White Men are the Most Discriminated Against Demographic

[BoodeBeep]

My boyfriend has just said this to me. His reasons were women and ethnic minorities get schemes/help/AWS etc. I asked why exactly he thinks they have them, who they were trying to equal women up to etc. He said we should have a meritocracy and I agreed but explained we haven't ever ever had that and not all men are there on merit. I asked if he thought the reason there wasn't 50/50 represention was because women just weren't up to it and he said of course not but what other explanation is there?

I left it because there is just no getting through the complete arrogant certainty that he is right despite having done zero reading around the subject, having zero experience of being a woman/ethnic minority and seeing and hearing the experiences me and many other women have.

It's so frustrating. He's generally great but blind on this issue and obviously unwilling to think about it in any depth beyond how it may affect him should he fall victim to the discrimination of an all women shortlist.

Do men ever really get it?

@boodebeep "Lots of places give free coding classes, available to all. I am doing one now. Not female specific."

I'm pretty sure Google coding classes have a certain level of prestige than others.

You could also say that having a Google coding class on your CV subsequently bestows a certain level of privilege....

I'll ask again, are you ok with sacrificing/denying opportunities to the poorest members of that group because the people of the top have (in your opinion) more privilege and opportunity than other groups?

Yes.

It's not 'opinion', it's fact.

Will you stop hijacking the thread now?

Is it fair that a white boy from a trailer park with parents that can't afford a computer and raised in an environment that doesn't promote academic success, is denied access to those classes purely on the basis of his group identity just because white men are over-represented at Google?

No of course not, but is it fair that a young girl who is competent at Maths and has potential at coding is put off a career in IT because she's been told that "girls aren't as logical as boys" and "video games aren't for girls"?

Of course your situation isn't fair, but you need to look what positive discrimination is fighting against rather than taking it at face value.

@gorgonlondon

"Yes."

Well at least you're honest, I can respect that even if I think your opinion is deplorable.

@IfyouseeRitaMoreno

"No of course not, but is it fair that a young girl who is competent at Maths and has potential at coding is put off a career in IT because she's been told that "girls aren't as logical as boys" and "video games aren't for girls"?"

Well actually there's plenty of evidence that girls perform just as well as boys at STEM, but excel in other subjects and are more interested in other subjects.

"Of course your situation isn't fair, but you need to look what positive discrimination"

We are talking about positive action (which is legal).

Positive discrimination is illegal. There is a clear difference between the two

I knew a guy like this, was so sure that everyone else was treat so much better than him and would rant on about it quite often (and blame feminists, generally)

It was such a relief to get him out of my life tbh. Fuck that shit.

I'll ask again, are you ok with sacrificing/denying opportunities to the poorest members of that group because the people of the top have (in your opinion) more privilege and opportunity than other groups?

The only people doing that are the people who vote for underfunding schools because they are think free education is socialist, and the people who actively prevent their children from participating in education opportunities.

Children should be able to go into school and learn without needing any special space or equipment at home. That means we need to fund schools.

Perhaps you could contribute to this foundation:

www.eldesafio.org/help-underprivileged-children-code-their-future/

I'm all for helping underprivileged boys break the barriers that the social class system has put on them. That's really not mutually exclusive with being a feminist.

But it's also worth noting that there are many more ways out of poverty for boys than there are for girls that don't involve a qualification. Not that anyone should be pushed to a certain career based on their class.

Well at least you're honest, I can respect that even if I think your opinion is deplorable.

Understand this. I do not care what you think or whether or not you 'respect' me.

I would just like you to stop derailing the thread and go back to Reddit.

Well actually there's plenty of evidence that girls perform just as well as boys at STEM, but excel in other subjects and are more interested in other subjects.

That's a fair point, I know many girls who are good all round I'e never understood this "girls are good at caring therefore boys are good at maths" illogical way of thing.

But it's also true that society pushes us in certain directions and offers certain stereotypes to girls (a plethora of boys= autistic = STEM genius for example) that discourage them from taking careers in STEM. A lack of female role models (from the times when women were actually legally banned from entering those fields) also doesn't help.

So, step away from the biological aspect of boys and girls' choices for a while and think about how society shapes them. That is the thing we can change. The outcome may not be completely equal but it will certainly be more equal than it is now.

Well actually there's plenty of evidence that girls perform just as well as boys at STEM, but excel in other subjects and are more interested in other subjects.

Just to come back to this, it's also worth noting that even in the subjects where girls' competence and interest are not questioned, men will rise to the top of those industries quicker.

