[Haskell-cafe] Are there any female Haskellers?
jason.dusek at gmail.com
Sat Mar 27 16:20:49 EDT 2010
2010/03/27 Alberto G. Corona <agocorona at gmail.com>:
> To say this in scientific headline jargon, it's a matter of
> division of work, time, and dimorphic fixation of abilities in
> the brain by natural selection trough dimorphic development of
> the brain of men and women by different genetic sequences. I
> don't know any kind of tool more flexible and powerful than a
> computer language. Men are good at making tools and using
> them. They invested more in engineering because this activity
> were more critical for their success than in the case of
> women. Sociological or cultural explanations don't explain the
> universal tendencies and habilities across cultures and time.
In this passage, you seem to attribute to men a relatively
great adaptation for making & using tools, relative to women.
You suggest this applies to computer languages -- excellent
tools -- and this explains the relative absence of women in
It's hard to take your remarks seriously; consider:
. There is no single adaptation for "tool using". Men differ
greatly in their aptitude for working with different kinds
. The relevance of tools in women's lives is well known; there
are few cultures that have not allocated some essential
domain of work -- fabric arts, tanning, cooking, picking
certain plants -- to women. It's hard to see any support for
the notion that tools are more (or less) critical for the
evolutionary success of men.
Though this may be your "honest theory", you don't offer much
support for it. When offering a theory as to the relative
success of one movie over another, I suppose there is not a
great burden of proof; but carelessness in the matter of which
kind of person can do which kind of work has hurt too many
people for too long.
More information about the Haskell-Cafe