Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by t2015_08_25 3920 days ago
Fascinating results, I would only caution people before taking this article's results to apply to "all" women. IME, approximately 10% of women desire employment success way more than the others.
2 comments

So what on Earth is objectionable in my comment? I speak from a moderate viewpoint, to take the study seriously, but not apply it blindly, apply my own small amount of experience, and get downvoted to -4?

Did this offend anyone? Please explain how. Otherwise I would perceive the downvotes to be the work of trolls.

Might be this:

> IME, approximately 10% . . .

How is this substantive?

Ah you're right. Thanks. That was driving me crazy. I should have learned by reading substantive comments found elsewhere. This one below, for example, struck me as exceptionally substantive and now I can see why it hasn't been voted below zero:

"I don't want to show up to work sweaty. And I want the utility of a vehicle if my plans change. So I'll drive regardless."

I didn't downvote you. You asked.

Don't be so worried about internet points.

BTW, that comment netted several magical internet points for whatever reason.

Women can be opinionated, especially feminists. I'm going to avoid ever bringing this up with one.
How rational of you. After all, nothing is more unpleasant than a woman rejecting one's opinion.
Oh is that what happened to Tim Hunt?
And here's a reference for hoopd's comment: https://reason.com/archives/2015/07/23/sexist-scientist-tim-...

edit// okay, here's another article that dives into the nuance and doesn't just try to plaster Tim Hunt. https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/the-timothy-hunt...

reason.com follows the same naming convention as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
Attacking the source rather than the content is usually the mark of a poor debating position. If the content is good, the source doesn't matter. If the content is bad, the source's badness will be self-evident.