tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post7381940867429615405..comments2024-03-25T17:38:55.490-07:00Comments on Dar Kush: Something to think aboutSteven Barneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13630529492355131777noreply@blogger.comBlogger51125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-12703244270057278832008-06-03T14:55:00.000-07:002008-06-03T14:55:00.000-07:00Moving on myself, we're 6 posts down now .... I ac...Moving on myself, we're 6 posts down now .... <BR/><BR/>I accept and respect your expertise in the area of statistics; you've got me beat. I'd happily teach writing or computer science; despite having written statistics software, I wouldn't presume to teach statistics.<BR/><BR/>... that said, in the appeal to authority, the principal author of this study, Steven Kull, seems quite a talented fellow himself.<BR/><BR/>http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/about.php?nid=&id=#staff<BR/><BR/>Moving past that ... I don't think your objection makes a great deal of sense. Critiquing the study for eliding the respondent's political bent, when measuring the respondent's political bent isn't what they set out to do in the first place, seems thoroughly besides the point...<BR/><BR/>See you in more recent posts. :-)Daniel Keys Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12992599044462413412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-14826526199729066272008-06-03T13:30:00.000-07:002008-06-03T13:30:00.000-07:00Dan: I earned my living as a statistician. I have ...Dan: I earned my living as a statistician. I have testified as an expert witness on statistical matters in federal court and the fish example I used in one of my posts was from a real case in Michigan. The result there was that an EPA recommended procedure, which I demonstrated in actual trials was biased, was removed from state law and one developed by myself and an independent consultant from Michigan State University was substituted. All I am saying is from a professional point of view there are several flaws in the study's methodology that prevent me from accepting any conclusion about FOX news based upon it. Let me try one more time to state clearly my main objection. If every thing about the study had been done identically. All the same people had been asked the same questions on the same dates, but the question What is your primary source of news was removed and replace by the question would you describe yourself as liberal, conservative, neither, the people would have answered the other questions the same and the results of the study would have shown that conservatives had the three misconceptions to a greater degree than liberals. The point is that conservative beliefs and watching FOX news cannot be separated out as cause of the alleged misconceptions because the study was not properly designed to distinguish between these two alternative explanations. I taught courses in Experimental Design. If one of mt students came back with a study designed this way he wouldn't have liked his grade.<BR/><BR/>Marty SAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-28391177624721336252008-06-03T12:11:00.000-07:002008-06-03T12:11:00.000-07:00You seem intent on asserting that people were aske...You seem intent on asserting that people were asked, prior to the invasion, whether WMD had been found in Iraq. They weren't. It's a strawman.<BR/><BR/>I don't know what your background in statistics is; I've written business statistical software, but I'm a programmer first and a statistician a distant second. But I see nothing wrong with a methodology that asks people questions on matters of fact, and correlates those responses with the media outlets from which they consume information. That's all these guys did. The miserable performance by Fox viewers says more about Fox and its viewers than it does about the nature of the polls.Daniel Keys Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12992599044462413412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-79759822511585606812008-06-03T11:18:00.000-07:002008-06-03T11:18:00.000-07:00Dan: I don't know if anyone except you and I are f...Dan: I don't know if anyone except you and I are following this discussion anymore, but I'm going to try to make my point one more time. My main point is the link you originally referred to discussed a study concerning belief in media misrepresentation and concluded that FOX viewers were more misinformed. Now since more conservatives would tend to certain beliefs than liberals the only way to draw a conclusion concerning the effect of the media versus the effect of political belief is as one additional question in their questionnaire.<BR/>Q18:<BR/> Do you consider yourself<BR/> A)Conservative<BR/> B)Liberal<BR/> C)neither<BR/>This would have allowed them to do a statistical analysis that would have take out the effect of political belief. As a competent statistician I would have included such a question. Based upon the questionnaire not containing such a question I can only conclude that the authors of the study are either incompetent or deliberately left the question out in order to get the conclusion they wanted.