Trusted, Automoderated users
25,837
edits
Talk:Women in STEM: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Donnelly Study
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
:Yes, good points, I changed it to saying that some see it as a barrier. If no one saw it as a barrier then it wouldn't be worth mentioning. But it is a frequent complaint, just maybe not a top 8 complaint.[[User:William|William]] ([[User talk:William|talk]]) 16:44, 21 December 2019 (UTC) | :Yes, good points, I changed it to saying that some see it as a barrier. If no one saw it as a barrier then it wouldn't be worth mentioning. But it is a frequent complaint, just maybe not a top 8 complaint.[[User:William|William]] ([[User talk:William|talk]]) 16:44, 21 December 2019 (UTC) | ||
:Also added your counterarguments[[User:William|William]] ([[User talk:William|talk]]) 16:57, 21 December 2019 (UTC) | :Also added your counterarguments[[User:William|William]] ([[User talk:William|talk]]) 16:57, 21 December 2019 (UTC) | ||
:As far as pre-industry having sex-segragation and it not causing a problem vis-a-vis inceldom, that's probably because parnerhips were implicitly or explicitly arranged. [[User:William|William]] ([[User talk:William|talk]]) 17:07, 21 December 2019 (UTC) | :As far as pre-industry having sex-segragation and it not causing a problem vis-a-vis inceldom, that's probably because parnerhips were implicitly or explicitly arranged. However, for those who were not arranged pre-indusry, a lack of female exposure certainly would have lent itself to inceldom, it just seems as a point of logic. [[User:William|William]] ([[User talk:William|talk]]) 17:07, 21 December 2019 (UTC) | ||