Tech Jobs and Apple: Every Bit As "Fun" As Pleasure Island? 185
theodp writes: On the eve of Apple's big Worldwide Developers Conference, Apple CEO Tim Cook said the lack of diversity in tech is 'our fault' — 'our' meaning the whole tech community. "I think in general we haven't done enough to reach out and show young women that it's cool to do it [tech] and how much fun it can be," Cook explained. Indeed, the WWDC scholarship winners shooting selfies with Cook at the San Francisco Four Seasons to celebrate their iPhone apps and other WWDC attendees looked to be having as much fun as, well, Pinocchio at Pleasure Island. But, as the NY Times recently pointed out, Cook can be guilty of overlooking inconvenient truths. Which here is that most young women (and men) wouldn't find it 'cool' or 'fun' to live with 8,000 co-workers in factory dormitories where they can be roused out of bed in the middle of the night by Apple for an emergency 12-hour shift to fit glass screens into beveled iPhone frames, although that too conjures up a scene from Pleasure Island.
How is that "our" fault? (Score:1)
How is it "our" responsibility to help anybody who can't see for him or herself (or who just has different tastes) see that tech jobs are "cool" and "fun?" Seems like young girls have every opportunity as young boys generally to form those opinions if they will.
Seems to me like this whole diversity push by all the big companies is just a way to make the job market more favorable for them. But I'm a white male, so I'm probably a racist, sexist homophobe.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Its "our" fault that we don't magically undo a hundred thousand years of evolution and make every woman think being in tech is cool and make them want to do all the same things as men.
Its "our" fault that women and men are different.
Can someone please explain to me WHY WE HAVE TO HAVE EQUAL REPRESENTATION WHEN WOMEN AREN'T FRAKING INTERESTED IN THE JOB.
Oh wait ... you know why? Because they can treat women to lower pay thanks to the required time off for most who want to have children not being able to ded
Re: (Score:1)
Get your free bitcoins from freebitco.in member 708! I have more experience!
Re: (Score:2)
Can someone please explain to me WHY WE HAVE TO HAVE EQUAL REPRESENTATION WHEN WOMEN AREN'T FRAKING INTERESTED IN THE JOB.
BECAUSE WOMEN ARE FREAKING INTERESTED IN THE JOB.
Aside from the many, many studies and surveys backing this up, you only have to look at recent history. Even 15 years ago there were more women graduating with tech degrees, or working in tech jobs.
Re: (Score:2)
BECAUSE WOMEN ARE FREAKING INTERESTED IN THE JOB.
Aside from the many, many studies and surveys backing this up,
Citation?
I know a lot of women (no seriously, my mother and sister are both women), and I simply don't see it anywhere. Sure we get *some* women who are genuinely interested in tech, but they are in the minority, just the same as men who want to work in infant care. Sure they exist, but nature dictates that generally speaking, men prefer mechanic type activity and women prefer social activities. This is even demonstrable in monkeys [newscientist.com]
Re: (Score:2)
No, he's wrong and you're right, actually.... eliminating outliers, women aren't really interested in tech jobs - especially when at the ages they need to be interested in STEM - the puberty years. Men and women have different physiology, it's not just the "naughty bits" that are different - certain parts of women's brains are larger than men's, and vice-versa. It's not that anyone is better or worse, it's that we're different. Of course, when women are doing tech jobs they should be paid similarly to me
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, when women are doing tech jobs they should be paid similarly to men, so I'm not justifying different treatment - but women generally actually do steer clear of STEM (generally) as a function of their physiology.
Agree 100% and in my experience they are. I've been managed a few payroll system projects and been privy organisational payroll and never saw any obvious discrepancy in remuneration. Men also tend towards money making jobs, while women will often target job satisfaction over cash. So on paper women get paid less overall, but it's because they choose jobs that pay less, or work less hours in order to support the family (eg Maternity leave).
Re: (Score:2)
So on paper women get paid less overall, but it's because they choose jobs that pay less, or work less hours in order to support the family (eg Maternity leave).
