about sex and childr
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I wasn't about to get into evolutionary psych, which is why I kind of brushed it off.
Talking in evo psych is a double-edged sword. On one hand, you have a narrative that fits the facts and sets a biological basis for the differences between men and women, and if you can scientifically prove it's sound, then okay.
However, if you can't (or are debating with someone who refuses to listen, or is going the "special snowflake" route with the argument), then what you end up with is more of a self-perpetuatin
Re: (Score:2)
I admit, I'm largely turned off by the "designed for girls" tag. Desensitized, really, since I'm over the age of 30 and have been inundated by this sort of thing for a quarter of a century.
(I know you're an AC and won't respond, but for the benefit of those who have continued reading, I've met with more than one coach who's tried to woo me into joining his gym with "women's classes", so, yes, this sort of thing happens to adults as well.)
I also remember not having pink Legos while growing up, because my pl
Re:Yeah, blame the parents (Score:5, Insightful)
You point to some pink toys, as evidence that boys and girls are being treated differently. Now, look at those pink toys, and tell me more about them. WHY do pink toys increase a girl's interest? Come on, dig deep.
Mindless repeating of stereotypes. You are obviously superior, in that you mindlessly repeat liberal talking points.
I say again, if the girls WANT to work in STEM, get the hell out of their way. If they DO NOT WANT to work in STEM, STFU and let them do what they want to do.
Stop PUSHING the girls into occupations that they may or may not want. Just STFU and sit down, and let the girls be whatever they want to be.
The arrogant cocksucker who occupies the White House told women that he doesn't WANT them to be housewives. WTF does anyone care what he WANTS? Rhetorical question - I know exactly who wants the wives out of the homes, and I know why. Dragging Mommy out of the house opens the door for baby sitters, social workers, school administrators, and more to get involved in the child's life. So, Mommy is down the road, slaving away to earn some money (part of which the government takes away from her) to PAY for all of the baby sitting, etc ad nauseum.
Did I mention social engineering in my post above? Yes, I did. Social Justice warriors don't like the nuclear family, they don't even like an extended family. So, they are working to destroy the family. Social engineering. Look around you. It's blatantly obvious.
Re: (Score:2)
I say again, if the girls WANT to work in STEM, get the hell out of their way. If they DO NOT WANT to work in STEM, STFU and let them do what they want to do.
Agreed. That's what this is all about, what Google is trying to get. "Get the hell out of their way", as you put it. Get rid of the unconscious steering away from STEM that parents and teachers are doing. Presumably you welcome their efforts.
Social Justice warriors don't like the nuclear family
I'm having real trouble nailing down what an SJW is. I'm occasionally accused of being one, but I like nuclear families. At best the term seems to be very ill defined and simply mean "someone I disagree with on social issues".
Re: (Score:3)
"It takes a village to raise an idiot" If you've frequently heard comments to that effect, then you've been in the presence of an SJW. They tend to view children as the responsibility and/or the property of the state. Child services around the nation seem to attract these kind of people. Whether a child services case worker happens to be a SJW or not, you seldom notice them - but when a SJW disagrees with a responsible parent or guardian, they have no qualms shouldering that responsible parent aside.
Th
Re: (Score:2)
Again, people call me an SJW but I don't seem to fit this description. I keep getting different definitions from different people. I think it's a meaningless term, applied seemingly at random.
Re: (Score:2)
Just in case you're still confused about what SJWs are, they're also resonsible for dystopia in SciFi:
http://slashdot.org/comments.p... [slashdot.org]
That's an insightful view apparetly, too. I hope that clears it up for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Note to you - you're not a mind reader.
Re: (Score:2)
Neither are you. From TFS, it would appear that Google is trying to learn how much unconscious steering away there is. This is definitely a more productive course than to just assume it doesn't exist.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I did address that issue in a sideways manned in one of the side discussions here. "What does Google have to gain . . ." regarding more women in the work force.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It was definitely worth my time. Thanks for the link!
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they're not interested in the current workforce dominated by males with sexist attitudes and L337 approaches?
More likely, they don't give a crap about that, they just want to pay as little money as possible, that's their only goal.
This latest effort is just an attempt to deflect criticism of the gender mix in their own workforce, by blaming the "unconscious bias" in educators and parents for their inability to find qualified females for their workforce. It's closer to the truth to say that the cheap Indian and Chinese labor they want is mostly made up of men, very much more so than the field of US candidates.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you understand what "unconscious bias" actually is? It's not actively steering the child at all, it's making assumptions and reacting certain ways that pushes them away from STEM. It happens right from birth, let alone after 18 years. You could at least try to understand the basics before throwing in your opinion.
Re:Yeah, blame the parents (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Ah I see so all the studies about unconscious bias where people have figured out how to actually test for it and etc are wrong because some random slashdotter declares it to be so without a shred of evidence.
Okey dokey then.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Yeah, blame the parents (Score:5, Informative)
"As I have a daughter, I know better. Of course bias is a big part of it, expressed verbally and non-verbally. Parents and grand-parents who give their daughters princess dresses for christmas and act gleefully if the daughter wear it, express a bias."
