One simply cannot have an "unconscious bias." One cannot be sexist,
racist or any other "ist" without realizing it.
Bias/discrimination/bigotry are all based on the intent of the person being
biased. Isn't that what the controversy about the latest Utah
hate crime bill is all about? In the bill, if a person beats someone up because
he doesn't like their hairstyle, he gets charged with assault. If he beats
someone up because he doesn't like their race, religion or sexual
orientation, then they add the "hate crime" charges to it. Soooooo.......if someone beats up a woman, and it can be shown that their
Twitter history shows their "unconscious bias" against women (according
to this published "science"), can they now be charged with a hate crime?
We're going down the wrong road here, people. We need to back
up and take the other fork before we go so far down this road that we can't
find our way back.
Well, I was going to eviscerate this article, but my fellow commenters have beat
me to the punch. Thanks for the insightful and reasoned objections!
Really? Just the title makes me nauseous. Identity politics rears it's
phobic head here at Deseret News. That guy is hot! That could be sexist but is
it wrong to say? Is the guy offended? Or is it some SJW who claims offense on
behalf of men everywhere who are not offended? As a woman, I was never offended
if someone said I was hot. But, I'm a feminist from the 70's before
feminism became such an ugly and divisive and disgusting thing.
So I retweet 20 lame dad jokes from guys I follow and five deeply insightful
tweets by women. Am I a pro guy sexist?A very flawed concept. Who
you follow and who you retweet does not define you. What you retweet does.
Notice how many people are angry and in denial over overt sexism? Sexism
exists and pervades every level of every culture. When anyone, male or female,
of any age, says "grow a pair" or "man up," they are being
overtly sexist. We define masculinity as strength, and femininity as weakness
and submission. Each and every day in the majority of American television
programs, whether a sit-com, rom-com, or docu-drama, women are presented as weak
and emotional, and men as strong and in control of their emotions: the women
scream in terror, the men save the day. That formula for sexism has been baked
into the cake of American Culture. Imagine the men screaming and clutching
their pearls, running for the exits when the bad guys draw their guns. Imagine
the women calmly saving the day, then comforting the sobbing men hiding under
the tables? See the problem here? Sexism.
Do you know how many "ists" there are that you can be without knowing it
because someone else took offense at something you said or did? If we have to
go around worring about someone taking offense at whatever we say or do, I might
as well pack up and move to the outback.
Scientific American published this? I'd guess they're activity trying
to shoot themselves in the foot for the progressive cause, but it might just be
subconscious bias...Men outnumber women on Twitter by almost 2 to 1.
Men are retweeted more than women. There could be a large number of factors that
explain the latter fact, including the most obvious one--simple statistics. More
men to retweet, more male retweets.But this "scientist"
assumes it's bias, and the solution to him is to be overtly sexist by
ignoring men in favor of women. And this got published in Scientific American.
If anyone wonders why so many of your fellow Americans can, in your estimation,
deny science, this is a perfect example of why. Because there's a lot of
science out there that is completely bunk, but many won't point it out.
I can say that I am not because I don't use Twitter.
Just because you happen to like more tweets from certain individuals instead of
from others, and those individuals happen to represent predominantly one gender,
does not make you sexist. Our world is growing more and more insane as people
feel compelled to find new things to be upset about, because many of the real
problems of the past have been or are being solved.
"the gender classifications are predictions based on users' first names
as given in their Twitter accounts":Seems like an awfully thin, not to
mention sexist, foundation on which to build an ambitious conclusion, but hey,
it's a lot easier than actually surveying a large sample of Twitter users.
Is there a tool on Twitter that measures how little I care if someone thinks I
am a sexist?
Does the current definition of sexist include recognizing that men and women
have differences beyond the obvious?
Good heavens! This is a report of someone interpreting the data to match the
hypothesis! The report even provides several reasons why the conclusion may be
wrong. Failure to retweet doesn’t equal ignoring or silencing the person
who posted. This is just another new and creative way for some to find offense
where none is intended.
Wow. Normally I enjoy the In Depth articles that the DN has started to run.
However, this one feels to me like it's trying to chase down a bogeyman
that may not even be there. I do not see any way that the researcher
who came to this conclusion about gender bias can account for content, context
and subject matter interest. This is a very tenuous argument.Now I
realize that I may not be the best judge of such bias. I don't have a
Twitter account and I believe social media in general is one of the great
cancers in our world at large. But whether it be retweets, likes, thumbs ups,
or whatever, I would only show support for a given opinion based on its content
and the truth I see in it, not for gender of the OP. The argument of
the article does not help weed out sexism; it actually helps cement it in place.
My goodness I didn't think we could get more silly than that meaningless
Bechdel test everyone cheers on in fiction like it's the Rosetta Stone, but
this person has found a way. Subconscious bias, I don't honestly understand
why anyone takes it seriously, but it really is the proverbial cult of
flagellation for my generation.The only people who are going to care
about this are people who already beat themselves up about these issues while
people like me who are probably the intended targets are just going to laugh at
the silliness of it all. You can lead a horse to water, you can't make him
drink, even if you lecture them until you're blue in the face.