Trigger warnings, safe spaces, and fascism on college campuses

[old_gregg]

he's a weird guy with a unique affect. and he needs someone to buy him some real dress shirts.

[creekster]

he's a weird guy with a unique affect. and he needs someone to buy him some real dress shirts.

We already knew he is canadian.

[pelagius]

Can you give an example of something you believe he is portraying in a needlessly provocative way?

I watched the part of the youtube video that was first linked. I really mostly watched the part about the male/female wage gap. I don't think I would say he was needlessly provocative but I also don't think he summarized the empirical evidence fairly and he didn't summarize the uncertainty about what that literature can or can't say. I tend to think he's was being polemical, but it could also be the case that the interviewer made it too difficult to give a reasonable summary of the empirical evidence. For example, using attitudinal questions to create psychological variables of the type he highlighted as explanations for the gap are quite problematic empirically because of the problem of when they are measured; there is a real problem with reverse causality. Furthermore, these variables based on attitudinal questions are quite noisy and I thought he overstated their explanatory power (even accepting their crappiness). I think most people would come away with the impression from watching that interview that there is no meaningful male/female wage gap. I don't think that's close to a fair characterization of the data.

[Flystripper]

I didn't come away thinking that there wasn't a meaningful male/female wage gap. I came away thinking that there were many factors that contribute to the wage gap in addition to gender and that if you are wanting to create equal outcomes (which sounds nice but may not be realistic) it may come with undesirable consequences that impact equal opportunity.

[pelagius]

I didn't come away thinking that there wasn't a meaningful male/female wage gap. I came away thinking that there were many factors that contribute to the wage gap in addition to gender and that if you are wanting to create equal outcomes (which sounds nice but may not be realistic) it may come with undesirable consequences that impact equal opportunity.

Even this pushes the data too far. There is basically one important variable that explains a good deal of the gap: the choice of occupation (men choose more renumerative occupations on average) ... it used to be that variables like education mattered but they men/women don't look different anymore over that dimension anymore.

[Flystripper]

Even this pushes the data too far. There is basically one important variable that explains a good deal of the gap: the choice of occupation (men choose more renumerative occupations on average) ... it used to be that variables like education mattered but they men/women don't look different anymore over that dimension anymore.

gotcha

[pelagius]

gotcha

Sorry, I forgot to mention variables that measure experience; those still matter too (not as important as occupational choice). Women still move out of the workforce more often and appear to demand more flexibility in terms of workplace experience. A man in the same career, that entered the workforce at the same time, will tend to have more experience on average ten or 20 year later. This tends to be associated with higher wage. So if this gets us to many factors then I guess I don't object to what your take away.

[pelagius]

Related note: was in a seminar Friday that looking at wages for executives and was even controlling for the speed of advancement. So it had all the usual controls plus added how fast a person had advanced through a company. Even controlling for that, the gap still 8%. On the other hand, there is an award's gap too. The female employees received more awards on average controlling for these other factors.

[falafel]

I didn't come away thinking that there wasn't a meaningful male/female wage gap. I came away thinking that there were many factors that contribute to the wage gap in addition to gender and that if you are wanting to create equal outcomes (which sounds nice but may not be realistic) it may come with undesirable consequences that impact equal opportunity.

That was my take on his comments too.

[pelagius]

That was my take on his comments too.

fair enough. But the evidence he marshaled in support of that idea was bad (at a minimum: quite overstated).

[falafel]

fair enough. But the evidence he marshaled in support of that idea was bad (at a minimum: quite overstated).

That's the problem for us civilians. No way to know who is overstating or understating the data.

[pelagius]

That's the problem for us civilians. No way to know who is overstating or understating the data.

Yeah, I think that's right, and highlights the biggest potential problem with a guy like him. He's quite persuasive, but maybe/potentially not always the best summarizer of the data nor the inferences that can be reasonably drawn. Of course, people that tend to be really careful with the inferences tend to also be dull as tombs (e.g., me).

[creekster]

fair enough. But the evidence he marshaled in support of that idea was bad (at a minimum: quite overstated).

That is sort of a big difference. Bad or overstated?

A polemic might overstate evidence (e.g. exaggerate) and I can iive with that because we all understand he has a POV based on his reading of the evidence. But bad evidence means he is, in effect, dishonest at some level. Do you think his polemical approach rises to the level of dishonesty?

[Eddie]

I thought that, to a degree, he was trying to simplify things for a large audience in a short interview. As well as for an interviewer with an agenda who wasn't really going to let him try to explain things or what he meant before cutting him off and telling him what he is saying and believes.

So I just took his position as you can't simplify it to one easy factor - male versus female. There are other factors that play a role - which includes factors inherent to stereotypical characteristics of being male or female but which may be seen in individuals of either gender - and that you can't just say it is because of gender alone.

It could've been interesting if she'd asked him to expound and then let him do it. Maybe ask for some of those additional characteristics without cutting him off and accusing him of some other misogynistic statement that he felt the need to defend himself from instead of trying to honestly understand what he was saying.

[pelagius]

That is sort of a big difference. Bad or overstated?

A polemic might overstate evidence (e.g. exaggerate) and I can iive with that because we all understand he has a POV based on his reading of the evidence. But bad evidence means he is, in effect, dishonest at some level. Do you think his polemical approach rises to the level of dishonesty?

Overstated is more likely. Given his educational training he is probably naturally sympathetic to those variables being important than say an economist like me. His discipline may be more likely not to see those variables as having problematic measurement problems. And it all may be explained by a very human reaction to an antagonistic interviewer, and he ended up verging into the polemic without intending to.