<BR/>On the issue of when data was collected and which data was used I refer you to page 4 of the document you sited in your latest post where it says<BR/><BR/>"To answer these and other questions we developed a more systematic set of questions that were included in a series of three polls, conducted over June through September, with a total of 3,334 respondents. This was combined with the findings from four other polls conducted January through May for a total data set of 8634 respondents."<BR/> <BR/>Notice I actually gave them the benefit of the doubt in my post by including the May data with the June though September data. If you take their approach in the above quote that the May data more properly belongs with the Jan. through Mar. data then actually the part of the data which I would consider to be to early to label as due to media misrepresentation rises to 61% from my stated 47%.<BR/><BR/>Finally haven't gone into this before, but I could raise lots of statistical/political questions about this whole "world" opinion poll stuff. For instance what was the result of the world opinion poll for China. Given the percent of the world population represented by China if a significant percent of Chinese had a negative opinion of us or our foreign policy this could hugely bias the results of the poll, but should we really care about or base our foreign policy on what China thinks of us.<BR/><BR/>Marty SAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-84709899797114338942008-06-03T09:23:00.000-07:002008-06-03T09:23:00.000-07:00Anyone still bothering to follow this thread, go l...Anyone still bothering to follow this thread, go look yourselves: Marty is flatly wrong.<BR/><BR/>http://65.109.167.118/pipa/pdf/oct03/IraqMedia_Oct03_rpt.pdf<BR/><BR/>Marty, you assert:<BR/><BR/>"Approximately 47% of the survey responses were from Jan. Feb. and Mar. 2003 the war didn't start until Mar. 20 2003. So we had no idea if we would find WMDs or not when almost half the data was gathered."<BR/><BR/>You appear to believe that people were asked to guess if the U.S. would find WMD in Iraq, and that these questions were then conflated with the questions asked post-invasion. You're pulling this theory out of thin air, because it didn't happen.<BR/><BR/><I>Before the war overwhelming majorities believed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Though it now appears this belief may have been incorrect, it does not seem appropriate to call this a misperception because it was so widespread at the time, even within the intelligence community.</I><BR/><BR/>The guys writing this report agree with you, Marty ... not that you appear to be aware of it. :-)<BR/><BR/>Bold below is mine:<BR/><BR/>"One of the most striking developments in the postwar period was that once US forces arrived in Iraq, they failed to find the weapons of mass destruction that had been a major rationale for going to war with Iraq. Nonetheless, <B>in PIPA/KN polls conducted May through September</B>, a substantial minority of the public said they believed that weapons of mass destruction had been found. A substantial minority even believed that Iraq had used weapons of mass destruction in the war. Polls from other organizations repeated these questions and got similar results."<BR/><BR/>May through September, Marty.Daniel Keys Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12992599044462413412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-59557908903466281092008-06-02T16:08:00.000-07:002008-06-02T16:08:00.000-07:00Dan: I followed your link to the site of the group...Dan: I followed your link to the site of the group who did the study and the followed a link to the actual questionnaire and some of the numbers. So lets start with when the data was taken. Approximately 47% of the survey responses were from Jan. Feb. and Mar. 2003 the war didn't start until Mar. 20 2003. So we had no idea if we would find WMDs or not when almost half the data was gathered. Counting responses gotten at that point biases the study and reflects the preconceived notions of those conducting the study.<BR/>To continue with the problems this is supposed to evaluate the media's effect on opinion so lets look at question 15.<BR/><BR/>"Q15. As you may know, the Bush administration has said that Iraq played an important<BR/>role in the September 11th attacks"<BR/><BR/>Here they clearly state the Bush administration's opinion. Conservatives whatever they have heard in the media tended to support Bush in greater numbers than others and so were more likely to answer such a question with an answer that supported Bush, but clearly this tells us nothing about the influence of Fox news. There were 13 question that asked about the three misrepresentations. Three of the questions referred to the president and his position. Also since there were 13 questions and only three misrepresentations thats an average of over four ways of asking the same question. Did answering just one variation make you count as wrong. That would be interesting in light of the following instruction from the questionnaire.<BR/><BR/>"The next few questions ask for your impressions of some things that you<BR/>may or may not know. Please just indicate your impression, whether or not you feel very<BR/>confident that it is correct."