> maybe there isn’t hard data, but it’s pretty obvious to a lot of people, so I would say this is something that need to be disproven, not proven
Huh, wonder why this world view doesnt jive with academia.
> maybe there isn’t hard data, but it’s pretty obvious to a lot of people, so I would say this is something that need to be disproven, not proven
Huh, wonder why this world view doesnt jive with academia.
When the ingroup is underrepresented the question is “how can we get more ingroup in”.
But when the outgroup is underrepresented it’s met with “maybe outgroup just isn’t as good”.
Eg. women in tech, men in nursing; conservatives vs liberals in academia.
Contrast that with women in tech or men in nursing and it becomes obvious why the comparison isn’t valid: women want to be good technologists, not to reject the validity of technology or say we should all go back to the Amish lifestyle (that desire is common to senior developers of both genders). Male nurses want to be good nurses, not claiming that their gender means they can commit medical malpractice.
Also the whole idea that they are self selecting out is absurd. There are many flavors of conservative, not just the ones you see on Ali G show or whatever.