I don't know about everything else but the huffington post is questionable in their bias
And gender disparity in population doesn't indicate a problem in and of itself. That's like saying there are more female than male nurses and thus a problem. If follows that if there are more women than there are more men in higher positions. On the nurse thing:sometimes gender disparity simply comes from natural inclinations of the sexes. Just like there are more left voters as teachers and right voters as military.
Also, anecdotal and/or perceivied evidence from any one individual, no matter their education or experience, is always questionable. Highly so. Some of the most intelligent people I know would disagree on issues such as this and racism and well even be looking at the same scenario and data. Interpretation and perception influence critical analysis as the brain tries to validity emotional logic with rational or to prove a rationalization given a pre emotive assumption or previously accepted data point that will influence the person. In this case, if an individual feels strongly about sexism and accepts the idea tht sexism is still a large issue before encountering a given scenario than they are much more liable to then find reasons to validate the previous feelings or thoughts. That's why no one person can be an acceptable source of information, especially when they can't prove something beyond a shadow of doubt when confronted with opposing views and/or when they're points largely rely on personal anecdotes and inferences. Furthermore, given certain large topics such as sexism it's quite easy to find a large following of people that'll coraborate a given inference and view. I can find a lot of people that'd be able to give first hand accounts on how whites are overlooked for others of color, that blacks are the direct cause for most issues in their communities, or that their life experiences have shown them that giving money/charity always ended in futility: does this prove that there's something happening to look into? Sure. Does it prove that they're right? Not really. Just indicates there's data to be gotten. At which point more data my shed light onto an issue to say that the person didn't know something, wasn't aware of something, overlooked something, or even misinterpreted something.
Which is why I don't give much account to personal anecdotes in and if themselves as indicative of anything of a larger scale. Our population is so big that even if they're rift it they're individual cases, they'd still be a drop in the bucket. Making the data stastically insignificant for the whole.
As for maternity leave -> I don't see that as sexist but as a realistic cost and benefits analysis of why you'd hire one person and not the other. Females will always be ones who carry the child, thus they'll always be the ones leaving for maternity if it pops up on the job. I've actually discussed this at length with people in my apartment, two of them women. I don't and can't consider it wrong to judge an individual on their biology and how that might effect the bottom line of a company. It's like not hiring people with certain medical histories or such and such in the military or government whether as a whole or for specific positions. It's not an "unjust" prejudice; just an acknowledgment of gender and there differences. As for men vs women for maternity leave and how they're treateddifferently. It's a very large grey area since you can't rightly directly compare the two and most of it lies in morality and individual case by case basis. You can't/should t be able to enforce a company to be nice in a legal sense.
Im just following along y'all conversation. By the by, ;p so much easier to but in when I'm not the one needing to prove something on either side and both of y'all comment on each other's data and your own such that it's easy to follow along.
Also, the personal accounts of the women on these forums have actually refused the premise the the industry they work in, STEM, is sexist. Which is on direct contrast to things it seems your data and experience say. Funny thing is there's also data supporting both sides and lots of women that te different stories. Interestingly though, is not sure if this is provable but it might be that most critically analysis of Stem sexism and the bows and whys come from those outside the industry. Not to say it doesn't exist at all; when imply there's no sexism I imply that issue isn't nearly as serious of some would have others believe. This in the context of present day discussion of it.
Edit: typing on phone so sorry for the grammar and stuff in some cases
Last edited by aj0413; 05/10/16 02:37 PM.