In a civilized society, paternity leave should be the same as maternity leave. There are plenty of men who would choose to spend time with their children instead of working, if they could afford to.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's in your internalized cultural values. An outdated institution is using you and the AC as meat puppets in a desperate struggle to pass on its memetic material. Let it go.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I think that "reaching out" is exactly why so many woman have run screaming from the industry.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see how 12 hour shifts in a factory to attach bevelled screens to an iPhone has any relationship to women in "tech" job (engineering & technical marketing). People in those roles are very well paid and voluntarily put in 24 hour "shifts" when the situation calls for it. The summary seems to be comparing the doctor to the orderly. Every single time "diversity in technology" comes up, someone mischaracterizes it, then someone else draws a parallel to their own hot issue that is more or less ortho
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Read my post again, China IS evil, but we are too. We refuse to cut them off, therefore we enable them to continue to be evil. We should be using our position to force them to become more democratic, enact and enforce environmental and labor protection laws, and generally kick them into the 21st century. Instead we are using them to erode our own laws, undermine our own workforce, and generally let them lead the way to further recidivism.
By your own statement, it does sound like we have laws to protect work
Not the reality of software development (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know what planet these people live on. It is a tough career with crazy deadlines and weird policies. You have to constantly keep up on the latest trends, or you will be viewed as 'too old' for the job. Meanwhile, computers never sleep, nor do they expect you to. You have to push back constantly to maintain your personal time.
That said, I love computers. I love programming. I just don't love the industry as it is now. There is a reason that most women don't want in. They may in fact be much smarter than men in this regards.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a programmer and I enjoy my job. I don't think software development is different to any other job. There are good places to work, and bad places. I've worked at bad places, but I know not everywhere is like that. I enjoy my current job.
Re: (Score:2)
OK, I've worked in the industry for a very long time now, and it can be 'fun' for the few bits where you actually get to prototype or work on the bulk of the features. That takes 10 percent of the time. The rest of the time you are going to be trying to find obscure bugs, introduced by crappy programmers rushing to get features out. Meanwhile you will be micro-managed through the 'agile' process asking you to account for every hour of your time. Then we will throw ill defined features at you, and expect them to be done within this two week time period, and be shocked when you reach the end of two weeks, and they are not done. This is usually due to the fact that meanwhile 16 support tickets were also thrown at you that are all critical in nature. Then you have those late night calls with your Indian counter parts that you can barely understand or stay awake for. But it is fun!
I don't know what planet these people live on. It is a tough career with crazy deadlines and weird policies. You have to constantly keep up on the latest trends, or you will be viewed as 'too old' for the job. Meanwhile, computers never sleep, nor do they expect you to. You have to push back constantly to maintain your personal time.
That said, I love computers. I love programming. I just don't love the industry as it is now. There is a reason that most women don't want in. They may in fact be much smarter than men in this regards.
Possibly one of the most insightful comments here in a very long time
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You need a new employer. I've never been in that position, and I've held several jobs over a long career.
Sick and tired of the political correctness (Score:5, Insightful)
What they all fail to realize is that equal opportunity does not mean equal outcome. Nobody gets me out of bed in the morning, brushes my teeth, forces me to do a particular job or anything else, so it's up to me to do that. Same with careers. If you have a specific problem, there are LOTS of legal protections to prevent this kind of thing - lawsuits, DoL complaints, and so on.
Ask any person of any identifiable group whether they feel good about being hired not because they were the best candidate, but because of some identifiable characteristic. You'll get two groups of answers - the majority who would feel awful about it, and the minority who would feel proud and entitled because of it. As long as that difference exists, this nonsense will continue.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that sums it up bests. It's short and to the point. Short enough to become a tagline/rally cry/etc.
Re: (Score:3)
Why is Tim Cook even wading into this discussion? Mainly because the SJWs are shaming companies such as Apple and Intel to do something about what they perceive to be an epidemic of gender skew in technology professions.
It's happened recently because tech companies have been getting more involved in politics. Apple/Google/Facebook want politicians in Washington to do something for them. Some of the Democrat politicians in return are asking about the gender ratio (because it's something they care about). So those companies talk about it, to make their 'partners' in Washington happy.
It's not because of shame, it's a way to get political power.
Re: (Score:3)
Why is Tim Cook even wading into this discussion? Mainly because the SJWs are shaming companies such as Apple and Intel to do something about what they perceive to be an epidemic of gender skew in technology professions.
