RE: Physicists show bias against female job applicants
October 26, 2012 at 7:36 am
(This post was last modified: October 26, 2012 at 8:00 am by jonb.)
It is blatant when it is identified. It is just a bias, when we just see the affects.
http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archi.../90/73G00/
William Osborne not good enough how about Princeton then?
PS
I love the implication in this that the Viennese are a primitive 15 century people, Oh yes we Europeans are not as advanced as you upright citizens, no bias there is there?
http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archi.../90/73G00/
William Osborne not good enough how about Princeton then?
PS
(October 26, 2012 at 1:29 am)Moros Synackaon Wrote: The above is not bias. It is blatant discrimination, albeit done to serve an existing audience whom does not care.
The same reason why Chick-Fil-A can continue -- their core demographic who they care very, very much for, in the end run, did not care what the myriad others who'd buy from CFA once and never again.
Nothing deeper than that.
To put in fashion speak, you can't make a modern shoe fit when the audience insists on it being from the 15th century.
If anything, the fossils who are most valued by the philharmonic have the final say.
Also, you're conflating a microcosm to the generic, all encompassing wide-spread issue outlined in preceding posts. In other words, it doesn't fit.
William Osborne's personal views do not scientific study make.
I love the implication in this that the Viennese are a primitive 15 century people, Oh yes we Europeans are not as advanced as you upright citizens, no bias there is there?