Not only that. In Germany, they found out that teachers are unconscious biased against lower class pupils on the sole first-name the kids have. Because lower class parents often name their kids like celebrities or characters in TV-shows, while the more educated classes name their kids more traditionally.
If the kids are called Kevin, Bejoncé, Kanye or Ronny for example, they get lower grades for the same content.
The bias has even a name, it's called 'Kevinism'.
https://namecurator.wordpress.... [wordpress.com]
http://www.ctvnews.ca/kevin-ch... [ctvnews.ca]
Re: (Score:1)
Perhaps those children really are a bit more dim-witted. Causation: genetics.
Re: (Score:1)
If the kids are called Kevin, Bejoncé, Kanye or Ronny for example, they get lower grades for the same content.
What, so the grading is performed arbitrarily? This is unacceptable. Who cares about the "kevinism" part, this reveals a far more serious issue. If there is no objective basis by which to grade the object, be it a test or paper, then it simply cannot be graded period.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Parents and grand-parents who give their daughters princess dresses for christmas and act gleefully if the daughter wear it, express a bias.
Shocking that parents are happy when their daughters like feminine things. It's almost like they don't think they're defective males and their views on clothing is orthogonal to computer issues.
You got it reversely. At first, it's the parents and the grand parents and other relatives who gives princess clothes as presents and then act gleefully. Only after that positive reaction, girls show interest in being a princess, and then parents and grand parents give new girlish presents and again show happiness if the girl smiles. Don't underestimate the amount of impression you make on a child until it conciously expresses interest in some thing and disdain for others! Each toy shop with "girl aisles" a
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think your anecdote demonstrates what you think it does. Of course peers have an influence on you. That's how fads work, after all. But at the same time, your daughter demonstrates that at the end of the day, she has her own interests and will pursue them.
I have a simple question: has anyone asked all these girly girls if they are unhappy? Do any of them feel brainwashed and resentful because they liked princess stuff and prefer the color pink?
Re: (Score:2)
I have a daughter as well.
And, oddly enough, a wife. The wife is also a programmer.
Oddly enough, with both parents programmers, my daughter expressed absolutely no interest in programming. No, I don't believe her teachers had more influence than her parents....
Though she's starting to express an interest in doing Minecraft mods, just because the mods she likes haven't been updated as promptly as she wishes they were....
Re: (Score:2)
Oddly enough, with both parents programmers, my daughter expressed absolutely no interest in programming. No, I don't believe her teachers had more influence than her parents....
But do you think that in a world where there were no parental biases, 100% of children would pick the same career as one or both of their parents? Because that is what you are implying with your post. Perhaps if you said your daughter has no interest in math, science, or computers your argument would be a little more on point.
Though she's starting to express an interest in doing Minecraft mods, just because the mods she likes haven't been updated as promptly as she wishes they were....
Sounds like you are just not waiting long enough for her to find her lifelong interests. Not everyone has to start programming at the age of 10. Expressing this type of interest, even
Re: (Score:3)
Anecdote pulled out of posterior invagination.
As opposed to the shows that have computer geeks being a woman [ranker.com] (47 listed, not including Arrow, Flash or Supernatural)?
Yes, you can argue by purposely not including information showing the opposi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How many people here were not constantly "expressed bias to" by their parents and peers telling us to get off the computer and go outside? Men and women that want to have careers in technology do so in spite of those complaints.
Some people need different levels of encouragement than others. And I wouldn't be surprised if one truly physical difference between men and women is women being more social than men, and therefore requiring more social validation on average.
My brother and I are a good example of different people needing different levels of encouragement. I was pretty self-motivated, but my brother needed more involvement from my parents. The end result was both of us becoming very educated (my brother with a doctorate and
Re: (Score:2)
So do you want women treated equally or not?
I want everyone to be given the same opportunity. The manner in which this opportunity is provided will likely be different for various subgroups of our population.
Re: (Score:2)
Then the answer is no, and you are sexist (or insert name for other term regarding discrimination based on your "subgroups").
Acknowledging differences between genders is not all it takes to be considered sexist. A belief that one gender is superior is also required. I have displayed no such belief; the exact opposite in fact.
Further, you can not give everyone the same opportunity period. It's impossible without extreme social and biological engineering, on the level of totalitarian control of a population.
Never let perfect be the enemy of good. And sliding scale arguments are almost always silly. We can certainly improve things even if it is impossible for everyone to have perfectly equal opportunity.
Re: (Score:2)
Just because women on average might need more social validation...
This expresses that men are superior. Men do not need as much social validation to make choices for themselves. You can derive that down to, men are more independent (a generally considered superior quality). No matter how noble the point that you expressed after that quote. To treat a specific group (like women) as innately lesser and in need of more help is sexist.
When not taken out of context, my statement was part of a larger context of women being more social on average than men (my opinion, not something I have researched extensively). This comes with pros and cons. Gaining validation internally or externally is not inherently better or worse.
My statement saying women need more social validation is not expressing men are superior. Men simply get the validation elsewhere. Again these statements are my opinion and only speak to gender averages.
