Some Prejudice Is More Ignorable Than Others
Academic norm smasher and social psychologist Lee Jussim blogs at Psychology Today about "the gaps" -- racial, gender, and other group-based gaps -- and the assumptions made by the academic left that gaps equal discrimination (when the gap happens to a "protected" group).
Some examples of the gaps?
Women earn about 75-80% of men. On intelligence and standardized achievement tests, Asian Americans score higher than Whites, who score higher than Latinos, who score higher than Blacks......Where do these gaps come from? The selective go-to explanation in the social sciences is discrimination. It is selective, because it is typically only applied when the group is one the left deems both oppressed and protected in some way (racial and ethnic minorities, women, LGBT, and so on). There is some, but not much, scholarship on why schools so consistently disadvantage boys, though understanding the gender gap in science fields is a hot topic.
...Sometimes gaps do result from discrimination. In rare cases, they may result exclusively from discrimination. In many cases, they probably result in part from discrimination. They rarely, however, result exclusively from discrimination.
Because gaps are often complex, simplistic, single-cause explanations, such as "discrimination," are rarely justified.
And consider:
...forms of discrimination against high status groups that the left, including leftist academics, routinely ignore. These are important because, in their very different way, they undermine the "gap=discrimination" assumption.There is, for example, ample evidence of prejudice against Asian Americans and Jews, which receives little attention in social science research, because of an attitude among academics that only prejudice against lower status groups matters (never mind that genocide and mass murder have often been committed against successful minority groups--Jews, Armenians, Tutsis, Kurds, Kulaks, and the teachers/professionals/intellectuals in China [during the Cultural Revolution], and Cambodia [during the Khmer Rouge's reign of terror]).
via @SteveStuWill
"There is some, but not much, scholarship on why schools so consistently disadvantage boys, though understanding the gender gap in science fields is a hot topic."
A big part of the reason for this is because you can't get grant money to study the outcomes of boys in schools. With most science funding these days coming from centralized governments, the Left has been able to capture the process and thoroughly politicize it. Researchers whose work reliably produces answers that the Left favors have little difficulty obtaining grants; every researcher who is regarded as "risky" (in that their work might produce politically incorrect results) gets turned down. (Michael Mann is rolling in grant money; John Christy has to depend in part on private donations to keep his work going.) It's Lysenkoism on a worldwide scale, and it's causing scientific progress in general to slow down (which is the first time since the mid-19th century that that has happened). I'm waiting for the day, and it's not very far away, when scientists will have to sign a loyalty oath in order to keep working in their field. When that day comes, we won't be having this discussion because Lee Jussim will not be able to get an article like this published.
Cousin Dave at March 15, 2016 6:55 AM
Explain to me the racism / sexism / cisism / ableism inherent in the following questions
2+2=?
What year was the Magna Carta signed?
What year were the Articles of Confederation dissolved and the Constitution ratified?
lujlp at March 15, 2016 7:01 AM
Women earn about 75-80% of men.
They're still trotting out that old chestnut?
You can tell it is contrived simply on the basis of the ratio offered. A more honest approach would be that a "man makes $X/hour and a woman $Y/hour" but I suspect if you do that then $X=$Y as a close approximation. Because among other things, they count people with multiple jobs and overtime as being the same as full time equivalent when it isn't.
Sorry, SWJs, I can do math. And ask questions like "how did you get that number?" and "where is your data?"
I R A Darth Aggie at March 15, 2016 7:02 AM
To be fair, when assuming a work week equals 35 hours regardless of how long someone really works women do earn 80% of what men do.
When comparing hours worked however we find women work 75% if the time men do.
So women get 80% of the cash for doing 75% of the work.
Want to end the wage gap? Pay all men 7% more than they get now
lujlp at March 15, 2016 10:44 AM
During a period in which the Ivy League had quotas to keep Jews out, the Jews nevertheless gained a way disproportionate share of Nobel Prizes, patents, scientific publications, etc. I refer readers to Thomas Sowell's book "The Quest for Cosmic Justice".
Craig Loehle at March 15, 2016 4:08 PM
this is a test
Gregg at March 15, 2016 9:06 PM
Leave a comment