You may think the nature presumption is wrong. Fair enough. But, humbly, you're too confident in your reasoning if you think your case is so strong that the nat

You may think the nature presumption is wrong. Fair enough. But, humbly, you're too confident in your reasoning if you think your case is so strong that the nature camp must be acting disingenuously. There are all manner of research findings about the biological differences in the sexes. And reasonable people can in good faith build cases from that research just as you've done from the observable evidence. Would I be wrong to conclude that you have a strong preference for the socialization explanation? I feel like this debate is held back by the illogical and erroneous belief that a socialization explanation is Good, while the nature explanation, should it turn out to be true, would be Bad. Or, that anybody who believes the nature explanation is themselves Bad or at the very least has bad intentions.