The word "fact" is used extremely loosely in this article. While the first "fact" is in fact factual it then very quickly goes down the rabbit hole of personal opinion/perspective.
By the time we get to "fact 3" the author isn't even pretending any more and the "fact" is just a bizarre "you're a mathematician, you can solve this!!1!" point...
I'm happy to have a discussion about gender politics/equality, this article is just a very poor starting point for such a discussion.
This is nothing more than a rant, pretending to be something more.
By the time we get to "fact 3" the author isn't even pretending any more and the "fact" is just a bizarre "you're a mathematician, you can solve this!!1!" point...
I'm happy to have a discussion about gender politics/equality, this article is just a very poor starting point for such a discussion.
This is nothing more than a rant, pretending to be something more.