<BR/><BR/>Here they are basically asking people to guess if they don't know the answer. Once again conservatives if forced to guess are going to agree with the president whose stance on these issues was well known in greater quantities than others irrespective of their news source and so again I claim that since more conservatives watch FOX news it is arbitrary to assign their beliefs with respect to these issues to FOX news rather than to their conservative political beliefs.<BR/><BR/>Marty SAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-31495318666197943142008-06-02T12:06:00.000-07:002008-06-02T12:06:00.000-07:00Marty, if the question had been: "Are we still loo...Marty, if the question had been: "Are we still looking for WMD?" ... why, Fox News viewers might be forgiven for saying "Yes" to that, since it was true. And you'd have a good point.<BR/><BR/>This isn't the question they were asked. They were asked: "Did we find WMD in Iraq?" ... and they got it wrong twice as frequently as the NPR/PBS crowd.<BR/><BR/>Open-minded (not a phrase I normally associate with conservatives, to tell the truth) ... and "wrong" ... are not the same things.Daniel Keys Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12992599044462413412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-21052021016920201882008-06-02T06:38:00.000-07:002008-06-02T06:38:00.000-07:00One more thing about FOX viewers believing the mis...One more thing about FOX viewers believing the misrepresentation of there being WMDs in Iraq. If you google the end of the search for WMDs you will find that the U.S. government announced the end of the search for these weapons on Jan. 12, 2005. That's 15 months after your researchers declared the search over and done with and called it a misrepresentation. Could it be that this quick decision about the WMDs reflects their biases and that all their study proves is conservatives are less likely to share the same beliefs as the liberal group that ran the study.<BR/><BR/>Marty SAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-7928812085957298512008-06-02T05:40:00.000-07:002008-06-02T05:40:00.000-07:00Dan: Even if everything in the study were not slan...Dan: Even if everything in the study were not slanted by those who conducted the study, it was published in Oct. 3, 2003. The war began at the end March of that year. That means the study may have been done at time when people still thought the WMDs were there, but we hadn't found them yet. More conservatives then liberals were supporters of the war believed that the WMDs were hidden or had been transported out. Some of the responses may have reflected peoples beliefs rather than which news source they watched. If people of a certain belief watch one news source over another it doesn't mean their belief came from that news source. No one denies FOX is more conservative than other news sources. But the comments like yours about people who watch FOX, are similar to the types of comments white racists make about blacks based up equally flimsy data.<BR/><BR/>Marty SAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-26047968427795388502008-06-01T19:49:00.000-07:002008-06-01T19:49:00.000-07:00They wanted the Fox viewers to not know the truth?...They wanted the Fox viewers to not know the truth? And the Fox viewers cooperated? That's a cooperative bunch of viewers, Marty.Daniel Keys Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12992599044462413412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-3553556220685661492008-06-01T19:31:00.000-07:002008-06-01T19:31:00.000-07:00I tend to ignore all studies whether they support ...I tend to ignore all studies whether they support my view or not. It is very hard to get a truly honest study. People tend to give you the answer they think you want. Sometimes consciously and some times unconsciously. One can do a study to determine if fish A or fish B tastes better. If you have them rank the fish from -5 for A is much worse than B to plus 5 A is much better than B then all things being equal since A better is associated with the plus sign and plus is generally considered good people tend to select fish A as better. Rerun the test with B associated with the plus sign and you will tend to reverse the result to favor B. Most people conducting a study give away the result they want somewhere along the way.<BR/><BR/>Marty S.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-6298576850667419492008-06-01T18:40:00.000-07:002008-06-01T18:40:00.000-07:00Well, ignoring studies you don't like is one appro...Well, ignoring studies you don't like is one approach ... almost Foxian. :-)Daniel Keys Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12992599044462413412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-57747657893377066282008-06-01T17:06:00.000-07:002008-06-01T17:06:00.000-07:00Dan: Well I watch all three networks quite a bit, ...Dan: Well I watch all three networks quite a bit, because I like to hear all sides of an issue. I feel that anyone who watches just one of the these networks gets a slanted view of the news. What I was referring to however is the practice which I find more common on CNN and MSNBC of getting a bunch of like minded people together in an interview and collectively bashing someone. So this morning CNN had a discussion about a McCain speech on Iraq. The discussion included Wolf Blitzer and two Democratic strategists. On Fox these type of discussion would usually be with a host and one Democratic and one Republican Strategist. If you watched Hardball with Chris Mathews on MSNBC during the campaign you would have seen endless Clinton bashing often with no one on her side.