It's happened recently because tech companies have been getting more involved in politics. Apple/Google/Facebook want politicians in Washington to do something for them. Some of the Democrat politicians in return are asking about the gender ratio (because it's something they care about). So those companies talk about it, to make their 'partners' in Washington happy. It's not because of shame, it's a way to get political power.
It's both, and the problem is that the SJWs and Democrats (who are wanting their votes and energy) both miss that actually, the disparity may--as others here have noted--be due to women being smarter and refusing to work in the field because of things entirely linked to gender-neutral working conditions...
While I doubt there's been any formal studies, because their results would actually be un-PC enough that you couldn't easily get the funding to do it, personal experience is that at least when it comes to
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
lol bro, just because you hate programming doesn't mean everyone does. Calm down.
Not everybody who opts to not be a programmer as a career hates programming. Some of us just took one look at what management thinks programmers ought to be capable of doing and decided that we'll keep doing it for the love of it and nothing more.
I'm one of them: I am calm, I do love programming, but I did enough research when deciding on a career to know that management on the whole believes that programmers are magical creatures capable of doing the impossible. It turns out that if a company expects me to
Re: (Score:2)
(Also, I'm not a bro and certainly not yours.)
Don't be sexist.
Re: (Score:2)
(Also, I'm not a bro and certainly not yours.)
Don't be sexist.
I don't know how to break it to you, but I have rather obvious anatomical indicators of my being the wrong sex to be a bro and we're not friends so even if I was the right sex it's still overly-familiar. So, how exactly is it sexist to object to being called something I most definitely am not?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
equal opportunity does not mean equal outcome.
Yep. We used to have a nifty word called "aptitude".
If opportunity were to be magically made really equal, then the only remaining differences in outcome would be due to aptitude.
We know for sure that aptitude for various tasks is not spread equally among individuals - that's why we have things like the Scholastic Aptitude Test, for Pete's sake.
Is aptitude for all tasks spread equally among groups? Genders? Racial groups? We don't know, and we sure aren't going to be allowed to study it. But if it isn
Re: (Score:2)
There have been plenty of studies into aptitude in different genders and racial groups. Intelligence, academic ability, dexterity, spacial awareness... You name it, it's been studied.
The point of all these efforts is to get more women to apply. Not to favour them in the selection process, just to get them to apply. MRAs go on and on about how hiring should always be done on merit, and it is. That's what's happening. That's the goal.
What you really mean is that you don't want any more competition.
Re: (Score:2)
Except for the fact you're lying through your teeth and the entire point IS explicitly to produce the 2:1-4:1 [cnn.com] advantage that women are privileged with in STEM fields.
Re: (Score:2)
That "study" is ridiculously flawed; they couldn't find a real paper arguing their point (noted in the article), so they invented a unrealistic scenario and used that. Nobody sane hires based entirely upon a piece of paper without meeting the person beforehand. It's absurd. They asked faculty members (not the people who would actually hire) to pick between two identical on-paper only people without being able to acquire more information or meet them in an interview setting, so of course they're going to dec
Re: (Score:2)
No, what they couldn't find was a single study that used actual faculty members in the actual fields being talked about. In other words they couldn't find a single scientifically valid study on the subject. THEIRS actually IS a valid scientific study which properly controls for confounding factors and passed peer review in a major journal.
You're just freaking out because your religion has been offended by the unspeakable heresy of disagreeing with your men-bad-women-victims narrative.
Re:Sick and tired of the MRAs (Score:2, Flamebait)
Why do the MRAs have to wade in on every discussion about this? We get it, you don't want to read or comment on these stories, so why do you keep doing it?
Why do MRAs keep repeating what everyone already knows? Of course it's about equal opportunity, not equal outcome... It's even called "equal opportunity" in many places.
More to the point, why don't they get that hiring it always done on merit? It's been discussed often enough, and they claim to be fed up of reading about it, yet the message hasn't sunk in
Re: (Score:2)
Women have a 2:1-4:1 advantage over men in getting STEM field jobs, and utterly dominate the entirety of education to the point of being nearly 2/3rds of graduates. Meanwhile men utterly dominate homelessness, workplace deaths, and are many times more likely to be convicted and incarcerated than a woman is for the same crime. In fact the criminal justice system is SO anti-man that a white male is more likely to go to prison than a black female for the same crime.
