3 ms·

The top-paying subfields in finance, medicine, sci/tech, are all heavily affected by the "people vs. things" distinction that the article talks about, in being

The top-paying subfields in finance, medicine, sci/tech, are all heavily affected by the "people vs. things" distinction that the article talks about, in being highly skewed towards "things". (Business management actually has similar problems as managers are heavily selected for being risk-loving and it's well-known in the social-science literature that women tend to be more careful than men at assessing risk.) There might be more hope wrt. the people-focused part, and we do see women having quite a bit of success there, even more so in parts of the world like East Asia where contemporary feminist ideology, with its pandering to wishful thinking and populism while neglecting the facts on the ground (as described by OP) is not really a major focus compared with the West.

projectramo 8y ago
People vs things is not a thing. Imagine someone wrote a paper that said men are horrible at management or anything collaborative because all their testosterone makes them so angry that they simply get too emotional to work with others. If you are a man -- and who knows on the internet -- you know this is garbage. Yes men have more testosterone. That is a fact, and no one is arguing. Yes, testosterone means you are more likely to get angry, but it doesn't follow that your anger levels prevent you from working. Come on! But now, instead of believing you, people say you are hysterical and anti-science, and you have to do a study to prove you don't get so angry you can't work. Every day people post examples of men who went ballistic at work. The study is inconclusive and you are wasting all this time trying to prove that the testosterone doesn't make you angry. Every time you lose your temper, people point out that you are a guy and of course you're prone to that. That's what this "people vs things" distinction is like.

projectramo 8y ago

People vs things is not a thing. Imagine someone wrote a paper that said men are horrible at management or anything collaborative because all their testosterone makes them so angry that they simply get too emotional to work with others. If you are a man -- and who knows on the internet -- you know this is garbage. Yes men have more testosterone. That is a fact, and no one is arguing. Yes, testosterone means you are more likely to get angry, but it doesn't follow that your anger levels prevent you from working. Come on! But now, instead of believing you, people say you are hysterical and anti-science, and you have to do a study to prove you don't get so angry you can't work. Every day people post examples of men who went ballistic at work. The study is inconclusive and you are wasting all this time trying to prove that the testosterone doesn't make you angry. Every time you lose your temper, people point out that you are a guy and of course you're prone to that. That's what this "people vs things" distinction is like.