= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Eugine_Nier comments on How can people be actually converted? - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (94)
My best guess is that, although OB/LW do a decent job of respecting women, they draw most of their readers from crowds that keep women out. There is definitely sexism within the libertarian-atheist-hacker segment of the Internet. Women are also less likely to major in economics and computer science, and gender roles probably play some role in that.
Would you please refrain from throwing around those kinds of accusations without evidence.
I have noticed that reddit's r/atheism is rather fond of basic sexist jokes such as:
http://todayilearned.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/how-men-and-women-take-photos.jpg
What sort of evidence would you like?
I think that reddit as a whole (ignoring some pockets) is fond of sexist jokes.
That is almost certainly the case.
If your working definition of "sexism" is implying that women may in at least some ways be different from men in ways that reasonably imply inferiority, I disagree with your definition.
The antecedent of your conditional is not the case. I do not have a definition of 'sexism' and am fairly confident that such a thing does not exist. That is, I am skeptical that there is a list of necessary or sufficient conditions that will match the folk-term 'sexism.'
However, the particular joke I linked to is the sort of joke that is often labeled 'sexist' by the sorts of people who care about such matters. That is good enough for me. More importantly, the joke is based off of (what seem to me to be) unjustified premises.