But you keep throwing "MRA" into almost every
Re: (Score:2)
Are you claiming it's OK that there's bias against women in one field because there's bias against men in another?
Perhaps you should realise that doubling down on bias just doubles the shittyness, and as such it's a terrible reason to continue. The sensible thing would be to try to remove bias. On that note, since you care about such things as the problems in the criminal justice system, what have you done about it? Or are you just whining all over the internet that someone else hasn't done anything about i
Re: (Score:2)
equal opportunity does not mean equal outcome
Far too many genuinely don't understand why this is true. They've been so sheltered from unequal opportunity that they take it for granted and assume the equality people have been fighting and dying for for hundreds of years must be something else.
We will have to keep spelling out "equal opportunity" until they clue in.
Re: (Score:2)
Becuase he is hire H1-Bs to replace all. So he is looking to hire foreign females, but get US Gov to give money for education that for jobs that will not be.
Well, if there are so many foreign female engineers and programmers - why are there so few American?
Convenient Truth (Score:3)
Those jobs are factory assembly work, not "tech". They are in the same category as assembling car parts, radios, or toy wagons. Cook is talking about creative development where you work with your mind, not simple low-skilled labor.
Yes, it sucks. But conflating the two in this article is dishonest.
Apple's Factories Have 30K Engineers (Score:2)
Steve Jobs's Advice for Obama [wsj.com]: Jobs told Mr. Obama that Apple employs 700,000 factory workers in China because it can't find the 30,000 engineers in the U.S. that it needs on site at its plants. "If you could educate these engineers," he said at the dinner, "we could move more manufacturing jobs here."
Re: (Score:2)
Jesus H. Christ (Score:5, Insightful)
Diversity for the sake of diversity is NOT a good thing. Granted, if a company has a thousand employees, and the only black face in the crowd belongs to the janitor, then there is a problem. But - if the company's demographics perfectly reflect community demographics, then we all know that the company is more absorbed in public relations and catering to special interest groups, than it is in BUSINESS.
I work for a woman. I work with women. Women work for me. I prefer the company of women, truth be told. But - I'm sure as HELL not going to hire a female because she's female. Or black. Or Asian. Or gay. Or whatever. I'm going to hire the MOST QUALIFIED PERSON FOR THE JOB! If that happens to be a straight white male - so be it. If it happens to be a gay Chinese woman, again, so be it.
Screw diversity. It's a waste of my time, waste of your time, and a HUGE waste of company resources.
Re: (Score:2)
But - if the company's demographics perfectly reflect community demographics, then we all know that the company is more absorbed in public relations and catering to special interest groups, than it is in BUSINESS.
Apple's own figures are that 80% of its tech workers are male. Does California have an 8:2 male:female ratio?
But - I'm sure as HELL not going to hire a female because she's female.
Neither is Apple. They just want their workforce to reflect their community's and the world's demographics.
Re: (Score:2)
AC already stated that California has an 8:2 ration of males to females WHO ARE QUALIFIED TO HOLD THAT POSITION. With Affirmitive Action, we would give those positions to unqualified persons, just because they are female, black, or whatever. And, that route leads to multiple failures.
Re: (Score:2)
Diversity for the sake of diversity is NOT a good thing.
Diversity for its own sake does in fact have some value, but it has costs as well, and in principle it's just as illegal and repugnant as any other form of discrimination.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I'd like to share a story that my father experienced.
He went to Oberlin University in Ohio back in the 1960s. Super-liberal-mega-leftist-ultra-femimist-uber-progressive school today, and even moreso back then. They decided that it wasn't fair that the student body was mostly white folk, so they pushed hard for the administration to enact quotas so that everyone would have a fair shot.
So the school did that. They had quotas, and they needed to have a certain percentage of minority "races" (aka skin colors).
Re: (Score:2)
If the girl has a gun, she may have an accident with it (guns aren't real safe around people who don't know how to handle them well). She may mark herself as a dangerous target and get shot when the criminal merely wanted her purse, or get murdered instead of raped. There's downsides here.
What the girl is unlikely to do with a gun is successfully defend herself against a personal attack. That takes more than just a gun.