Is this because men are risk-takers? Better suited at leadership? Or because women take on the responsibility of childcare (for whichever reason)? Or because women accept male authority more readily than vice versa? Or a mixture?

Either way, the outcome is still unequal. Do you think that inequality is unavoidable because of biology? And do you think it's fair?

@IfyouseeRitaMoreno some good posts there, a few points:

"offers certain stereotypes to girls (a plethora of boys= autistic = STEM genius for example"

I believe that Simon Baron-Cohen has hypothesised that autism is just an extremely masculinised brain due to overexposure to pre-natal testosterone, and that girls overexposed to prenatal testosterone display more masculine like interests and career choices

"So, step away from the biological aspect of boys and girls' choices for a while and think about how society shapes them. That is the thing we can change. The outcome may not be completely equal but it will certainly be more equal than it is now."

Scandinavia has been trying to reduce social stigma, promote equality and encourage more women into STEM and more men into nursing, but the gaps got bigger and the personality differences got bigger. I have discussed this in previous threads - all the evidence is that as Countries become more equal then men/women have more freedom and ability to pursue their own interests. Poorer less equal Countries mean that more women do STEM because it's a potential route up the social mobility ladder

"Either way, the outcome is still unequal. Do you think that inequality is unavoidable because of biology?"

I believe equality of opportunity is preferable to equality of outcome.

If you could eliminate ALL social stigma and gender conditioning overnight then there would still be gaps in professions - more men would still sign up to the Army, more men would be sewer cleaners and oil rig workers etc

More women would still choose to be the primary caregiver to the child they've just conceived for 9 months, etc

Well actually there's plenty of evidence that girls perform just as well as boys at STEM, but excel in other subjects and are more interested in other subjects.

The boys at school who told me that lego was "not for girls" were quite keen to railroad me out of the three-dimensional physical problem-solving that makes for a good STEM student. Multiply attitudes like that across a whole society and you get an illusion of girls preferring other subjects, when in fact they have actually actually been driven out of STEM. Parental toy provision has a lot to do with it as well and I was supremely lucky that my parents let me have Lego and BILOfix. During one play session, my Jem dolls were passengers in the BILOfix cart I built that was drawn by my My Little Ponies (the old-fashioned kind that actually looked a bit facially horseish). Building that cart, with shafts and wheels, to the right scale, was a design problem that girls don't face if they are only given dolls.

"The boys at school who told me that lego was "not for girls" were quite keen to railroad me out of the three-dimensional physical problem-solving that makes for a good STEM student."

Great anecdote 👍

I don't have the research to hand but iirc the data I'm referring to re preferences came from surveys of hundreds of thousands of students, not 100% sure without checking

I'm afraid your anecdote about patriarchal overlords in training isn't very compelling!

I'm afraid your anecdote about patriarchal overlords in training isn't very compelling!

Again, stop with the silly insults. It may be haXXor's anecdotal experience but it's one that's been experienced by myself and many other women.

Can you remember what the research said about why girls are more interested in other subjects, despite being good at STEM subjects?

@IfyouseeRitaMoreno

Actually citing anecdotes is a logical fallacy:

"You used a personal experience or an isolated example instead of a sound argument or compelling evidence."

I believe that Simon Baron-Cohen has hypothesised that autism is just an extremely masculinised brain due to overexposure to pre-natal testosterone, and that girls overexposed to prenatal testosterone display more masculine like interests and career choices

If you look at Simon Baron-Cohen now though you'll see a completely different story! His name is against research papers looking into the prevalence of undetected autism in girls and he was on twitter the other week asking us to consider the number of girls that go undiagnosed, a problem that ironically comes from his own skewed theories.

Brain Organisation Theory (the theory you're talking about) is far from solid science. The experiments and surveys on which he based it have been heavily criticized.

Yet the point is that the effect that SBC's arguments had on our way of thinking was enormous as was the willingness of people to accept them. These (often media-driven) stereotypes, given "scientific" credence by people like SBC, stick to us like velcro and continue to have an effect long after the science has been pulled apart.

So for Scandinavia, that hardly proves anything. The UK is a country which is regarded as relatively equal yet the sheer onslaught of gender stereotyping from birth affects our choices. It's as if when the legal barriers are gone societal barriers are instead put in their place.

And no that's not a "patriarchal overlord" conspiracy. It's an observation. Look at the "Angel in the House" doctrine which happened to come about when 19th century proto-feminists started to campaign for work outside the home. Too much of a coincidence..

You used a personal experience or an isolated example instead of a sound argument or compelling evidence."

