One would assume that scientists, who are trained to think objectively, are completely immune to gender discrimination. However, a recent Yale study by Corinne Moss-Racusin and colleagues suggests otherwise.
The researchers created a fictional student and sent out the student’s application to science professors at top, research-intensive universities in the United States. The professors were asked to evaluate how competent this student was, how likely they would be to hire the student, how much they would pay this student, and how willing they would be to mentor the student. All of the applications sent out were identical, except for the fact that half were for a male applicant, John, and half were for a female applicant, Jennifer. Results showed that, with statistical significance, both male and female faculty at these institutions were biased towards male students over female students.
Data from the study shows that on average, science faculty was willing to pay the male applicant about $4,000 more per year. source
"The gender gap doesn’t exist"
"We don’t need feminism"
"Maybe he just worked harder"
"*any MRA bullshit*"
I had to read this study for class. It is thorough as fuck.
I get “fake geek girl” BS in job interviews. I have skipped applying for programming jobs because the ads promote the “bro-centric company culture,” where it is common to drink beer and no one complains about your naughty sense of humor. I have applied at companies that won’t interview me for the position that I’m qualified for because the type of programming that I do is more typical for guys and this other type over here that I don’t do is more typical for girls; in order to show how inclusive of women they are, they strongly encourage me to apply for [girl job] despite me being grossly overqualified for [boy job that I can’t be interviewed for]. I have gone to interviews where it is made clear to me that I’m the affirmative action candidate, that they were intrigued by my claim to play video games [which I was tested on], and then had the technical interviewer act astounded because during my whiteboarding exercise, I followed a coding standard that prevents a security breach and no other applicants did— and then not gotten the job. I have had jobs where my opinion was dismissed by my superiors who were less qualified than me, who repeatedly interrupted me during demos to tell me that I’m doing the demo wrong on a product that the interrupter has never used— and then gotten fired for calmly standing up to him.
So let me tell you why there are so few games with strong female protagonists and so few games with characters that women can identify with as idealized heroes: games are made by men for themselves.
Professor Breanne Fahs offers female students extra-credit if they “stop shaving their legs and underarms for ten weeks during the semester while keeping a journal to document their experiences.” For Fahs, who teaches women and gender studies, the purpose is to get students thinking critically about societal norms and gender roles. A similar opportunity is available to men in Fahs’ classes who recieve extra credit for shaving all of their hair from the neck down. One student, Stephanie Robinson, described it as a “life-changing experience: "Many of my friends didn’t want to work out next to me or hear about the assignment, and my mother was distraught at the idea that I would be getting married in a white dress with armpit hair. I also noticed the looks on faces of strangers and people around campus who seemed utterly disgusted by my body hair. It definitely made me realize that if you’re not strictly adhering to socially prescribed gender roles, your body becomes a site for contestation and public opinion."
They published a paper about this the first time someone did it, and it showed that non-white young women experienced a lot more pressure from friends and relatives to remove their hair. The authors suggested that because beauty standards are white - long, fine, flowy blonde hair, blue eyes, etc, etc - his body hair non-conformity was more troubling in WOC, as they crossed yet another boundary of femininity. They were also more likely to have darker or thicker body hair, so it would stand out more than on the blonde women, for example.
For me that sort of exemplifies why it’s so important to have multiple, intersectional feminisms. Because “let’s not shave our legs!” might be a powerful and important message, but it’s ultimately one of white privilege that sort of ignores the whiteness of these beauty standards in the first place.
I sincerely believe that anyone who identifies as pansexual, demisexual, etc has a mental disorder that affects the brain to think differently. I see it as like autism. It's another way of thinking. But personally, my opinion is the majority of those people identifying as such, are attention whores who say it to be "against the grain".
First of all, pansexual and bisexual are not so different. Most bisexual people don’t differenciate between the two. Yeah, not all bisexual people are attracted to people who are non-binary/ambiguous in some ways, but most of them have no problem with that. Irl most bisexual people are into NB people too, if they meet one who they find attractive. Online, people tend to differenciate between the two. I also call myself bisexual while I still find non-binary people attractive too. I know most Tumblr users would categorise me as pansexual because of that, but I prefer to stick to the old-school definitions in that sense. Not a disorder. Just a way of experiencing attraction.
Demisexual people are the one who cannot feel sexual attraction unless they get really close emotionally to somebody. I don’t think it’s that uncommon actually. I know a lot of people who feel that way. One of my closest friends is like that and he had no idea until a few months ago that this term actually exists. There is nothing wrong with him, it’s just a way someone’s emotions work.
Everyone experiences these things differently, it’s not a disorder and what you just said with your message is just