Re: (Score:2)
No, the point is, you have no point. Let us consider women. There are some women - we might even say many women - who feel like their gender holds them back. At the same time, there are many women who don't see things that way. And, there are millions of women who don't WANT to work in the work force, at all. These are mainly "home makers". Obama made a mindless speech not many months ago, in which he told those home makers that he doesn't WANT them to be homemakers! These women are being pressured t
Working in a factory =/= working in technology (Score:1)
Who in their right mind thinks a factory worker counts as a technology worker? The closing sentence is completely irrelevant, even if true.
Red herring? (Score:4, Interesting)
. "I think in general we haven't done enough to reach out and show young women that it's cool to do it [tech] and how much fun it can be,"
Do "we" reach out for the young men?
Nobody ever "reached out" for me, yet here I am. Have I just been living under a rock?
Re: (Score:2)
I avoided computers while going to school, even though everyone told me I should be in computers. I studied electronics in the early 1990's, but those jobs were disappearing. After a three year stint as spaghetti cook, my roommate got me a job as a software tester "intern" (i.e., Fortune 500 company couldn't afford another full-time staffer). After that six-month stint, I became a video game tester for three years. When I became a lead video game tester that lasted another three years, I went back to school
Women who want to do it are doing it (Score:1)
There are women on the tech field, those who want to do it are doing it already. More than that do not want to do it and you can't and shouldn't either force or manipulate them into anything.
Steve Wozniak was nowast encouraged wastby society to spend his entire time building computers and other tech. He simply liked being able to do something for the sake of doing it. Not because anybody told him he should like it but because it made him feel good that he could do it. Good luck convincing people who do no
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
No, those who want to do it more than they want to avoid putting up with harassing, unprofessional, boorish assholes, are doing it already.
The problem is, there's a lot of harassing, unprofessional, boorish assholes in the industry, and they're doing their damnedest to protect their boys' club.
This line of argument is like concluding, that women "obviously don't like golf," based on a quick perusal of the Augusta National Golf Club's membership list circa 2005.
Re: (Score:1)
Bullshit. Like I said, Wozniak wasn't forced or manipulated by anybody to do tech stuff ON HIS OWN in his house. I wasn't either and I did do tech stuff anyway before EVER even setting a foot in any workplace ever.
Re: (Score:1)
Bullshit! People who go into the tech that I actually give a shit about are not those, who came here just because it's one of the possible career choices but because they liked doing in for its own sake and I don't see as many women doing ANYTHING technical for its own sake before they even think about their future jobs.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
No, those who want to do it more than they want to avoid putting up with harassing, unprofessional, boorish assholes, are doing it already.
In other words, *exactly* the same as men.
If you think all men are equally content with dysfunctional workplace cultures, well, that's just sexist.
North Korean news (Score:3)
This is the most rote, politically correct, by-the-numbers news story I've seen on Slashdot in a long time. Are you building a portfolio to try to apply for a job at a North Korean news bureau? Are you getting paid or graded based on the number of silly, college-student-activist, progressive bromides you can pack into a paragraph?
People don't buy apps based on the "diversity" of the programming staff. App users don't care. It's a 100% equal opportunity for everyone. But that's not really what you want, is it?
he's part of it (Score:2)
Bleeding heart, emotion based reasoning is part of the legacy, pseudoscience, pseudo-liberal mindset.
Whether Timmay wants to admit it or not, the meritocracy matters -- blacks, women, christians struggle when faced with asians, males, and jews, at least when faced with a difficult test. The world of physics blossomed after the Ivy League finally allowed Jews into their schools in the 1920's and 1930's. All that immersion in the Torah as a child really pays off.
So it's bad enough that we use emotional reason
Not even about gender (Score:2)
The CEOs just want to portray the menial jobs as 'cool' so they can reduce wages even further.
What's "fun" have to do with anything? (Score:2)
When I was a video game tester and a lead video game tester for six years, most people told me that I have a "fun" job. My answer always mystified them, "It's fun for the first six weeks."
Working at a video game company isn't fun and games. Testers test video games, testers don't play video games. A distinction that most people don't get. Something that fresh out of school newbies have to learn the hard way when they get a job in the video game industry. Most don't last more than two months.
