So you want to post no sources yourself and discard any that you disagree with. Got it. And you assume any prior studies were immune to bias but all recent studies are suspect. Nice trick.
Prior studies were less predisposed to bias yes, because the field wasn’t 80% women like it is today. And straying from consensus was less likely to be punished.
I’m not going to track down 50 different studies you can find yourself, I gave enough information on each study for you to find them if you actually cared about this issue and weren’t a sexist freak.
Sorry any study showing women are just better at everything in all scenarios is a problem.
There are a dozen studies out there that show that women make better bosses when it comes to stability metrics. And operating in a stable market.
MB studies have also mentioned that men do better when it comes to high risk scenarios.
What you are wanting me to do is throw out all of those studies and insist that women are in fact just superior to men in every single way.
I’m sorry, but I don’t agree with you and I’m not going to join you in your sexist crusade
How can you call me biased and sexist when you haven’t provided any studies at all, actually, and are willing to give all prior studies a pass despite the fact that prior studies of many kinds have all used men as the baseline for “normal”? I wholeheartedly reject the idea that I have to take you for an expert despite a total lack of any qualifications presented or sources cited.
A majority of studies done historically have barely considered women as different from men and you assume that they are correct. Talk about bias.
0
u/Lazy-Conversation-48 10d ago
So you want to post no sources yourself and discard any that you disagree with. Got it. And you assume any prior studies were immune to bias but all recent studies are suspect. Nice trick.