I recently updated my answer to the question Do all countries have the same gender imbalance in science? with additional information.
Basically, my answer contains the following position :
- It is a misconception that women are underrepresented in science or STEM fields fields in general, as this applies to only some fields (with especifically computer science & engineering standing out)
- Yes, this is a roughly consistent for different countries, although countries with greater gender equality - ironically - have a greater gender gap
- This could be at least partially explained by gender stereotyping or the high "geek factor" of those fields, but biological sex differences may play a role at least as significant
I believe each of the three components of my answer are equally important, due to the numerous common misconceptions there are about gender inequality in STEM as a consequence of the current political climate. For the same reason, I deemed it necessary to back up this position by a lot of data, with graphs & sources. In fact, my update consisted mostly of adding additional data, graphs & sources as a response to a comment on that answer, which - rightfully so - pointed out that I insufficiently backed up that gender differences are roughly consistent for different countries.
After updating my answer, I stumbled on the question Why are women even less represented in engineering than in other STEM? and realized that all of the three components of the aforementioned answer apply here as well to the same degree. So I re-posted my answer to this question, with minor modifications.
Around the same time, I found the question Could it be beneficial for me to not disclose my gender/ethnicity in an REU application?. Here, I posted an answer that basically contains the following position :
- We know that women that faculty members generally prefer female applicants over male applicants
- We also know that African-Americans & Hispanics are typically favored over European-Americans & Asian-Americans in college admissions
- There are numerous campaigns worldwide to increase the number of women or "minorities" in STEM, including the creation of jobs where only women are allowed to apply
- Therefore, as a white male, I would be inclined to not mention race or gender on my applications for tenure track job applications, especially with respect to positions in a STEM field. For the same reason, I would be inclined to mention my gender as a woman or my race if I were black or Hispanic.
This too, of course, was backed up by sources (although less extensively).
Then I found the question Should I disclose gender, race, disabilities etc. in tenure track job applications?, where again the exact same components apply. So here, too, I re-posted my previous answer with minor modifications.
I learnt that my answer to Why are women even less represented in engineering than in other STEM? was deleted by a moderator (Strongbad), with a comment not to post duplicate answers, and that I should "tailor [my] answer to the specifics of each question".
So I decided to remove the least relevant details of my answer and re-post the remaining part of my answer as a new answer, referencing my answer to Do all countries have the same gender imbalance in science? for the details that were left out. This answer was also deleted, by the same moderator. No comment this time.
Then I received PM from an anonymous moderator about Could it be beneficial for me to not disclose my gender/ethnicity in an REU application?. They told me that normally they would "just delete the duplicate answer", but that they would not delete my answer in this case because it "presents a unique view that is not presented in the other answers and in general goes against the majority view of the community". Also, they wanted to make it clear "moderation of these answers is not related to the views expressed in them, but rather the generic information".
I responded to this message by explaining that in both cases I believe the exact same answer to be equally applicable to both questions, and that leaving out just a part of the answer (at least IMO) significantly reduces the quality of the the answer for both questions in both cases.
I also asked how I could answer Why are women even less represented in engineering than in other STEM? without my answer getting deleted? I received no response so far.
I find it hard to believe that the deletion of my answer to Why are women even less represented in engineering than in other STEM? isn't abuse of the rules of this community with respect to duplicate content in an attempt to censor an unpopular opinion, especially considering a different decision was made by a moderator in a very similar context in the very same community. But let's just assume it isn't and the reason two different answers to that question are deleted has nothing whatsoever to do with the actual views expressed in them.
Can anyone explain to me why it's OK for Could it be beneficial for me to not disclose my gender/ethnicity in an REU application? and Should I disclose gender, race, disabilities etc. in tenure track job applications? to have roughly the same answer, but not for Do all countries have the same gender imbalance in science? and Why are women even less represented in engineering than in other STEM?? Is it just a matter of different moderators making different choices or is there a difference between both cases that I'm just not seeing?
And if it is really just a matter of different opinions from different moderators, doesn't this mean the community rules need some revision towards greater objectivity? How is it acceptable that the personal opinion of one moderator determines whether a detailed answer backed up by ample sources ends up getting deleted? How is that fair to the members of this community?
Also, is there a way I can answer Why are women even less represented in engineering than in other STEM? using relevant information from my answer to Do all countries have the same gender imbalance in science? without my answer getting deleted?
Would I need to find different data, different graphs & different sources to pretty much demonstrate the same argument? Would I need to rephrase every paragraph to pretty much make the same argument? And if either of these would be acceptable, why not just allow the answer as it was? Why all the hassle to rephrase the form of an answer when the content itself is fine?
Or if it's really just a matter of including content not relevant enough to the question, which content must be removed to make the answer acceptable and on which grounds? How is not each of the three components of my answer sufficiently relevant to the question?
Since I'm not confident I'll receive a response to my PM, I suppose this is question is a suitable alternative approach for getting an answer to (at least some of) those questions.