When I worked at
We haven't done enough? (Score:2)
JFC. All we have done in the last 15 year, and probably before that, is try to encourage women and minorities to enter the field. Everywhere I've worked since college has had targeted recruiting for women and minorities. One company would spend a lot of money on recruiting trips to HBCUs and HWCUs and the only other university they visit is the local state school because it's only a day trip. We have had outreach programs at all levels of education, even driving down into elementary schools, to make STE
Isn't this obvious? (Score:2)
Tim Cook doesn't give a shit about minorities or women for that matter. The reason he is saying this is so there there will be more programmers in the pool to choose from. More programmers means that Apple and others can get away with paying lower wages, since there will be more qualified candidates to choose from. It's the same reason that they all support more H1-B visas - flood the market with programmers and drive down salaries.
Just like everything else in business, it's all about the money.
Grrrrkkk.... (Score:2)
...in general we haven't done enough to reach out and show young women that it's cool to do it [tech] and how much fun it can be...
Isn't it time we started waking up to the fact that computing and technology isn't about 'cool' or 'fun'? And wouldn't it be better to show that little bit of respect to young men and women, to not expect that the only thing they could possibly have an interest in is 'cool' and 'fun'? Most young, clever people simply want to get to grips with life in a serious way, to develop their skills and feel they are doing something wortwhile. Why else do so many young choose careers that are demanding?
Technology is
Suddenly... CHINA! (Score:2)
Is it just me or does OP seem to be stretching a little bit in the last few sentences to try and segue an article about US gender diversity into another dig at the working conditions in China.
Look, I'd like for all the people in China to have nice jobs, and be treated well, breathe clean air and eat double quarter pounders whenever they want to as much as the next guy. But stop blaming Apple for this not happening. Apple strides to set restrictions on their manufacturing partners that have been steadily i
Re:Countless science papers confirm average IQ Low (Score:5, Informative)
IQ never changes upward after birth
Of course it can, here is one example [wikipedia.org]. You are on crack or something. More specifically, you are only looking at studies that confirm your preconceived viewpoint, which is how you are able to remain racist.
Re: (Score:2)
Hm. I had always heard that IQ trends upwards until about 18 at which time it starts declining ever so slightly until death. Certain things like music can increase IQ as well.
Re: (Score:2)
I had always heard that IQ trends upwards until about 18 at which time it starts declining ever so slightly until death
Most people don't make the same active effort to improve their brain that they've been making until high school.
Re: (Score:2)
IQ never changes upward after birth. If a test shows otherwise, experts in the field correctly claim such a contrived test is not a proper IQ test.
I provided a link that proves otherwise. You have nothing. All you look at are studies that confirm your bias, and if one disagrees, you claim it is wrong.
Koreans, Olympics, and Sprint (Score:2)
Countless science papers confirm average IQ of west African blacks is far Lower than most other racial groups.
I'm curious if any such studies have followed black children adopted by white parents vs. white children adopted by black parents. Or perhaps you're just telling a Pinocchio.
A north korean descent person will not win an Olympic Sprint Race
But once you cross the border to the south, you see Samsung, the official cell phone maker of the Olympic Games [olympic.org]. And they're on Sprint [samsung.com].
minnesota twins studies for 20 years and more (Score:1)
of course black children have been studied to death.
including genetic twins raised in different cities.
minnesota twins studies for 20 years since 1959 : ... proves humans are similar to all other mammals regarding IQ being genetic. 10 billion dollars USA spent on Head Start program also came to same conclusion.
http://www.livescience.com/472... [livescience.com]
Everyone likes to downvote science and facts on slashdot.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have always wondered: what's with you white nationalists and anti-Semitism? You keep promoting the IQ and ancestral civilization of white people, except for hating the subgroup with the highest IQs and exactly the sort of prosperity-promoting civilized moral values you claim to promote elsewhere within the race.
Re: (Score:1)
We cannot be bothered to read the article. Now you want us to read the post before moderating it? Surely you ask too much!
I do not generally moderate and, even with posting and an excellent karma, the system seems to have figured that out as I do not seem to get mod points much any more. I am not one to judge others very much so moderating seems a bit uncomfortable to me.
