people correctly identifying that the women on average perform worse, even given the same resumes.
Where exactly are you pulling this from?
Where exactly are you pulling this from?
I'm "pulling it from" the same place you pulled your preferred explanation (that female performance conditional on the same resume is the same, and so the worse ratings were due to professors preferring males, even given the same performance, or incorrectly expecting worse performance from the females).
The issue with your interpretation of the study is your selective appeal to evidence.
You would like to provide evidence for the fact that worse outcomes for females are due to discrimination. But the evidence you provided is consistent with both explanations (discrimination vs actually worse performance from females)
I didn't notice I was replying to you, not aestra, who implicitly explained the results of the study in the way I described, when they used that study as evidence that "sexism is alive and well". Even though in this particular study, the authors (incorrectly) ignored my alternate explanation, it is in fact often discussed in this context (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_discrimination).
And I am sick of your side of the argument swearing at your opponents while constantly playing the victim card. Fuck you.
As for why I asked you to stop being a tosser in the first place, I asked a question and immediately had you telling me what I supposedly think. That said, I really shouldn't have bothered asking you to stop, as to do that does seem to be something that is far wide of your abilities, given the evidence available here.