6 ms·

Do Women Give Up Competing More Easily? Evidence from the lab and math Olympiad

53 points by Bostonian 7y ago

notus 7y ago
I can't read it. Why do they give up?
- colechristensen 7y ago
  Abstract >We use lab experiments and field data from the Dutch Math Olympiad to show that women are more likely than men to stop competing if they lose. In a math competition in the lab, women are much less likely than men to choose competition again after losing in the first round. In the Math Olympiad, girls, but not boys, who fail to make the second round are less likely to compete again one year later. This gender difference in the reaction to competition outcomes may help to explain why fewer women make it to the top in business and academia.
  - Zenst 7y ago
    The whole mentality of presuming those that do not win will try try again and learn from the experience often ignores that for some, it is logical to learn from the experience and move on in another direction all together. Hence a further deeper study would be inciteful. Did those who did not try again, try something else and shift focus and how well did they do in that new focus. That would be the biggest question.
    - noobiemcfoob 7y ago
      Follow this strategy too many times and you're out of new foci. It's particularly concerning if you're more fragile against the early challenges associated with a new endeavor. Many things won't look fruitful until you stick with them long enough to see over the first hill.
      - colechristensen 7y ago
        Risk-taking diversity has value in a population. It is believable that there are sex and age based differences in the distribution of risk taking as a result of both culture and biology. Bias for or against an individual based on these tendencies is wrong when used to pre-judge that person. What about the outcome bias for people or groups with differing risk tendencies? Is it morally necessary to compensate for different risk strategies? Which ones and to what degree? Which sources of cause should get this privilege and which shouldn't? There is a vocal group that insists that any disparity in outcome needs to be corrected, at least for their preferred groups. There is another that insists that it is immoral to punish (in any way) the hard work and other characteristics that lead to success outcomes.
        noobiemcfoob 7y ago
        You...really seem to be reading into my post. Moral necessity for rewarding different risk strategies? No, I'm not making any overarching claims to be taken up and enforced by a government or similar entity. And diversity of most sorts has value in a population. Actually, my biggest take away from all this is that it is even more important to stop framing things as zero-sum competitions and more as collaborations where an individual can find a space fitting of their grit, skills and interests.
  - pkaye 7y ago
    I'd be curious if this applies to all countries.
  - lonelappde 7y ago
    Take that study with a mountain of salt. Gender, math, and artificial contests is a fraught combination of topics.
  - twic 7y ago
    Related finding from interviewing.io: http://blog.interviewing.io/we-built-voice-modulation-to-mask-gender-in-technical-interviews-heres-what-happened/ http://blog.interviewing.io/we-built-voice-modulation-to-mas...
- ISL 7y ago
  While the article is paywalled, the data and analysis code are not. I'm not familiar with the programming language nor the file format. In addition, a 2016 draft of the paper appears to be available here (found by searching for the paper's title): https://site.stanford.edu/sites/g/files/sbiybj8706/f/buser-yuan-2016.pdf https://site.stanford.edu/sites/g/files/sbiybj8706/f/buser-y...
  - seeker61 7y ago
    I think the language is Stata's built-in "do-file" language. The datasets are probably Stat's format as well.
- TimTheTinker 7y ago
  Did you give up attempting to read it? :-D
- stevesimmons 7y ago
  Why did you give up? Are you a woman? (... just kidding, of course...) Ungated PDF is here: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Do-Women-Give-Up-Competing-More-Easily-Evidence-the-Buser-Yuan/e4fe7bf9660b1c219a238c892fe82b47a395a292 https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Do-Women-Give-Up-Compe...
howiroll 7y ago
B...but it’s the social discrimination that makes girls give up more easily! It has nothing with their sex! This paper is sexist!
cphoover 7y ago
Oh boy here we go...
ericmcer 7y ago
Some will point to this as evidence that the unequal outcomes in our society are not a result of sexism, but biological differences between sexes. Others will say society has taught women to give up more easily on their aspirations. Who knows what the truth is? Is it really worth chasing when the end goal is trying to label individuals based on a set of predetermined qualities?
- ThrustVectoring 7y ago