Re: (Score:3)
None of that is set in stone. A century ago, the IQ gap between Irish Protestants and Irish Catholics was bigger than the current gap between whites and blacks. Today, that gap is completely gone, probably because of not eating potatoes for three meals a day. We should not look at the current gaps as something that should be accepted, but as something that should be fixed. Blacks in America have worse nutrition, and more exposure to lead and other environmental contaminants. They are much less likely t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They are much less likely to be breastfed, which can change IQ by 3 points.
Not to detract from your main point, but breast feeding is one of those topics which has been highly politicized and any weird claims like this should be taken with a grain of salt. I've read a study claiming what you say (can't find it now), here's [nih.gov] another study claiming that isn't true. There are many more. Enough that I think you'd need to be an expert in the field in order to sort between them.
Usually though, when researchers start dickering over this sort of thing, what you can say for sure is that w
Re: (Score:2)
"When I was a kid, while other boys where learning how to talk to girls, I spent a lot of time working through puzzle books and doing recreational mathematics." So because girls don't have a hard time talking to girls they don't get good at puzzles and math? Brilliant!
Re: Same studies say whites are moronically stupid (Score:4, Interesting)
It should also be noted that in those same studies..... whites are pretty moronically stupid in comparison to their asian cousins :p
Actualy a white's IQ level (which is used as a "base" also) is *on average* at 100, an (Chinese/Japanese/Korean/etc) Asian's is at 105 (other Asians, e.g., Indians, Arabs are much less than that, about 90), and a black's at 80...
So, it is the blacks who have a very low IQ (if i use YOUR words: "moronically stupid in comparison to" others). A good starting point for -scientific- research (without so much of the other "stuff" that are usual in this kind of discussions) is the book "The Bell Curve" - contains many IQ studies.
Unfortunately this fact (i.e., blacks have lower IQ than other races) is so problematic to discuss because it "paints" anyone who express it as a racist who *hates* blacks - i am a racist, but i don't hate blacks, i just believe in racial differences (actually, i believe that i love blacks more than many people who try to suppress their low IQ fact, because i think that they can be helped socially if we recognize the *biological* fact, in the right way: there is a reason we WHITES have special education programs for our WHITES with low IQ...)
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately this fact (i.e., blacks have lower IQ than other races) is so problematic to discuss because it "paints" anyone who express it as a racist who *hates* blacks - i am a racist, but i don't hate blacks, i just believe in racial differences (actually, i believe that i love blacks more than many people who try to suppress their low IQ fact, because i think that they can be helped socially if we recognize the *biological* fact, in the right way: there is a reason we WHITES have special education programs for our WHITES with low IQ...)
Interesting. I agree, and same goes for women who tend to whinge a lot these days about their situation. There is no doubt that Western European men led the charge of human development, regardless of race. So those who can trace their heritage via that line have had historical advantages, even if you have more melanin than someone else. The good news is the the difference is not too big that it can't be corrected, and anyone who has access to the same levels of nutrition, social structure, health and educat
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately this fact (i.e., blacks have lower IQ than other races) is so problematic to discuss because it "paints" anyone who express it as a racist who *hates* blacks - i am a racist, but i don't hate blacks, i just believe in racial differences (actually, i believe that i love blacks more than many people who try to suppress their low IQ fact, because i think that they can be helped socially if we recognize the *biological* fact, in the right way: there is a reason we WHITES have special education programs for our WHITES with low IQ...)
Interesting. I agree, and same goes for women who tend to whinge a lot these days about their situation. There is no doubt that Western European men led the charge of human development, regardless of race. So those who can trace their heritage via that line have had historical advantages, even if you have more melanin than someone else. The good news is the the difference is not too big that it can't be corrected, and anyone who has access to the same levels of nutrition, social structure, health and education can achieve the same level as anyone else. It's important to distinguish between racism (discrimination) and recognition of physiological differences between humans.
I am not just racist (as i already mentioned) but also sexist, i.e., i believe that racial differences and differences between the sexes exist - i agree that it's important to distinguish between racial/sexual discrimination and recognition of physiological differences between races/sexes, although i also believe in a "healthy discrimination" (in a "good spirit"... if you can understand MY spirit!) that can help races/sexes socially.
