I’m still not sure that the problem is real or at least worth the fuss. It might be, but I’m not convinced. It might be more like the name effect, for example: real, but tiny. The first step before trying to do something about the issue should be to make sure the issue isn’t illusory.
So far, I see Alicorn complaining about her aesthetic preferences not met by the prose on the forum, but how typical is it? Some people agree that the writing decisions made by some of the posters are not that great, but how much of it is support of hypothetical preferences of other people isn’t clear. A whole information cascade about preferences may form this way, with hardly any of the participants benefiting, but most of them thinking that they help others. A few can’t demand of a community what they intuitively think is fair.
Everything that involves arguing that it’s important to not drive women away from the site is contingent on the reality of effect of writing style choices on the number of female participants.
Indeed. Where these issues bump into such empirical questions, it seems like we should need statistical, rather than merely anecdotal, evidence.
But the evidence that we do have is anecdotal, and it does suggest that some valued members of our community are made uncomfortable (to the point of considering leaving) by some inconsiderate use of language. And those who like this site are already a statistical anomaly.
In my experience, most women don’t have a negative emotional response to men talking about “getting girls”. They themselves talk about “getting a man”. I suspect that the percentage of women are actually offended by this kind of talk is not large (10%-20%?).
Of course each such statement has to be evaluated separately, but for the word ‘get’ in this context specifically, I think the above applies.
Maybe we could gather a bunch of such statements and ask women whether they find each one offensive and why. We might be able to gather some statistical data.
I’m still not sure that the problem is real or at least worth the fuss. It might be, but I’m not convinced. It might be more like the name effect, for example: real, but tiny. The first step before trying to do something about the issue should be to make sure the issue isn’t illusory.
So far, I see Alicorn complaining about her aesthetic preferences not met by the prose on the forum, but how typical is it? Some people agree that the writing decisions made by some of the posters are not that great, but how much of it is support of hypothetical preferences of other people isn’t clear. A whole information cascade about preferences may form this way, with hardly any of the participants benefiting, but most of them thinking that they help others. A few can’t demand of a community what they intuitively think is fair.
Everything that involves arguing that it’s important to not drive women away from the site is contingent on the reality of effect of writing style choices on the number of female participants.
Indeed. Where these issues bump into such empirical questions, it seems like we should need statistical, rather than merely anecdotal, evidence.
But the evidence that we do have is anecdotal, and it does suggest that some valued members of our community are made uncomfortable (to the point of considering leaving) by some inconsiderate use of language. And those who like this site are already a statistical anomaly.
In my experience, most women don’t have a negative emotional response to men talking about “getting girls”. They themselves talk about “getting a man”. I suspect that the percentage of women are actually offended by this kind of talk is not large (10%-20%?).
Of course each such statement has to be evaluated separately, but for the word ‘get’ in this context specifically, I think the above applies.
Maybe we could gather a bunch of such statements and ask women whether they find each one offensive and why. We might be able to gather some statistical data.