this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2024
-94 points (13.3% liked)
Asklemmy
43806 readers
1050 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You must hate statistics
Disaggregating data by gender has legit purposes. You do that to the data after the fact though. Setting up one survey for women and one for men pollutes the outcome.
You must suck at statistics. See? I can do it too! People who misuse statistics and data to shit on women also makes me angry.
Yes. At the time I'm commenting, 1 out of 2 questions on the "women's" question is about the gendered nature of the question itself (50%). And 2 out of 11 on the "mens" (18%). The dataset has already been "polluted" as you describe, by the design of the questions.
What if the intention is to gather data on that, though?
I would expect a control then, a group that is asked the question without the gendered piece. But that can't be done here on this Lemmy community now because we've already seen the gendered versions of the question.
Not like Lemmy is the place to do this sort of thing anyway. In addition to very limited population size, expect a higher rate of STEM folks compared to general population, meaning a higher rate of people who have had a 101 class level on statistics or better. Combined with sarcastic internet commenters. It all means unsubtle manipulations like this gendered question are going to fall flat.
Then comments calling out the unnecessary, ham-handed gendering should be expected data points.
You're right.