= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Eugine_Nier comments on LW Women: LW Online - 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 (590)
Only if you over do it.
What are the odds?
Also, do you apply a downwards adjustment to your evaluation of a woman's original mathematics?
As randomness* would have it, I just ran into an example of women doing that to a woman for her fiction.
*On the radio as I was catching up on the thread.
Depends on what other evidence I have.
Just read the article. Given the information presented my prior is that Jamaica Kincaid got her job due to (possibly informal) affirmative action, i.e., the New Yorker felt like they needed a black female writer to be "diverse".
You don't know how many black female authors they've got, and you haven't read any of her work.
True. This is my prior for "black female author gets extremely fast tracked" and the article didn't say anything that would make me update away from it.