Open Thread, May 5 - 11, 2014

Tenoke

Previous Open Thread

You know the drill - If it's worth saying, but not worth its own post (even in Discussion), then it goes here.

Notes for future OT posters:

1. Please add the 'open_thread' tag.

2. Check if there is an active Open Thread before posting a new one.

3. Open Threads should start on Monday, and end on Sunday.

4. Open Threads should be posted in Discussion, and not Main.

Previous Open Thread

You know the drill - If it's worth saying, but not worth its own post (even in Discussion), then it goes here.

Notes for future OT posters:

1. Please add the 'open_thread' tag.

2. Check if there is an active Open Thread before posting a new one.

3. Open Threads should start on Monday, and end on Sunday.

4. Open Threads should be posted in Discussion, and not Main.

I thought Nancy was asking me to identify a specific article that was selectively quoted. I did: all of them.

I'm just saying that the headline is a lie, supported by selective quotation: this is not a finding of sexual similarity and none of the popular coverage claims that it is a study of sexual difference. I'm not saying anything fancy about subtle connotations that are smuggled in and not explicitly identified. This is a very simple claim and anyone interested in more detail should read the popular articles themselves. What else could I have possibly meant?

OK, so I took a look.

First popular article linked from Slate. Slate says this article trumpets the study as revealing "differences in men’s and women’s bodies, differences found as deep down as the cellular level".

I think the article is nominally about the study, but ends up saying rather little about the study. It quotes an author of the study about the findings of the study. Then it goes on to quote him talking about genes on the Y-chromosome more generally, and has a couple of paragraphs that so far as I can tell are unrelated to the study, ab... (read more)

0gwern12y

And again, you reiterate your original claim and respond to neither Nancy nor myself. Here is an article. You say it is wrong and not only is its thesis wrong, every quote is misleading. When asked for elaboration, you go on saying that. If 'this is a very simple claim', it should be easy to elaborate how the popular articles are correct, the quotations of them misleading, and the revisionist interpretation 'nonsense'.

6

Open Thread, May 5 - 11, 2014

6

You know the drill - If it's worth saying, but not worth its own post (even in Discussion), then it goes here.

6

6

Open Thread, May 5 - 11, 2014

6

You know the drill - If it's worth saying, but not worth its own post (even in Discussion), then it goes here.

6