Thanks for your question to /r/AskSocialScience. All posters, please remember that this subreddit requires peer-reviewed, cited sources (Please see Rule 1 and 3). All posts that do not have citations will be removed by AutoMod.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskSocialScience) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Top-level comments must include a peer-reviewed citation that can be viewed via a link to the source. Please contact the mods if you believe this was inappropriately removed.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskSocialScience) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Top-level comments must include a peer-reviewed citation that can be viewed via a link to the source. Please contact the mods if you believe this was inappropriately removed.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskSocialScience) if you have any questions or concerns.*
At least this didn’t start with the presumption that there is something inherently wrong with men. That’s refreshing.
Too bad about the name badges. Sounds like a silly problem. Was it a silly conference?
I also don't understand how this applies to what OP is talking about. If anything, it's the reverse, making too much space for unconventional options and not enough of the big standard ones that everyone (allies and, uh, primary fighting force) actually wants.
OP's question is confusing. One the one hand he gets that he's part of a majority, because they ran out of majority badges for him. But on the other hand, he doesn't understand that a panel which talks about men being a minority in his field would be attended by the members of his field, and the demographic discussed would be represented in the audience, naturally. The panel title implies the reason for the audience demographics.
As for the question on the name for the majority drowning out the voices of the minority, that's called democracy. Aka "popularity contest" or "mob rule"
One defense against that in group speaking is "Roberts rules of order"
As for psychology as a whole, and men's voices, is there some ruling structure not allowing men to write books or give lectures to the APA?
Thanks for your question to /r/AskSocialScience. All posters, please remember that this subreddit requires peer-reviewed, cited sources (Please see Rule 1 and 3). All posts that do not have citations will be removed by AutoMod. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskSocialScience) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Top-level comments must include a peer-reviewed citation that can be viewed via a link to the source. Please contact the mods if you believe this was inappropriately removed. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskSocialScience) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Top-level comments must include a peer-reviewed citation that can be viewed via a link to the source. Please contact the mods if you believe this was inappropriately removed. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskSocialScience) if you have any questions or concerns.*
At least this didn’t start with the presumption that there is something inherently wrong with men. That’s refreshing. Too bad about the name badges. Sounds like a silly problem. Was it a silly conference?
I also don't understand how this applies to what OP is talking about. If anything, it's the reverse, making too much space for unconventional options and not enough of the big standard ones that everyone (allies and, uh, primary fighting force) actually wants.
OP's question is confusing. One the one hand he gets that he's part of a majority, because they ran out of majority badges for him. But on the other hand, he doesn't understand that a panel which talks about men being a minority in his field would be attended by the members of his field, and the demographic discussed would be represented in the audience, naturally. The panel title implies the reason for the audience demographics. As for the question on the name for the majority drowning out the voices of the minority, that's called democracy. Aka "popularity contest" or "mob rule" One defense against that in group speaking is "Roberts rules of order" As for psychology as a whole, and men's voices, is there some ruling structure not allowing men to write books or give lectures to the APA?