24 ms·

Imagine a scientific study that just said "Scientific justification for social oppression found." In a nutshell, I believe that's why. It's not even that it's

by bitops 13y ago

Imagine a scientific study that just said "Scientific justification for social oppression found." In a nutshell, I believe that's why. It's not even that it's bad for there to be differences between the sexes; what's bad is that some people will inevitable take these studies as justification for their sexist views and attitudes.

saraid216 13y ago
You don't have to imagine it: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2766200?uid=3739696&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21103484766073 http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2766200?uid=3739696&ui... "The Negro: Is he a biological inferior?" (1927) That was from one crappy Google search. I can probably go home and break open books to get indirect references for a lot more studies.
- sltkr 13y ago
  But that article concludes that “the Negro” is NOT inferior: > I have tried to review briefly the important fields in which evidence of Negro inferiority is most likely to be found, if found at all. In no case is the proof conspicuous by its volume---rather the opposite appears true.
  - jff 13y ago
    That old HN favorite http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines rears its head once again!
  - saraid216 13y ago
    I actually wondered how such an article got published as late as 1927. That would explain it. I can go find a better one tonight. More broadly, though, here's a Wikipedia page on the subject: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism Glancing through the citations, #33 is "Tiedemann, Friedrich (1836). "On the Brain of the Negro, Compared with that of the European and the Orang-outang" (PDF). Phylosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 126."
reinhardt 13y ago
What's so horrible about a "sexist" view that manifests as buying different toys for boys and girls?

by bitops 13y ago

saraid216 13y ago

You don't have to imagine it: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2766200?uid=3739696&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21103484766073 http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2766200?uid=3739696&ui... "The Negro: Is he a biological inferior?" (1927) That was from one crappy Google search. I can probably go home and break open books to get indirect references for a lot more studies.

sltkr 13y ago
But that article concludes that “the Negro” is NOT inferior: > I have tried to review briefly the important fields in which evidence of Negro inferiority is most likely to be found, if found at all. In no case is the proof conspicuous by its volume---rather the opposite appears true.
- jff 13y ago
  That old HN favorite http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines rears its head once again!
- saraid216 13y ago
  I actually wondered how such an article got published as late as 1927. That would explain it. I can go find a better one tonight. More broadly, though, here's a Wikipedia page on the subject: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism Glancing through the citations, #33 is "Tiedemann, Friedrich (1836). "On the Brain of the Negro, Compared with that of the European and the Orang-outang" (PDF). Phylosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 126."

reinhardt 13y ago

What's so horrible about a "sexist" view that manifests as buying different toys for boys and girls?