[manigandham]

No, the summary is that men and women have different interests (in average across billions) which creates a tendency to choose different professions. This division is even more pronounced in the most egalitarian and free societies.

Lack of interest in a subject does not mean a lack of capability.

[dirtydroog]

Would you hire someone who was really good at something but hated doing it?

[manigandham]

How would I know someone hated doing something? How would they be really good at something by investing time and effort if they hated it? Any why would they apply for that position?

But all things being equal, I would rather hire the person who is more motivated and interested in the field than the person who isn't because skills can be learned and motivation produces results.

[magic5227]

If a society tells a woman she's not likely as interested in something, guess what profession she is more likely to choose? Not the one she's being told she won't be happy with.

[alexpetralia]

Is there any evidence that would convince you that interests can diverge, independent of society (nurture)? Your argument relies on the assumption (yes, an assumption, not evidence) that society exclusively determines our interests. You do not admit a role for biology. There is little scientific evidence that supports this view.

[magic5227]

I didn't say "society exclusively determines our interests"

my point was pretty simple. If society at large, in ways small and big, encourage women from joining a field, I think it's likely fewer will participate.

This is the argument behind Sheryl Sandberg creating stock photos that demonstrate more inclusion. If all I see are white men with grey hair in photos as doctors, don't you think that might bias women to think that's who doctors are? That's not 100% of what influences an interest, but it's an important one.

https://www.gettyimages.com/collections/leanin

[magic5227]

https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2005-11115-001

Current research generally does not find evidence that variations in preferences, psychology, or personality stem from genetic or biological factors. Rather, they’re primarily attributed to culture and socialization.

[reroute1]

Actually the abstract points out that this hypothesis is one going against the largely held scientific view of biological factors and gender differences...

A rebuttal a year later in the related section points out omissions from this paper and offers a deeper perspective on the differences

https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2006-11202-013

[Khaine]

You mean like that in more gender equal societies, women are less likely to pursue a degree in STEM. Its a well known phenomenon called the gender-paradox[1]

[1] http://eprints.leedsbeckett.ac.uk/4753/6/symplectic-version....

[XorNot]

Is there any evidence (say, the numerous studies on this very topic) that would convince you that the pipeline of many careers has systemic discriminatory effects driving particular genders and races out of those fields?

[alexpetralia]

In fact, quite a bit! I am already convinced. If tribal associations would clarify, then I am more than likely "on your side."

Can you direct me to where I suggested there is no systematic career discrimination towards minorities? If that's how you interpreted my comment, then I apologize for that. There is absolutely substantial structural discrimination; I don't intend to minimize that.

The comment I was replying to did in fact specify as an assumption (the antecedent of the conditional) that "society tells a woman she's not likely as interested in something." This framing excludes the possibility that something else (namely biology) may affect a person's preferences.

I don't think that's a reasonable assumption - again, little scientific evidence supports that view. (Even intuition does not support that view: I don't think most people would argue that men for the most part are "brainwashed" by society to have sexual preferences for women. Likely some of this is biological; in fact, there is a good evolutionary reason for it!)

[amazingman]

What an oddly paternalistic point of view.

[joelhoffman]

People do form a lot of their personalities as small children, after all.

[james_s_tayler]

It also has a large genetic component at the same time.

[bobmcbobface]

Seriously, who in society is doing this?

20 years ago there was a lot less of a push for women in tech and you actually did hear lots of people espouse this view, now the programmes and encouragement is everywhere and the social cost of a different view is your job.

What is being argued and and what is happening don't seem to correlate.

[magic5227]

I don't think having a few programs or pr campaigns solves systemic bias. I guess to answer your question, ask women who are in tech or considered it if they experience bias.

I have, and I regularly hear depressing and disturbing examples.

[manigandham]

Wouldn't that apply to both sexes? Can you really tell someone what their interests are?

"happy with" is not the same as "interested in" however it seems like the last 2 decades have had a lot of focus on letting people follow their passion.