Too bad his conviction was overturned. He spent 28 years in solitary for a crime he shouldn't have been convicted of.
Sure, but in Paris, I assume you're allowed to leave your apartment for more than an hour a day. Unless... is this where the reputation of the French not getting any work done comes from?
Actually, it turns out that the perceived odds of getting caught matter a lot more as a deterrent than the size of the punishment. What's the difference between 10 years and 20, when you've got to make rent next week or your mom will get kicked outta her home?
Yay, work for pay. As little as 12 cents an hour, and a maximum of $1.15 an hour.
What wonderful opportunities we've afforded our inmates.
Oh, I totally agree that it's sexism, and a problem.
I guess I feel weird about the parent of my original post (is that the... GGGGGP at this point?) seeming to assert that we shouldn't be worrying about getting lady programmers, because we don't have enough guy teachers - as if it's a zero-sum game. Especially since, to me, they seem simply like two different sides of the same coin - the same sort of forces that say teaching is "women's work" also say that "programming is for men."
I definitely don't deny that males are underrepresented in elementary education - the number I see floating around most often is 18% to 20%. I am having a lot more trouble finding statistics on how male teachers are perceived, but since you guys say that this is a real problem, I believe you.
Does what I was saying about the reason that men are viewed as pedophiles not make sense to you all? It seems really straightforward to me, that since we believe women "should" care for children, we view men with suspicion.
By the way, http://www.menteach.org/about_... might be a resource you'd like to send money to. They look like they do good work promoting male teachers in elementary schools (though their website is a little outdated).
There's no conspiracy, don't worry. "Patriarchy" is just a word for a society in which males are generally the authority figures, both on a family level and a societal level, like the one we live in.
Societies have cultures, and cultures have cultural narratives. The cultural narratives of patriarchal societies are necessarily sexist (just as narratives of a matriarchal society would be).
I didn't say that men need to change. We need to change our culture, which currently parrots patriarchal narratives. Most dudes aren't out there consciously making sexist decisions, just like most dudes don't rape people. That doesn't mean that, by virtue of being non-sexist, they suddenly stop being affected by our sexist culture (in both positive and negative ways, just like women).
Right in the paragraph your quoted there, I cited the low pay for jobs perceived as "feminine" by our culture as a reason that dudes (who are expected to be the primary breadwinners) might not want to take up teaching. If teacher pay were more in line with other "masculine" professions, or if men faced less social pressure to be the sole provider for their family, more men would take it up.
Our cultural narrative also codes both violence and sexuality as "masculine" (both as a form of strength) - so it's no surprise that a guy in a "feminine" role might be suspected of having violent or sexual reasons for it, ones that we would not usually attribute to lady teachers.
You missed the big one.
Todd the Teacher.
Men have been practically excluded from teaching, by being painted with the sexist assumptions
that they are all child molesters and pedophiles with nothing positive to contribute.
In comparison to this particular problem, an imbalance in programmers is nothing.. bias in the
teaching of our children should be a huge priority, and yet, its not....
Well, maybe you can start by combating the sexist assumptions that women are naturally more nurturing (a story uniquely suited to keeping those pesky women in the home). You can follow up by setting teacher pay to a reasonable level, so that they're competitively compensated for the amount of schooling and long hours that they need to put in.
The patriarchy (I wonder if I'll get modded down for using that word) tells us that women are gentler, weaker creatures more suited for "family" work than men are. Men are taught to assert their masculinity by displaying their power over others, which combined with the narrative of "men can't help raping women," naturally leads us to be suspicious of any man transgressing those gender roles. Because men are coded (by our culture) as inherently sexual beings, we assume their motivations for pursuing a "feminine" job are also sexual - that is, that they must be sexually interested in the children they are supposed to protect.
(I personally don't know anybody who has a problem with male teachers, but I'm going to take you at face value that this is a real problem that you've faced.)
Sounds great to me. Why don't you go hop on over to a forum for nurses and pharmacists, and bring it up there?
I just accepted a job for a 50% pay raise, from one University to another (across the US). Plus, there's still promotion opportunities ahead, with corresponding pay raises.
Maybe the lesson is not to switch to lower-paying jobs, but simply to switch jobs.
Oh thanks, that is better than the method I described.
Your method is actually pretty close to what the paper describes. The idea is that '00060000000D' and '00070000000F' are closely related, but '38439FDCA' and '921938312C' are not.
An important limitation of his approach is that it only works for "all organisms whose genomes can be aligned to each other." (With no mention of how "good" the alignment has to be, nor the fact that alignment is not objective.)
So, you'd have multiple schemas for each "group" of organisms. I think his idea is possibly applicable to, say, describing multiple samples within a species. It's clearly ill-suited for a universal naming strategy like the article proposes, though.
I don't think "controversial UI" counts as "evil."