Quote from: Solar on May 27, 2011, 05:22:43 PM
OK, lets look at what she claims...

Okay, let us. Her claims and the FOX new story about her study are not the same thing.


You keep saying why does it matter, but really what you're asking is why does it matter to someone who isn't a sociologist and again this is questioning the relevancy of the whole field.

Males are females are represented in humanity at a certain rate which is relatively steady. If we represent ourselves in a different way in our works it is reasonable for someone to ask why. For this issue of children's literature one could ask if the over-representation of males to females (relative to the actual state of gender occurrence) correlates to the gender of the author: Are there simply more male characters in children's lit because more children's lit is written by males?

I agree that the tone (or connotation if you will) of the gender representation seems relevant. Without looking at her actual study how do our know if this is considered or not? The fact that it's not mentioned in the article in the OP doesn't mean anything more than just that.

Quote from: GreyRaceGlobalist on May 28, 2011, 08:10:52 AM

Quote from: Solar on May 27, 2011, 05:22:43 PM
OK, lets look at what she claims...

Okay, let us. Her claims and the FOX new story about her study are not the same thing.


You keep saying why does it matter, but really what you're asking is why does it matter to someone who isn't a sociologist and again this is questioning the relevancy of the whole field.

Males are females are represented in humanity at a certain rate which is relatively steady. If we represent ourselves in a different way in our works it is reasonable for someone to ask why. For this issue of children's literature one could ask if the over-representation of males to females (relative to the actual state of gender occurrence) correlates to the gender of the author: Are there simply more male characters in children's lit because more children's lit is written by males?

I agree that the tone (or connotation if you will) of the gender representation seems relevant. Without looking at her actual study how do our know if this is considered or not? The fact that it's not mentioned in the article in the OP doesn't mean anything more than just that.

Which brings us full circle.
Her sampling is way to small, and pretty irrelevant.
One would need to take 2/3 of all children books printed since 1900 and do a count, but what does it matter?
So there is a disproportionate number of males to females, or vice versa, why is it even remotely important?
What is even more important, were the authors male or female, were there more human heroes than animal heroes, were the heroes male or female humans.
Her study is a total waste of time and not one that would get a passing grade in a college class.

She has totally failed to make any point, other than to show her bias masked as research.

And for you to try and say otherwise exposes your leftist bias.

Quote from: Solar on May 28, 2011, 08:44:55 AM
Which brings us full circle.
Her sampling is way to small, and pretty irrelevant.
One would need to take 2/3 of all children books printed since 1900 and do a count, but what does it matter?
So there is a disproportionate number of males to females, or vice versa, why is it even remotely important?
What is even more important, were the authors male or female, were there more human heroes than animal heroes, were the heroes male or female humans.
Her study is a total waste of time and not one that would get a passing grade in a college class.

She has totally failed to make any point, other than to show her bias masked as research.

And for you to try and say otherwise exposes your leftist bias.

My whole position is that you're making conclusions about a study without actually viewing the material you are judging.

I've already said that while you could be right I just don't see any reason to assume you are right without examining a primary source regarding the topic so save the partisan dismissal. I'd be making the exact same argument to someone who was assuming that a Christian was incapable of researching evolutionary biology without allowing their personal feelings to bias their results.

Claiming bias in research without examining methodology, and the snippets of actual information in the linked article do not outline a methodology, is making an unreasonable assumption unless their is some exceptional circumstance such as a history of academic fraud on the part of the researcher.

My only question is who is paying for this study?  If this is my tax dollars at work then she has wasted my money.  8)

Quote from: Solars Toy on May 28, 2011, 09:32:18 AM
My only question is who is paying for this study?  If this is my tax dollars at work then she has wasted my money.  8)

It's a question worth asking.

From what I saw yesterday it looks like the research hasn't actually been published yet. Funding should be acknowledged in the article though.

Interesting site.  Comments stated "she was and easy A and treated us like elementary school kids".  Personal favorite...

Taught a very one-sided view of feminism. Lectures were almost unbearable and tests were very broad and difficult to study for. I would not take another class with this professor.

http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=934742&page=3

I would like to know what she is paid (one website said an Assistant Professor at FSU makes $72,300) and how many classes she teaches to earn that salary.  Or is most of her time spent on research such as this one?  ::)

Quote from: GreyRaceGlobalist on May 28, 2011, 09:30:13 AM
My whole position is that you're making conclusions about a study without actually viewing the material you are judging.

I've already said that while you could be right I just don't see any reason to assume you are right without examining a primary source regarding the topic so save the partisan dismissal. I'd be making the exact same argument to someone who was assuming that a Christian was incapable of researching evolutionary biology without allowing their personal feelings to bias their results.

Claiming bias in research without examining methodology, and the snippets of actual information in the linked article do not outline a methodology, is making an unreasonable assumption unless their is some exceptional circumstance such as a history of academic fraud on the part of the researcher.

This so called research is akin to greenies taking every incident of minor injury and taking the total to justify why nuclear energy is harmful.
Point is, they lumped in minor scratches that didn't even require a band aid, as part of the research.

That is what she has done, she gave no explanation as to why there is an imbalance, only that one exists.

That is not research, that is agenda.

It is beyond me as to why you accept this as a valid study when it doesn't follow the basic rules of research.

Quote from: Solar on May 28, 2011, 01:14:03 PM
That is what she has done, she gave no explanation as to why there is an imbalance, only that one exists.

You're saying she has an agenda because she fails to apply subjective interpretation?

That really doesn't make any sense.

More importantly though, aren't you just assuming she has no explanation to offer? Have you actually seen the work and read her conclusions? I'm pretty sure the research isn't published yet so that seems unlikely.

Quote from: GreyRaceGlobalist on May 29, 2011, 03:19:20 PM
You're saying she has an agenda because she fails to apply subjective interpretation?

That really doesn't make any sense.

More importantly though, aren't you just assuming she has no explanation to offer? Have you actually seen the work and read her conclusions? I'm pretty sure the research isn't published yet so that seems unlikely.

No, I base it on the fact that she is a self described feminist, that is her main focal point in teaching.
So it goes without saying, she has an agenda in everything she does.

Did you see what one of her students had to say?
Taught a very one-sided view of feminism. Lectures were almost unbearable and tests were very broad and difficult to study for. I would not take another class with this professor.

Quote from: Solar on May 29, 2011, 04:34:26 PM

Did you see what one of her students had to say?
Taught a very one-sided view of feminism. Lectures were almost unbearable and tests were very broad and difficult to study for. I would not take another class with this professor.

Nope, hadn't seen that.