3 ms·

Not really. There are claims that for example men are better at spacial reasoning (imagining/navigating a 2d/3d space, constructing physical things in their hea

by mAritz 9y ago

Not really. There are claims that for example men are better at spacial reasoning (imagining/navigating a 2d/3d space, constructing physical things in their head before acting on it). Women are supposedly better at putting themselves into the perspective of other people, both emotionally as well as logically. Or so I've heard. I'm sure there have been studies on these topics though, and I think that's what your parent comment is asking for?! Although, making these out to be biological differences could be a stretch.

brians 9y ago
Boys are encouraged to build and to play ball. Girls are encouraged to perform and to play tea. Why would we expect the stereotypical difference to be biological at all? I'm sure there are some differences in tendencies, but I'm not at all sure they'll avoid being swamped by environmental effects, socialization, and individual variation.
- renaudg 9y ago
  Because it happens even in monkeys : https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2583786/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2583786/ I've posted it elsewhere in the thread already, but this article is a good recap of research on the topic : https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rabble-rouser/201707/why-brilliant-girls-tend-favor-non-stem-careers https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rabble-rouser/201707/wh...
  - evgen 9y ago
    That is not a "good recap of research", it is a motivated collection of cherry-picked data points put together to suit the author's political purpose. Dig a bit on the author of the piece and you will get a feel for his objectives, and dig a bit into the actual points he is, poorly, attempting to make in the article and you will see that they seem to hand wave over a bunch of questions that any real researcher would examine further. Please provide real research rather than spamming this blog post as though it was actually a useful contribution to the conversation.
    - TimTheTinker 9y ago
      That's a rather ad-hominem response/dismissal. Care to address the blog post's arguments?
    - renaudg 9y ago
      > a motivated collection of cherry-picked data points put together to suit the author's political purpose How very ironic you should say that, given the author's interesting demonstration (with figures) in that very same post of the propensity of the other side to over-cite weak studies that fit the desired narrative, and under-cite inconvenient ones with orders of magnitude better sample sizes and methodology. > Please provide real research. Indeed...
- remarkEon 9y ago
  Toy preferences are innate. I'm seriously struggling to understand how people can obviously realize that different breeds of dogs have different innate behavioral characteristics but somehow deny that humans (we're just another mammal!) can have the same kind of inherited characteristic patterns. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/icd.1986/abstract;jsessionid=CB828F46887CB1D332E6403D72C1B1D2.f03t04 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/icd.1986/abstract...
- ithkuil 9y ago
  > Boys are encouraged to build and to play ball. Girls are encouraged to perform and to play tea. Why would we expect the stereotypical difference to be biological at all? I'm sure there are some differences in tendencies, but I'm not at all sure they'll avoid being swamped by environmental effects, socialization, and individual variation. Yes, I think individual variation is the key here. I know quite a few girls that didn't like to do activities things meant for girls and the same for quite a few boys. No matter how much pressure (from parents, teacher and peers) they received they just followed their nature and did whatever they liked more (e.g. the girls played soccer and the boys "played tea"). I have examples of that from my experience both as a child and now a parent and uncle. Wouldn't this mean that perhaps there is something in the tendencies and predisposition that is not rooted in social coercion? Often when people think about biological cause they think in terms of what a male or female brains should be, just by virtue of being labeled a male or female biologically (e.g. by some physical quality, including tests involving chromosomes) But what if you, as an individual just don't match? Does that make your abilities or tendencies less hereditary or less caused by biology? The biology of the individuum is what affects the individuum, along with upbringing and literally everything else, including others prejudices! Personally, a big advantage of this current wave of reverse bigotry is that individuals who would have been just put aside without even giving them a chance now can fare better because society e.g. is being trained at the fact that women can be just as good. Often, that's what matters. I often hear that the end justifies the means; that if we actually try to have a nuanced conversation about this complex topic we'd just give misogynists and xenophobes a way to pursue their agendas. And we definitely need more work if we want that people have less bias when confronted with a person of a gender that "doesn't match". I wonder when will come the time that being fully open, objective and honest will be the most practical way of achieving this goal.
- dyno12345 9y ago
  Lots of studies have shown that girls that happen to have received prenatal male hormones show strong preferences for more typically boy's toys and play behavior in spite of any degree of social pressure. There are lots more but here are a few: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12760514 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12760514 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15693771 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15693771 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12414881 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12414881
windsignaling 9y ago
The keyword here is biological. In biology we do not study spatial reasoning or empathy. In biology we study physical processes. Fact: men and women have different body parts. Fact: men and women have different hormones and hormones affect behavior. The trouble arises when we cannot even discuss "what is a man" and "what is a woman" for fear of offending somebody. Anyone can believe they are a man or a woman or anything else, that's fine. But we can't change biology. At this point it's just wordplay.

