6 ms·

The biggest issue is that, with such gender-related differences, it is virtually impossible to differentiate between what is biological in nature and what is th

The biggest issue is that, with such gender-related differences, it is virtually impossible to differentiate between what is biological in nature and what is the result of socialization. You're basically just limited to fetal development and infant behaviors, which you can't exactly extrapolate to career choices and adult cognitive function. Looking at modern-day gender ratios in careers and just hypothesizing a biological cause is specious reasoning. You need so much more evidence to make that claim.

pmarreck 8y ago
Identical twins raised separately have a 50% higher concordance of sexual orientation. Note: Not 100%, but also not 0%. This tells me that, at least in the case of sexual preference (and possibly, all other preferences, such as in learning how things work/STEM), it seems to be significantly (but not completely; but also not insignificantly) influenced by nonsocial/biological/"root" factors. This is of course, unfortunately, the most troublesome answer, because all it does is lead to even more questions.
- openasocket 8y ago
  sexual preference is a pretty bad stand-in for career choices. But we don't have to use it, there are twin studies on career path: http://www.aei.org/publication/the-genetics-of-job-choice/ http://www.aei.org/publication/the-genetics-of-job-choice/ . The numbers vary a lot based on the specifics, but tend to be less than 50%. But this only provides evidence of a genetic component to career choice, not sexual differences. To prove that, you'd need to isolate the genes responsible and show they are on the X or Y chromosomes. Actually, genes are a lot more complicated than that, and there would likely be a large number of interactions between a lot of different genes. So instead you'd need to use some sort of statistical model. Also, I'd note that this doesn't rule out societal factors. Heritability scores are a measure of the interaction between genes and the environment. If we lived in a world where it was against the law for a woman to be a computer programmer, you'd see a very strong genetic component for career choice as well!
  - pmarreck 8y ago
    > To prove that, you'd need to isolate the genes responsible and show they are on the X or Y chromosomes. I don't think that's necessary. All you'd have to do IMHO is 1) take male identical-twin-raised-separately data about career choice 2) take female identical-twin-raised-separately data about career choice 3) do a multivariate regression analysis of both twin-to-twin and also gender-to-gender; you should be able to derive the statistical relationships between career and sex, and both of these to genetics, and that would demonstrate genetic influence. Since the correlation between genes and career seems to be positive http://www.aei.org/publication/the-genetics-of-job-choice/ http://www.aei.org/publication/the-genetics-of-job-choice/, and the correlation of gender and career seems to be positive http://career.iresearchnet.com/career-development/gender-and-careers/ http://career.iresearchnet.com/career-development/gender-and... (although is claimed to be 100% environmental, according to the blank-slate hypothesis, which I consider a radical position), we can safely assume that some combination of all 3 is also positive, although the actual value requires math.
    - openasocket 8y ago
      Absolutely none of this controls for social factors. Twin studies focus on twins raised separately, since they would have the same genes but a different environment. But unless one of the twins is raised in this society and another is raised in a society without any notion of gender roles, you aren't really demonstrating anything.

pmarreck 8y ago

Identical twins raised separately have a 50% higher concordance of sexual orientation. Note: Not 100%, but also not 0%. This tells me that, at least in the case of sexual preference (and possibly, all other preferences, such as in learning how things work/STEM), it seems to be significantly (but not completely; but also not insignificantly) influenced by nonsocial/biological/"root" factors. This is of course, unfortunately, the most troublesome answer, because all it does is lead to even more questions.

openasocket 8y ago
sexual preference is a pretty bad stand-in for career choices. But we don't have to use it, there are twin studies on career path: http://www.aei.org/publication/the-genetics-of-job-choice/ http://www.aei.org/publication/the-genetics-of-job-choice/ . The numbers vary a lot based on the specifics, but tend to be less than 50%. But this only provides evidence of a genetic component to career choice, not sexual differences. To prove that, you'd need to isolate the genes responsible and show they are on the X or Y chromosomes. Actually, genes are a lot more complicated than that, and there would likely be a large number of interactions between a lot of different genes. So instead you'd need to use some sort of statistical model. Also, I'd note that this doesn't rule out societal factors. Heritability scores are a measure of the interaction between genes and the environment. If we lived in a world where it was against the law for a woman to be a computer programmer, you'd see a very strong genetic component for career choice as well!
- pmarreck 8y ago
  > To prove that, you'd need to isolate the genes responsible and show they are on the X or Y chromosomes. I don't think that's necessary. All you'd have to do IMHO is 1) take male identical-twin-raised-separately data about career choice 2) take female identical-twin-raised-separately data about career choice 3) do a multivariate regression analysis of both twin-to-twin and also gender-to-gender; you should be able to derive the statistical relationships between career and sex, and both of these to genetics, and that would demonstrate genetic influence. Since the correlation between genes and career seems to be positive http://www.aei.org/publication/the-genetics-of-job-choice/ http://www.aei.org/publication/the-genetics-of-job-choice/, and the correlation of gender and career seems to be positive http://career.iresearchnet.com/career-development/gender-and-careers/ http://career.iresearchnet.com/career-development/gender-and... (although is claimed to be 100% environmental, according to the blank-slate hypothesis, which I consider a radical position), we can safely assume that some combination of all 3 is also positive, although the actual value requires math.
  - openasocket 8y ago
    Absolutely none of this controls for social factors. Twin studies focus on twins raised separately, since they would have the same genes but a different environment. But unless one of the twins is raised in this society and another is raised in a society without any notion of gender roles, you aren't really demonstrating anything.