I doubt anyone is suggesting there's a misogynist prostitue fetish conspiracy at EA.
Ragtime seemed to imply that. She (I am assuming she is a she) even said twice that it was not a coincidence.
I think it could easily not be a coincidence and also not be the product of a deliberate choice on Steve's part.
If Steve goes down to the corner to get a cup of coffee, and gets a nice big JFK half dollar in his change, when he reaches into his pocket for a coin to flip, he's going to grab that nice big coin. There's no reason for him to question what comes up when he flips, I mean, a coin flip is practically iconic as a non-biased way to determine something.
If someone comes up and says, "Hey, your choices are not random," Steve has two choices. He can say, "No, I'm flipping a coin. It's
got to be random, so there." Or he can say, "Really? I thought it was all right, because I'm flipping this coin. Let's see." And then undertake to test the actual randomness of the coin.
Now, it may be that it'll come out as it should, once the numbers are examined. Then again, it may not. Or it may be that enough other coin flippers are using weighted coins that Steve might find he wants to be more aware of a long streak of heads. Or something.
You're absolutely right, there needs to be more data if we want to know whether it's a coincidence or not. But essentially every editor is working with a coin that's weighted one way or another (those weights include things like how much of what sort of thing is turning up in slush, as Steve points out in the other thread, that's a considerable weight all by itself and not the fault of the editor), and it's good to question just where that weight is and whether or not it's something you want to take into account. If no one raises the question, if you don't ever ask yourself, you're stuck just saying, "But it's a coin flip!" and never actually knowing what's going on.
I don't mean to be argumentative. If you check out my comments on one of those stories ("The Right Kind of Town") you'll see that I agree that the prostitute trope is tired and rarely used inventively. I agree with you and Ragtime on the larger issue. I do not agree with her that there is the appearance of bias when it comes to EA's editorial choices. I maintain that sometimes a coincidence is just a coincidence, and this recent 'to do' is just that.
I'm not allergic to arguments!
But I mostly agree with you. I'm not familiar enough with the whole gamut of EP stories to make a call one way or the other, but I don't think Steve would ever knowingly pick things that were actively misogynistic. I'm just saying, since it is so prevalent in other places, when it shows up at EP, even though I know Steve wouldn't do it on purpose, it may still be "not a coincidence" without any malice or action on his part, and it's worth at least asking if it really was, or if there's something else going on that it might pay to be aware of.
The issue is very much worth bringing up. If Ragtime's comment struck you as confrontational and accusing, it might be worth remembering that "it's just a coincidence" is the automatic answer in places where it is manifestly
not a coincidence. And it's hard, when every time one mentions it the answer is "you're just seeing things", to be even-tempered and pleasant--possibly harder to be even-tempered when it's happening in a place you have otherwise felt comfortable and welcome in. It's hard not to feel angry. And sometimes if you're unrelentingly polite and nice, no one actually gets that it's a problem and nothing gets done.