You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

philosophysics comments on Happy Ada Lovelace Day - Less Wrong Discussion

10 Post author: palladias 16 October 2012 09:42PM

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

Comments (65)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: [deleted] 17 October 2012 03:20:25AM *  7 points [-]

Though I agree this post might be better suited for the Open Thread, The Science Babe, physics Ph.D. Dr. Deborah Berebichez, comes to mind.

However, I am questioning the merit of generally emphasizing minority groups in order to reduce their associated disadvantages. I wonder if this emphasis perpetuates a sense of having to differentiate between groups of people. Ideally, any gender or race based disparity would merely be a statistical coincidence rather than a consequence of racism and sexism. My hopes are that the primary reason for combating racism and sexism is rooted in a very humane understanding and compassion and NOT in further emphasizing the "obvious" difference in the groups yet at the same time calling for a certain "equality". My hopes are to diminish the conscious recognition of differences, solely based on characteristics like gender and race, in people in the first place.

Comment author: palladias 17 October 2012 04:26:40AM 4 points [-]

Did you check out the study above on quotas shrinking stereotype and competence gaps?

When it comes to gender, until we get a whole lot more transhuman, we will still need to be aware of biological differences related to pregnancy. We need a different model to reintegrate women into their jobs after leaves (or we need mandatory paternity leave to compensate for the biological difference). Trying to get to the point where we can ignore gender too fast really means asking women to fit the male model.