ata comments on 'oy, girls on lw, want to get together some time?' - Less Wrong

31 Post author: MBlume 02 October 2009 10:50AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (171)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: ata 03 October 2009 09:03:57PM *  4 points [-]

However, there is the possibility of re-framing LW it so that it appeals more to women. Perhaps we need to re-frame saving the world as a charitable sacrifice?

Is there a way to re-frame LW as being about "charitable sacrifice" without significantly straying the general goal of "refining the art of human rationality" (which may or may not be charitable/sacrificial)?

What do you see as the essence of its current framing, and what is the evidence that women would respond better to the charitable-sacrifice frame?

(Normally I'd respond to the quoted comment with "That's sexist nonsense" and leave it at that, but I am trying to be socratic about it.)

(Also, if anybody knows or can estimate, are the gender ratios similar in the relevant areas of academia?)

Comment author: SforSingularity 07 October 2009 09:27:13PM *  1 point [-]

(Also, if anybody knows or can estimate, are the gender ratios similar in the relevant areas of academia?)

All male biased as far as I know. (Math, philosophy, AI/CS)

Comment author: Jack 07 October 2009 09:35:52PM 2 points [-]

Aren't biology and psychology solidly balanced/ skewed female?

Comment author: SforSingularity 07 October 2009 09:55:43PM 1 point [-]

psychology, yes, definitely. Bio, I do not know, but I would like to see what it looks like for evo psych.