u/Liapop_

When reacting to marlows response Dr Donut made the following claim:

‘There’s never been a case when like a girl PvPer has been like number 1 or number 2 or number 3 or top 10 or top 50 or top 100…so the fact that she’s number 1 already in every gamemode already is super super rare…but then you also include the fact she’s a girl…it just makes it so, so much more rare’

[This quotation is clearly abridged and taken out of context - he puts it more gently than this. Available here: https://youtu.be/OcDXBc9U\_hg?t=1006&si=35KkhZafyfYAXlBG ]

This argument conflates and misinterprets the nature of probability, as demonstrated via mathematical argument. Let me know if you spot any errors - I was careful but it’s always possible.

Also I make no claims about whether the person in question was indeed cheating. I’m just here to do hella maths.

There now remain only two possible explanations. Donut is a rampant sexist, having comprehensive knowledge of probability and set theory and having deployed it accordingly when making these comments, or Donut forgot/slightly misunderstood/fell into a common misconception regarding the nature of probability. Donut may also be influenced by living in a society contributing to unconscious biases which plague us all.

Basically the lack/rarity of a girl in the top 100 Minecraft players does not provide compelling evidence that any specific girl who ends up in the top 100 cheated to achieve this.

That is unless you are claiming that cheats magically work better for girls (or you can argue that any player in the top 100 cheated) or that girls cannot legitimately make the top 100 (there’s no evidence for this. You’d have to show that something about being female literally makes it not possible to be a top player legitimately. That argument is sexist. Recontextualise it as women in the 50s as engineers. There did indeed exist arguments that women simply could not handle the maths of the job - that there was something about the nature of being a girl/woman that meant she could not achieve such a thing, evidenced by the absence of women in the field).

TLDR absence of evidence != evidence of absence.

When reacting to a random stream Dr Donut made the following claim:

‘There’s never been a case when like a girl PvPer has been like number 1 or number 2 or number 3 or top 10 or top 50 or top 100…so the fact that she’s number 1 already in every gamemode already is super super rare…but then you also include the fact she’s a girl…it just makes it so, so much more rare’

[This quotation is clearly abridged and taken out of context - he puts it more gently than this. Available here: https://youtu.be/OcDXBc9U\_hg?t=1006&si=35KkhZafyfYAXlBG ]

This argument conflates and misinterprets the nature of probability, as demonstrated via mathematical argument. Let me know if you spot any errors - I was careful but it’s always possible.

Also I make no claims about whether the random person was indeed cheating. I’m just here to do hella maths.

There now remain only two possible explanations. Donut is a rampant sexist, having comprehensive knowledge of probability and set theory and having deployed it accordingly when making these comments, or Donut forgot/slightly misunderstood/fell into a common misconception regarding the nature of probability. Donut may also be influenced by living in a society contributing to unconscious biases which plague us all.

Basically the lack/rarity of a girl in the top 100 Minecraft players does not provide compelling evidence that any specific girl who ends up in the top 100 cheated to achieve this.

That is unless you are claiming that cheats magically work better for girls (or you can argue that any player in the top 100 cheated) or that girls cannot legitimately make the top 100 (there’s no evidence for this. You’d have to show that something about being female literally makes it not possible to be a top player legitimately. That argument is sexist. Recontextualise it as women in the 50s as engineers. There did indeed exist arguments that women simply could not handle the maths of the job - that there was something about the nature of being a girl/woman that meant she could not achieve such a thing, evidenced by the absence of women in the field).

TLDR absence of evidence != evidence of absence.