[ianleeclark]

You're asking for a hard-science demonstration of a soft-science problem and this is causing you to refuse understanding a deeply rooted systemic problem if it can't be immediately displayed.

Ahh, your post history is illuminating and an interesting walk through the reactionary mind:

> Historically speaking fascists were hard left

> You know what Nazi stands for, don't you?

> Implying someone is racist when they've not said anything racist is unacceptable ad-hominem.

I don't think you're equipped to have this conversation.

[repolfx]

Your post is heavily downvoted because you are simply engaging in ad-hominem - presumably you ran out of arguments and know you can't win this one?

There is no such thing as a "soft science problem" for which "hard-science demonstrations" are invalid. That's a separation you've made up on the spot.

What I'm asking for isn't even science, I'm not even asking for data. I'm asking for anecdotes! That should be easy! Just show a bunch of cases of companies explicitly refusing to hire women or refusing to promote women because of their gender. You don't even have to show that amounts to the entire cause of the disparity. That's an absurdly low bar.