The most important thing in my opinion is to not suppress scientific facts
Re: (Score:2)
I am a Greek. I remember my school as a child and our special education class for retards (everyone there was Greek, i.e., no other races, just white kids of very low IQ),
Where I live, Greeks would not consider themselves "white". Years ago we used to have a lot of racial tension between "whites" and greeks. That seems to have blown over now that we have a new enemy* in the Chinese and Arabs.
*perceived by populist media
Re: (Score:2)
I am a Greek. I remember my school as a child and our special education class for retards (everyone there was Greek, i.e., no other races, just white kids of very low IQ),
Where I live, Greeks would not consider themselves "white". Years ago we used to have a lot of racial tension between "whites" and greeks. That seems to have blown over now that we have a new enemy* in the Chinese and Arabs. *perceived by populist media
If we accept the 3 "basic" races (whites-Caucasians, blacks-Africans, Asians-Mongolians), we Greeks are whites - among that general white race we can say that we are Southern-Mediterranean whites (like Italians for example, or Jews, i.e., different from Slavs for example) - remember that we Greeks are (in)famous for trying to differentiate ourselves from the rest of the world all the time, even if that means to be self-excluded from the "white race" (i am well known in Slashdot for my usual "we Greeks, you
Re: (Score:2)
We have a mixed bag here, so Greeks get bundled in with Italians and Middle Eastern brown skin races and labelled "Wogs" (which can either be offensive or friendly depending on your intent)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There are no biological facts here. Different groups have different IQs for various reasons, since IQ tests do not measure raw intelligence potential. Heck, if you took a modern IQ test and used it on the typical white of a century ago, the result would be roughly around 85.
Re: (Score:2)
You are overlooking that there are large differences in IQs based on other factors. Look up the Flynn effect [wikipedia.org]. Back around 1930, the average American had what would now be an IQ around 80. They weren't genetically different from the average American nowadays. There's debate on what caused the difference, but by citing an average black IQ score of 80 you're putting them on a par with the 1930 US.
Shall we just accept the biological fact that 1930s US people were inferior?
Re: (Score:2)
Actualy a white's IQ level (which is used as a "base" also) is *on average* at 100, an (Chinese/Japanese/Korean/etc) Asian's is at 105 (other Asians, e.g., Indians, Arabs are much less than that, about 90), and a black's at 80...
What's the average Greek IQ?
Since we Greeks are whites i guess somewhere close to 100 (i believe a bit lower than 100 - of the whites, the most inteligent, more than the average, i think are -Ashkenazi- Jews).
Re: (Score:2)
Actualy a white's IQ level (which is used as a "base" also) is *on average* at 100, an (Chinese/Japanese/Korean/etc) Asian's is at 105 (other Asians, e.g., Indians, Arabs are much less than that, about 90), and a black's at 80...
What's the average Greek IQ?
If you exclude our annoying fascistic fried here around 100 but even given the size of the greek population once you include him it drops to around 23 or so.
Re: (Score:2)
Actualy a white's IQ level (which is used as a "base" also) is *on average* at 100, an (Chinese/Japanese/Korean/etc) Asian's is at 105 (other Asians, e.g., Indians, Arabs are much less than that, about 90), and a black's at 80...
What's the average Greek IQ?
Somewhat less than the average Greek IOU.
Re: (Score:3)
I've had sat psychologist administered IQ tests a year apart and had my score differ by 10 points. I've been told that, in fact, this is perfectly normal and well within the accuracy expected of IQ tests by psychologists who take them seriously. I wouldn't worry about IQ scores changing (they may well do that, but it is equally likely measurement error). IQ is a very imperfect measure to begin with. Our ability to measure it, even under the best of conditions, is extremely poor. Take most IQ studies with a
Re: (Score:2)
Idiots like you give racism a bad name. Learn to write.
No, what gives racists a bad name is being racist.
Re: (Score:2)
i think you're overreaching a bit.
Re: (Score:2)
i think you're overreaching a bit.
As opposed to the article?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The whole history of the California Gold Rush is historcally distorted.
What happened right prior to the California Gold Rush? The United States annexed the part of Mexico that was made into California in 1848. They badly needed white Americans to rush there and settle the new land, to establish an American base population.
So what happened? The 1849 California Gold Rush. There's GOLD out there, fellahs. Here, hop this wagon, train or boat and move out there!
Re: (Score:2)