Realistically though how many times do you think a boy has been told that video games are not for boys?

And if you're looking for something with higher numbers then google Alice Roberts and the experiments that have been done on adult toy giving to babies based on perceived sex. I'll summarize: when adults were given charge of various babies they overwhelmingly gave them toys according to the sex they perceived that baby to be (the experimenters dressed the boys in pink and girls in blue).

Culture exists. It has an effect.

I believe that Simon Baron-Cohen has hypothesised that autism is just an extremely masculinised brain due to overexposure to pre-natal testosterone, and that girls overexposed to prenatal testosterone display more masculine like interests and career choices

Simon BC is a clinical psychologist so he’s very skewed towards the more theoretical and away from the biological.

I’m a geneticist - the consensus among the molecular science people is that autism is likely the result of a suite of genes interacting with each other and their environment. There’s no evidence for hormone washes etc as a causative mechanism. When you look at some single gene syndromes that have autistic like traits as symptoms you don’t see hyper masculinity as a factor or any concordance with effects of unusual hormonal exposure on the womb.
That alone would make me doubt the SBC theory. I worked on one such gene model and again, the consensus in the field is that autism is a complex dance of genes and environment. There’s a strong genetic component but whatever causes it isnt simple - if it was as dimples as hormones/vaccines/a single virus/one gene/two -three genes we would have seen that signal by now. The fact that we haven’t implies it’s for a very complex etiology. Personally I see parallels with a threshold/tip type model like the ones proposed for schizophrenia - a suite of genes gives a person a background risk level and perhaps one or more environmental stimuli can tip the balance.

But we just don’t know. I’m fairly confident it’s not as simple as extreme boy brain though.

"So for Scandinavia, that hardly proves anything. The UK is a country which is regarded as relatively equal yet the sheer onslaught of gender stereotyping from birth affects our choices"

The people behind the research ranked Countries by gender equality, some Countries are more equal than others. Scandinavia consistently ranks higher than the UK and others. The phenomenon of their gender equality paradox is widely known

"And no that's not a "patriarchal overlord" conspiracy."

That was a reference to the implication that little boys telling little girls "lego is for boys" is somehow responsible for gender gaps in STEM

"Realistically though how many times do you think a boy has been told that video games are not for boys?"

Do you have any evidence that suggests telling girls video games are for boys is why there are more male programmers than girls?

"And if you're looking for something with higher numbers then google Alice Roberts and the experiments that have been done on adult toy giving to babies based on perceived sex."

The aforementioned Simon Baron Cohen has done research on toy preferences in young babies.

The evidence behind girls being more interested in people and boys in things is well established.

Regardless this all rehashing old arguments now and is well away from positive action/positive discrimination

"Culture exists. It has an effect."

I don't think I've ever denied that. The point is that nature/biology also has an influence despite the efforts of the biology deniers

As I said earlier, I believe equality of opportunity is preferable to equality of outcome.

If you could eliminate ALL social stigma and gender conditioning overnight then there would still be gaps in professions - more men would still sign up to the Army, more men would be sewer cleaners and oil rig workers etc

"If you could eliminate ALL social stigma and gender conditioning overnight then there would still be gaps in professions - more men would still sign up to the Army, more men would be sewer cleaners and oil rig workers etc"

Well let's put our best effort into that elimination process and see what happens. It will be interesting to find out.

@fmsfms my experience isbobe example of a wider and well-understood social phenomenon. Until extremely recently (the last two years), my local Tesco and all other large Tescos had a section marked "Girls' toys" and another marked "Boy's toys". This is the UK's biggest supermarket labelling toys by sex and sending a message to parents and kids that your genitals dictate your toys.

As an aside, the two sections are now relabelled "dolls" and "action". Other than clothing and portrayed sex, how do action figures differ from dolls?

I'm at work, so I don't have time to dig out the material debunking a lot of Simon Baron-Cohen's ideas. His research is permeated with sexism and he has particularly harmed Borderline Personality Disorder patients, most of whom are female, and a recent hypothesis is that many women diagnosed with BPD are autistic and the female presentation of autism mimics BPD.

Oh great, another anecdote.

Do you think that toymakers, dating back to original artisans/individual craftsme...sorry craftspeople figured out that girls liked playing with dolls and boys with toy cars etc, and therefore made more of them.

Or was it all another patriarchal conspiracy?

Do you attribute women staying home to raise children in greater numbers than the father to women being given dolls as kids?

a recent hypothesis is that many women diagnosed with BPD are autistic and the female presentation of autism mimics BPD.

This hypothesis is not SBC's.