<BR/>Some times I think Mathews has spent as much time campaigning for Obama as Obama has.<BR/><BR/>P.S.<BR/>As for the survey you sited on the web as I said before I know just how wrong surveys can be and never believe them without knowing exactly how the data was collected and analzed.<BR/><BR/>Marty SAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-90521664888449017502008-06-01T15:06:00.000-07:002008-06-01T15:06:00.000-07:00The women's suffrage movement predates the civil r...<I>The women's suffrage movement predates the civil rights movement. At one point, women seeking the right to vote were imprisoned and force fed (dangerously and painfully) when they went on hunger strikes to protest. Some women were killed in those jails. At the time, spousal rape was not a crime, nor was beating your wife, within certain limits.</I><BR/>Josh, again this is where specificity is important. The women's suffrage movement was a WHITE woman's movement. WHITE women seeking the right to vote were imprisoned and force fed, etc. But what was happening to black women and men during this time? What happened to black women within the women's suffrage movement? After white women gained the right to vote, did this right extend to black women in Alabama and Mississippi? <BR/>Similarly in fighting for black rights in the civil rights movement how were black WOMEN treated in comparison to black MEN?Lester Spencehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02545778619369769610noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-19885647906833163332008-06-01T14:01:00.000-07:002008-06-01T14:01:00.000-07:00Marty, I personally think everyone dumps on Fox ne...Marty, I personally think everyone dumps on Fox news because the people who watch it are either:<BR/><BR/>1. Stupid, or<BR/>2. Made so by Fox<BR/><BR/>http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/714.html<BR/><BR/><I>Almost shocking was the extent to which Fox News viewers were mistaken. Those who relied on the conservative network for news, PIPA reported, were “three times more likely than the next nearest network to hold all three misperceptions. In the audience for NPR/PBS, however, there was an overwhelming majority who did not have any of the three misperceptions, and hardly any had all three.”<BR/><BR/>Looking at the misperceptions one at a time, people were asked, for example, if the U.S. had discovered the alleged stockpiles of WMD in Iraq since the war began. Just 11% of those who relied on newspapers as their “primary news source” incorrectly believed that U.S. forces had made such a discovery. Only slightly more — 17% — of those who relied on NPR and PBS were wrong. Yet 33% of Fox News viewers were wrong, far ahead of those who relied on any other outlet.</I><BR/><BR/>"in my experience it has fewer incidences of discussions where only one side is represented than CNN or MSNBC."<BR/><BR/>I'll have to take you word for this, since I don't watch television -- Fox or CNN or MSNBC. But it doesn't appear to be showing up in their results.Daniel Keys Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12992599044462413412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-81586260132185295852008-06-01T13:12:00.000-07:002008-06-01T13:12:00.000-07:00Brian;I like your idea about not avoiding issues a...Brian;<BR/>I like your idea about not avoiding issues around racism and sexism, because only by understanding all sides and all issues can we resolve the situation. The problem is you put the word valid in front of discourse and everybody has a different idea of what is valid. People in the public eye have to resign their position or are fired for making a non-PC statement that one group takes offense at. Everybody dumps on Fox news as not being news just because it tends towards the conservative point of view, even though in my experience it has fewer incidences of discussions where only one side is represented than CNN or MSNBC.<BR/><BR/>Marty SAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-89881191336041804612008-06-01T10:00:00.000-07:002008-06-01T10:00:00.000-07:00Brian: As bad as white women have had it in a sexi...Brian: <I>As bad as white women have had it in a sexist male dominated society, I can't recall a moment where people were so outraged that white women were allowed education to the point that the govenor assembled the national guard to stop the white women to simply attend school, as was done to the Little Rock Nine in 1957.</I><BR/><BR/>History sometimes means that the times when oppressed people were oppressed don't happen simultaneously. <BR/><BR/>The women's suffrage movement predates the civil rights movement. At one point, women seeking the right to vote were imprisoned and force fed (dangerously and painfully) when they went on hunger strikes to protest. Some women were killed in those jails. At the time, spousal rape was not a crime, nor was beating your wife, within certain limits.