|
|
|
|
|
by wpietri
1063 days ago
|
|
That is not in fact the argument. If that's all you're getting from it, I suggest you try again. As to your other views, I think you have several errors. The biggest is declaring "it has nothing to do with gender" in a very gendered society, one with a long history of bias, and thinking having one (weak) alternative explanation is sufficient to explain executive hiring patterns. |
|
"It has nothing to do with gender" is with regard to the ratio of BE to FE people in engineering leadership. I'm not making the argument that gender bias plays no role in promotion anywhere. It is possible for some things in the world to not be explained by gender bias.