News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Intern... by remarkEon on Saturday August 05, 2017 @07:09PM (#14938497)
Except they aren't difficult to prove, and this is what really really bothers me. We've got hundreds of thousands of years of innate, biologically formed behaviors that we have because they were evolutionarily advantageous. I'm not saying we should use these differences to discriminate, what I'm saying is that it's pretty easy to observe that they inform behavior and career preference.
Re:The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Intern... by taysic on Saturday August 05, 2017 @07:30PM (#14938624)
They are difficult to prove because they are exceedingly general and abstract. Try this one from the article:

"Openness directed towards feelings and aesthetics rather than ideas. Women generally also have a stronger interest in people rather than things, relative to men (also interpreted as empathizing vs. systemizing). These two differences in part explain why women relatively prefer jobs in social or artistic areas."

I have to say there could be other reasons for this. A big one is that people gravitate toward things where other people like them already are. They have a tendency to emulate. It takes unique people to break out of molds and do things that others don't expect of them. Or that aren't familiar or socially comfortable to do. Same for men.

Now it could be true this is related to an innate trait. But who cares? We're talking about 50% of the population and the differences between people are aplenty. Companies have no business in deciding what's the right thing for any group anyway. Whatever people's motivations are - biological or something they came up with yesterday ultimately isn't anyone else's business.

Re:The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Intern... by xyzzyz on Sunday August 06, 2017 @04:35PM (#14943343)
Try this one from the article:

Sure, it has been studied to death. Here's a good summary:

http://sci-hub.cc/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00320.x

Check out the Table 1 on page 1104, for summary of different studies. Of particular interest is the people-things orientation the parent poster mentions, with mean effect size across multiple studies so large (d = 1.18) that it almost never occurs for non-tautological research questions.

Re:The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Intern... by acdha on Saturday August 05, 2017 @08:55PM (#14939039)
Do you have any peer reviewed citations for those claims? If this is as certain as you're assuming, it should be easy to point to the underlying mechanism and evolutionary underpinnings.
Re:The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Intern... by remarkEon on Saturday August 05, 2017 @09:19PM (#14939133)
Ha. The Evolutionary Psychology wiki is probably a good start, but if you're skeptical of evolution I'm not confident anything I'd link would convince you.
Re:The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Intern... by acdha on Saturday August 05, 2017 @10:11PM (#14939280)
Skeptical of evolution? That's a telling misrepresentation — ask for scientific evidence for random unsupported speculation and be accused of not believing in science?

Again: do you have any citations? If this was as well as established as you're claiming they should be easy to provide.

Re:The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Intern... by remarkEon on Saturday August 05, 2017 @10:43PM (#14939383)
Sure, let me google that for you...

Quit being weird and pretending males and females are the same.

Re:The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Intern... by Pulcinella on Saturday August 05, 2017 @10:42PM (#14939377)
Why? Evolutionary psychology (even if true) is completely unenlightening.

Anyone can be an evolutionary psychologist!:

"Men do [thing] because they evolved to."

"Women think [this] because women who didn't did not pass on their genes."

Re:The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Intern... by remarkEon on Saturday August 05, 2017 @10:53PM (#14939426)
Not going to engage further if your summation of Evolutionary Psychology is that it's "unenlightening".

I can't stand this bizarre trend on the Left that holds up "science" as a vanguard in one context but dismisses it in another if it's politically convenient.

Re:The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Intern... by wfo on Sunday August 06, 2017 @12:03PM (#14941823)
The fact that you whine about anyone disagreeing with you being some bogeyman you call "the Left" (which does not exist of course) is telling; instead, you should consider your discussion partners as people instead of the enemy, perhaps then you will provide arguments that are not you just stating the thing you desperately want to be true over and over again and we can all learn something.
Re:The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Intern... by Pulcinella on Saturday August 05, 2017 @11:09PM (#14939468)
Because Evolutionary Psychology is not science. It makes no predictions. It has no theories. It is untestable. It entirely relies on just-so stories.
Re:The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Intern... by brown9-2 on Saturday August 05, 2017 @07:14PM (#14938527)
What you keep referring to as "biologically formed behaviors" others see as "formed by society".
Re:The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Intern... by remarkEon on Saturday August 05, 2017 @07:30PM (#14938622)
Right, I know, and my response is that those people are wrong. Yes some behaviors are socially formed. Of course. But "Society" has existed for a trivial amount of time relative to human history. Again, this is weird to pretend behavior isn't informed by biology. I just don't understand it.