by mAritz 9y ago

brians 9y ago

Boys are encouraged to build and to play ball. Girls are encouraged to perform and to play tea. Why would we expect the stereotypical difference to be biological at all? I'm sure there are some differences in tendencies, but I'm not at all sure they'll avoid being swamped by environmental effects, socialization, and individual variation.

renaudg 9y ago
Because it happens even in monkeys : https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2583786/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2583786/ I've posted it elsewhere in the thread already, but this article is a good recap of research on the topic : https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rabble-rouser/201707/why-brilliant-girls-tend-favor-non-stem-careers https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rabble-rouser/201707/wh...
- evgen 9y ago
  That is not a "good recap of research", it is a motivated collection of cherry-picked data points put together to suit the author's political purpose. Dig a bit on the author of the piece and you will get a feel for his objectives, and dig a bit into the actual points he is, poorly, attempting to make in the article and you will see that they seem to hand wave over a bunch of questions that any real researcher would examine further. Please provide real research rather than spamming this blog post as though it was actually a useful contribution to the conversation.
  - TimTheTinker 9y ago
    That's a rather ad-hominem response/dismissal. Care to address the blog post's arguments?
  - renaudg 9y ago
    > a motivated collection of cherry-picked data points put together to suit the author's political purpose How very ironic you should say that, given the author's interesting demonstration (with figures) in that very same post of the propensity of the other side to over-cite weak studies that fit the desired narrative, and under-cite inconvenient ones with orders of magnitude better sample sizes and methodology. > Please provide real research. Indeed...
remarkEon 9y ago
Toy preferences are innate. I'm seriously struggling to understand how people can obviously realize that different breeds of dogs have different innate behavioral characteristics but somehow deny that humans (we're just another mammal!) can have the same kind of inherited characteristic patterns. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/icd.1986/abstract;jsessionid=CB828F46887CB1D332E6403D72C1B1D2.f03t04 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/icd.1986/abstract...
ithkuil 9y ago
> Boys are encouraged to build and to play ball. Girls are encouraged to perform and to play tea. Why would we expect the stereotypical difference to be biological at all? I'm sure there are some differences in tendencies, but I'm not at all sure they'll avoid being swamped by environmental effects, socialization, and individual variation. Yes, I think individual variation is the key here. I know quite a few girls that didn't like to do activities things meant for girls and the same for quite a few boys. No matter how much pressure (from parents, teacher and peers) they received they just followed their nature and did whatever they liked more (e.g. the girls played soccer and the boys "played tea"). I have examples of that from my experience both as a child and now a parent and uncle. Wouldn't this mean that perhaps there is something in the tendencies and predisposition that is not rooted in social coercion? Often when people think about biological cause they think in terms of what a male or female brains should be, just by virtue of being labeled a male or female biologically (e.g. by some physical quality, including tests involving chromosomes) But what if you, as an individual just don't match? Does that make your abilities or tendencies less hereditary or less caused by biology? The biology of the individuum is what affects the individuum, along with upbringing and literally everything else, including others prejudices! Personally, a big advantage of this current wave of reverse bigotry is that individuals who would have been just put aside without even giving them a chance now can fare better because society e.g. is being trained at the fact that women can be just as good. Often, that's what matters. I often hear that the end justifies the means; that if we actually try to have a nuanced conversation about this complex topic we'd just give misogynists and xenophobes a way to pursue their agendas. And we definitely need more work if we want that people have less bias when confronted with a person of a gender that "doesn't match". I wonder when will come the time that being fully open, objective and honest will be the most practical way of achieving this goal.
dyno12345 9y ago
Lots of studies have shown that girls that happen to have received prenatal male hormones show strong preferences for more typically boy's toys and play behavior in spite of any degree of social pressure. There are lots more but here are a few: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12760514 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12760514 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15693771 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15693771 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12414881 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12414881

windsignaling 9y ago

The keyword here is biological. In biology we do not study spatial reasoning or empathy. In biology we study physical processes. Fact: men and women have different body parts. Fact: men and women have different hormones and hormones affect behavior. The trouble arises when we cannot even discuss "what is a man" and "what is a woman" for fear of offending somebody. Anyone can believe they are a man or a woman or anything else, that's fine. But we can't change biology. At this point it's just wordplay.