<BR/><BR/>My point is not to say that this was as bad, or even comparably bad, but as a caution against you trying to say things were better or worse for women without knowing the whole history of the women's rights movement.Josh Jasperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08441897278413737658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-64258353566248399192008-05-31T21:46:00.000-07:002008-05-31T21:46:00.000-07:00Kukulkan:Lol. Okay. I understand NOW. But don't tr...Kukulkan:<BR/>Lol. Okay. I understand NOW. But don't try to avoid the issue, black and white. Meet it head on. See, as I said, leaving it out of the equation can be misinterpreted the wrong way, too.<BR/><BR/>Meet it head on. Don't be afraid. (overall, in the country, my belief is that's one part of what is hindering a valid discourse and moving through obstacles: avoidance, in whatever form it may present itself)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-42133666678487802142008-05-31T18:08:00.000-07:002008-05-31T18:08:00.000-07:00Brian:The reason I used the example of Asians not ...Brian:<BR/><BR/>The reason I used the example of Asians not being smarter than Whites as opposed to Whites not being smarter than Blacks was an attempt to avoid the whole White/Black controversy. I think the statement Whites are smarter than Blacks a stupid statement. I've known plenty of White folks who are intellectually challenged and know extremely intelligent Blacks. Clearly, the statement Whites are smarter than Blacks is a useless statement.<BR/><BR/>"Looking for "clinical" reasons why the races are different is never going to do anything but seperate cultures further. "<BR/><BR/>I wholeheartedly disagree. I am not an ostrich. I do not hide from the truth. If there are clinical differences in races, then we need to know about them.<BR/><BR/>Suzanne:<BR/><BR/>Psychometric testing didn't stop in the 60s or the 70s. Many of the cultural bias accusations from that era are well-founded. The psychometricians keep devising new tests in order to eliminate cultural bias. Please explain to me the cultural bias of red and green. Show a person a red card or a green card and tell them to push button A for red and button B for green. A racial difference appears in reaction time. The difference also correlates with IQ. <BR/><BR/>Let's be clear - individual merit matters to me overwhelmingly more than race (I am not, however, completely free of racial bias - neither do I expect is anyone here). I would not let an Ashkenazi Jew (ethnic group with high IQ) perform surgery on me if she is a moron. I would let a Black woman perform surgery on me if she was intelligent and well trained.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-91060482957544051712008-05-31T16:44:00.000-07:002008-05-31T16:44:00.000-07:00Re IQ tests:I had my defining moment about IQ test...Re IQ tests:<BR/>I had my defining moment about IQ tests over 40 years ago when our neighbor was told her daughter (a pre-schooler) had a low IQ because she couldn't identify a stop light. We didn't have any stop lights where we lived. None, zip, zero. She has never seen one.<BR/><BR/>It still took a huge amount of time and energy to keep this low IQ pronouncement out of the child's school record.mjholthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00626250928180743075noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-3055158839480170692008-05-31T16:42:00.000-07:002008-05-31T16:42:00.000-07:00That is your interpretation of the evidence. I hav...<I>That is your interpretation of the evidence. I have not stated that the evidence means anything other than a difference in mental process. If education impacts mental ability (and there is evidence of this) then your point and mine are not incompatible.</I><BR/><BR/>No that is NOT my "interpretation<BR/>it is the results drawn from innumerable studies of IQ tests<BR/>in the 60's (I think but I may be wrong by a decade) when it became apparent there was a cultural bias<BR/>in the test construction.<BR/><BR/>Steve perry's example is a good one.<BR/>Also they found the "interpret the saying: a roling stone gathers no moss" question was biased as black students in segregated schools were<BR/>not being taught symbolic/metaphoric interpretation<BR/>Bl;ack students were likely to answer the question by talking about how moss can't grow on a stone that is rolling down a hill - a literal answer which was scored WRONG.<BR/><BR/>I am telling you what I learned in post-doctoral work in Psychology<BR/>and on the basis of 20+ years of working as a psychologist, including work as a psychometrist.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-26780247405245008182008-05-31T16:39:00.000-07:002008-05-31T16:39:00.000-07:00If Clinton and Obama were both white men, Obama wo...If Clinton and Obama were both white men, Obama would be where he is and Clinton would be where she is. That is how their performances unfolded. They are both exceptional people. To recognize how exceptional, take a look at McCain, who is not exceptional.mjholthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00626250928180743075noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-36922606231318914932008-05-31T14:22:00.000-07:002008-05-31T14:22:00.000-07:00Kukulkan:"Finally, there is a difference between e...Kukulkan:<BR/><BR/>"Finally, there is a difference between evidence and proof. I have <B><I> never said that Whites think differently than Blacks or Asians </B></I>. I have simply said that <B><I> IQ tests are evidence of such </B></I>."<BR/>Six in one hand and half a dozen in the other is the same thing.