Op Ed

Kotaku - Nerds and Male Privilege.
The idea that perhaps the way women are portrayed in fandom is aleetle sexist is regularly met with denials, justifications and outright dismissal of the issue. So regularly, in fact, that there's a Bingo card covering the most common responses. Part of the notion of male privilege in fandom is that nothing is wrong with fandom and that suggestions that it might benefit from some diversity is treated as a threat.

But what is that threat, exactly?

View : : :
81.
 
Re: Op Ed
Dec 19, 2011, 17:12
81.
Re: Op Ed Dec 19, 2011, 17:12
Dec 19, 2011, 17:12
 
Prez wrote on Dec 19, 2011, 16:49:
Draugr:

I appreciate you are concerned above all for equal treatment for all, but in my view you are letting easily manipulated stats give you a false sense of unfairness in the workplace that simply doesn't exist, and hasn't for a very long time.

Numbers are funny things. They could be made to dance a jig, and one set of data can be used to argue a point from both sides. Stats are worse - they don't ever tell the complete story, and are almost never represented honestly when used in discussions like these.

And the finger would point the same way, I would argue that the stats were being used to give a false sense of fairness. I've avoided using stats due to this particular weakness they can suffer from, I can only think of one stat I cited, and it was to prove a point, not provide evidence of privilege.

I will certainly agree with you. I've been very careful not to get too statistic heavy for that very reason,which is the same reason I was being critical of his post to begin with. I wasn't using stats as the basis for my argument, that was someone else. I can only think of one stat which I cited, My only point in showing stats was that things were being cherry picked, so while we can see a bunch of stats supporting someones argument, there are plenty of stats that don't support it, and when bringing in stats we can run into the problems you covered. When we look at a stat, or collection thereof, and then draw conclusion such as 'priveledge doesn't exist.' Then the statistics are not being used for their intended purpose. The only conclusion we could factually draw from the stats is (for example) More men serve in the military than woman. Numbers can be misleading, and aren't the only factors when considering issues such as these.

None of the stats listed were really produced in any meaningful way, and discusses nothing of the methodology when gathering the stats, or the samples used, and far from encompass all the issues that men and women are subject to, so they are moot.
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
2.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
18.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
37.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
   Re: Op Ed
38.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
    Re: Op Ed
3.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
4.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
5.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
64.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
   Re: Op Ed
7.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
8.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
   Re: Op Ed
9.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
    Re: Op Ed
11.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
    Re: Op Ed
6.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
10.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
12.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
13.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
14.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
15.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
16.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
20.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
17.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
19.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
31.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
33.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
34.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
35.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
21.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
22.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
26.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
32.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
36.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
   Re: Op Ed
41.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
    Re: Op Ed
42.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
    Re: Op Ed
43.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
     Re: Op Ed
49.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
      Re: Op Ed
51.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
       Re: Op Ed
44.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
     Re: Op Ed
45.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
      Re: Op Ed
46.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
       Re: Op Ed
47.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
        Re: Op Ed
66.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
        Re: Op Ed
67.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
         Re: Op Ed
69.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
          Re: Op Ed
70.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
           Re: Op Ed
71.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
            Re: Op Ed
72.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
             Re: Op Ed
73.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
              Re: Op Ed
74.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
             Re: Op Ed
79.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
             Re: Op Ed
80.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
              Re: Op Ed
 81.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
               Re: Op Ed
82.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
                Re: Op Ed
83.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
                 Re: Op Ed
76.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
          Re: Op Ed
77.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
           Re: Op Ed
23.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
24.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
25.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
27.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
28.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
29.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
48.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
50.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
   Re: Op Ed
52.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
    Re: Op Ed
53.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
    Re: Op Ed
54.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
     Re: Op Ed
55.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
      Re: Op Ed
56.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
       Re: Op Ed
57.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
      Re: Op Ed
58.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
       Re: Op Ed
59.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
     Re: Op Ed
62.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
      Re: Op Ed
78.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
      Re: Op Ed
60.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
    Re: Op Ed
63.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
     Re: Op Ed
65.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
      Re: Op Ed
30.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
39.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
40.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
61.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
68.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
75.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011