There are other "good" reasons. (Score:1)
For example, the "fact" that the computer industry is infested with pervs and misogynists, therefore women shouldn't go there because they'll just be hit on by perverted geeks without any social graces or fellow feeling.
Whether it is the truth or not doesn't really matter: people will be driven away MERELY BY THE ACCUSATION.
I think rather than guiding (Score:2)
Parents' superpower (Score:5, Insightful)
Ah, parents. The supposedly superpowerful entities that can somehow control their children's career path over decades without even trying, yet keep failing to stop them from having underage sex or trying drugs no matter how hard they actively attempt to.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Your gross oversimplification is indeed ridiculous, but since that's not what Google is claiming it only speaks to your own (miss)understanding of the issue.
From an early age there is subconscious bias, not just from parents but from teachers as well. Since children tend not to be very interested in sex for the first 10+ years of their lives, and when they do become interested it's usually the unwillingness to educate and influence that is the problem, it's not really the same thing at all.
There has been a
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Ahh MaiMoJo. As predicable as radioactive decay. Blame, deflect, and attack social status, throwing some ad hominem whenever possible and only show up for debates that provide opportunity to women or remove accountability for their own decisions.
Never respond to any criticism or logical retort and don't forget to use sweeping statements, prejudice, and open ended responses with hardly an explanation behind them. But hey, at least you only get modded up for the first few hours, then back down it goes.
Re: (Score:1)
I find the entire concept of someone being able to flip gender color orientation both Totalitarian and Orwellian. The entire concept of social science experimentation without explicit consent from the individuals involved is, as we are now seeing with the sexodus, absolutely disastrous for the continuity and functionality of society.
Well over half of kids right now do not have a father in the home, and as a direct result of this, about a third of young men between the ages of 18 and 25 are slated never to
Re: (Score:2)
Did you pause and wonder what causes the very existence of "girl colours" and "boy colours" in the first place, while you were thinking about this pink&blue flip-over as an example that somehow could undermine the subtext of my (tongue-in-cheek) comment ?
Yeah, I guessed not :D
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Parents' superpower (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
That comment is so good, it's almost like the BS that was spewed out the other day on sites like The Guardian, Time, and other outlets about how "teenage boys don't like big breasted women." Of course, when you look at what little data there is you find out that: There was no confirmation data, it used a online poll, it was heavily circulated on feminist sites, especially those espousing an anti-male point of view. Well, I mean the data is out there...you know the data that says said paygap is by choice.
Cultural Marxists gonna cultural Marxist (Score:3, Insightful)
Boys are falling behind in education but there are still a few male bastions that have not been conquered yet. Keep fighting the good fight progressives!
Curious... can I... (Score:2)
Curious... can I... list the names of organizations, tools, and resources that I've unconsciously gravitated to via unconscious bias to combat unconscious bias?
Re: (Score:2)
It's an interesting idea. Perhaps an unconscious bias for a particular search engine, brought about by its name being synonymous for a verb?
Too many assumptions in the questions (Score:3)
There is an assumption there, which is as yet untested, that the respondant believes anyone would benefit from unconcious bias training at all.
Re: (Score:2)
There is an assumption there, which is as yet untested, that the respondant believes anyone would benefit from unconcious bias training at all.
Are you claiming that unconscious bias doesn't exist?
If so:where can I find these rational humans?
Why does this sound like Orwell or CP reeducation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Citizen, we are here to free you from your unconscious biases so that you may more thoroughly accept the wisdom of the party and refine your thoughts and actions for the glory of the party and the state.
Re: (Score:3)
That's because it is. Go hang around some feminist sites these days like feministing or the mary sue, and you'll find out that using bullshit to make up your point is pretty much accepted. And of course if you point out the flaw, you're automatically a persona non grata to be purged from the ranks.
Stop. Posting. This. Shit. (Score:2, Insightful)
Everyone is clearly sick to fucking death of his SJW vomit. Where ever you're getting this shit... go somewhere else. Maybe you'll find something less idiotic to post on the board.
Re: (Score:2)
Not, apparently, the folks at Google.
Re: (Score:2)
A madness going through San Franciscan progressives is not applicable to anyone but themselves.
How about bias of the teachers? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I took the survey and there were several questions regarding the biases of teachers.
Females wants alpha males (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe in the US... In Japan nerds are seen as attractive partners. Intelligent, often sensitive and less reserved, able to earn good wages and reliable.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course we trust Google (Score:3)
"your responses are confidential, meaning that your feedback will not be attributed to you and the data will only be used in aggregate form."
Translation:
"We already have enough information to identify you personally, so there is no need for you to provide us with your name."
so... (Score:3)
I don't see a shortage of women doctors (Score:2)
And yet the pioneers must have suffered from appalling discrimination. How did they manage to beat the patriarchy?
the other half of the equation (Score:2)
When we talk about what people want, we are talking about what they are programmed to want. This discussion has already pointed out environmental programming that goes into each of us: the roles we are expected to play; the attitudes we should have; etc ... but this discussion has entirely missed a far more essential programming that influences us all.
We, many of us programmers, tend to forget that we are exquisitely programmed ourselves by our DNA. We do its bidding without question. Do you think that the