<BR/><BR/>You obviously don't understand the "lean" of your own argument/statement, which was, as you REstated: "I did note that IQ results go Asian to Caucasian to Black." And then you flatly state in the previous post without touching upon in this new one: "My point here is not that Asians are smarter than Caucasians." Without ALSO stating you are NOT saying whites are also not smarter than blacks. Racism isn't always what is stated or said. It also is what is NOT stated or said. Or, as in this case, what was just flat left out of the equation.<BR/><BR/>Your physical "differences" statement is a lean towards a racist statement. One of the things I was told when young, by my racist family, was that blacks are better at sports because they have an extra leg muscle or two that we whites don't have. Reading statements like that does nothing but give me a terrible flash back to my racist upbringing.<BR/><BR/>Looking for "clinical" reasons why the races are different is never going to do anything but seperate cultures further. As far as the human aspect (the metaphorical "appendix" of all statistical data) of any culture goes, there is NO difference. None. Write that in on one of your charts.<BR/><BR/><BR/>As far as Asians go: I was stationed in Japan for four and a half years. Their culture, unlike American culture, is based on how smart you are. Children go to school year round, six days a week. It is the cultural insistance on education combined with innate ability that equals smartness. And, of course, hard work. Very hard work. The reasons Asians score higher on American IQ tests is the drive factor. Also, which is even more impressive, is Japanese read books front to back, right to left. They have to flip that thought process once in America and once they learn English. Never mind the kanji systems; symbols and alphabetic. (I also was in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, Korea, Philippines, and Okinawa)<BR/><BR/>When I was stationed in Little Rock between 87 and 95, there was alot of attention paid to the anniversary of the Little Rock Nine: the nine black students who were integrated into the all white school, Central High. As bad as white women have had it in a sexist male dominated society, I can't recall a moment where people were so outraged that white women were allowed education to the point that the govenor assembled the national guard to stop the white women to simply attend school, as was done to the Little Rock Nine in 1957. (Troops were then withdrawn, then federralized and sent back to this time protect the nine students) If nothing else, that speaks volumes to me that you are the enemy mentaliity whites have held towards blacks, the residual effects we are still witnessing today, fifty years later.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-34848374713872338012008-05-30T18:00:00.000-07:002008-05-30T18:00:00.000-07:00As professional statistician I can tell you that t...As professional statistician I can tell you that trying to draw a conclusion from a number like women earn 78 cents on the dollar without a really major comprehensive analysis including all variables that affect income. Things like education, experience, number of hours worked, type of job, industry(different industries often have different pay scales), size of company etc. By the way with respect to hours worked does the 78 cent figure represent hourly wage or annual wage. Furthermore even if you did an analysis which computed the contribution of each of the important variables and found for example that women do earn less, but its because the fields they tend to go into you would still be left trying to understand why men and women go into different fields and does it reflect sexism in society.<BR/>As I see it,trying to measure racism and sexisms with numbers is futile. Most of us know racism and sexism when we see it on a one to one basis and the best we can do is work to eliminate it.<BR/><BR/>Marty SAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9339191.post-30614354254207420352008-05-30T13:07:00.000-07:002008-05-30T13:07:00.000-07:00There are some female disadvantages beside less st...There are some female disadvantages beside less strength. Until recently, there was a very high risk of death in childbirth. This doesn't just mean loss of individual lifespan, this means there are fewer women with a chance to accumulate resources.<BR/><BR/>I know childbirth was seriously deadly in western civ until the development of antiseptics and anesthesia, but I don't know if it was quite as dangerous in earlier, less theory-driven cultures. I've heard it's considered a big deal in all human cultures.<BR/><BR/>Men are generally much more willing to abandon their children. This has longterm costs, but gives short term freedom of action.<BR/><BR/>The big one-- and something I don't have an explanation for-- is that women are much worse at organized violence. I haven't heard of women organizing for violence at anything larger than the gang level, and afaik, even that is rare compared to men.<BR/><BR/>Comparing lifespan for men and women may not be a good measure. Men and women are physically different enough that the risk of heart attacks starts much earlier for men. Afaik, this isn't a matter of environment, though I'm willing to be surprised.Nancy Lebovitzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07068537632391466902noreply@blogger.com