  Economically, a good chunk of unequal outcomes are a necessary evil in order to incentivize the behavior necessary for an efficient economy. If being a high-ranking corporate officer didn't pay better than lower-ranking ones, nowhere near as much work would be put into competing to climb the corporate ladder. You can read more about it by getting into Tournament Theory, but the basic gist is this: "winners" get paid more than their output is worth, "losers" less, but the average participant's compensation tends to be proportional to the average value of work. It's useful when the difficulty of measuring output is so burdensome to make piece-work uneconomical. There's other categories where the pay incentives are necessary. Taking on physically dangerous, unpleasant, or taxing work (eg, oilfield workers), or doing jobs that require a large investment in skill development (doctors, software developers). If you don't have the pay differential, a lot of important jobs just won't get done. >Is it really worth chasing when the end goal is trying to label individuals based on a set of predetermined qualities? It absolutely makes a big difference when it comes to public policy. If the unequal outcomes are because one sub-group is more willing to take the risks we want to avoid or develop the skills we don't have time to learn, it's extremely counterproductive to try to fix those outcomes. The inequality is the price we pay to get people to do things they'd rather not. Backtracking on these incentive gradients is short-sighted at best.
  - wolco 7y ago
    "If being a high-ranking corporate officer didn't pay better than lower-ranking ones, nowhere near as much work would be put into competing to climb the corporate ladder." I disagree a lot of people seek a higher ranking job because of power. Once they have the power they give themselves more. Would you rather clean bathrooms or tell others when to clean them for the same pay?
nurettin 7y ago
I think this is a positive thing. People who don't give up usually end up where they aren't supposed to, with peers who are simply better. Not to say they are totally useless, but they wouldn't have made the cut without their drive, which just means they pushed themselves above their limits to achieve something they shouldn't have. Now they are occupying space more deserving people could have been. Is that the wise thing to do? Looking at you guys.
- imesh 7y ago
  I think there are very few subjects where natural talent will be more productive than drive and work ethic. Not sure how you could test or prove something like this though.
  - SkyBelow 7y ago
    It would depend on how you define natural talent. A certain level of natural talent is absolutely necessary, but that level of natural talent is found in the majority of people. If you don't consider that natural talent and only consider some specific level above the baseline as qualifying, then the impact of natural talent verses hard work is much lower.
- saagarjha 7y ago
  I like being around people who are better than me :(
- luckydata 7y ago
  Sounds like the mentality of a loser. Nobody that has ever done anything meaningful in their lives think this way.
- dllthomas 7y ago
  Why isn't drive itself a part of who deserves what?
  - nurettin 7y ago
    it is, the drive to make it to finals and win is valuable, the drive to fail and try again, is it wise is what I am asking for the given reasons above.
nocitrek 7y ago
This is common sense to anybody who had lived past his puberty, yet you cannot say it in this crazy neoliberal world. You really need a study for this?
luckydata 7y ago
This seems to be consistent with the principle that nature experiments with males but plays conservatively with females. I don't think it's an accident that both the smartest AND the dumbest people in any population will be males. Females play too important of a role for the specie, while males are very expendable so they can afford to try more dangerous things more often. If a male is removed from the genetic pool it's easy to make up for him, while losing a female reproductively is a tragedy.
- y4mi 7y ago
  That's not how evolution works though. It's not about what's best for a species. It's about which individual breeds how much before death. And looking at it from that point of view makes it even more straightforward. Especially if you consider that historically approximately 80% of males died without having offspring.
  - spectrum1234 7y ago
    This is actually not true. It's about whats best for the gene. If a gene in a male has a higher standard deviation than in a female, this can all be explained at the gene level.
arnioxux 7y ago
There are firsthand accounts from women who did compete successfully on why it's harder for them (for example first answer is from a female IOI silver medalist): https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-more-women-participate-in-programming-contests?share=1 https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-more-women-participate-in-pro...
- 0-_-0 7y ago
  That answer basically came down to "there are few women in competitive programming because there are few women in competitive programming".
neilv 7y ago
Possibly a different version of the paywalled paper, freely available: T. Buser, H. Yuan, ``Do women give up Competing more easily? Evidence from the Lab and the Dutch Math Olympiad,'' 2016-11-10. https://pure.uva.nl/ws/files/7151108/Buser_and_Yuan_2016.pdf https://pure.uva.nl/ws/files/7151108/Buser_and_Yuan_2016.pdf
Isamu 7y ago
Recently on a podcast I heard the assertion (so I don't know of a study) that female students may be observed to do better on average in math classes than males, but males were disproportionately much more confident about their abilities than females. I have observed this difference myself anecdotally, it is sometimes almost comical in young males to have completely unearned confidence in math and technical skills. I have always thought this is tied to normal effects of testosterone.
boubiyeah 7y ago
I must have some very womanly traits then. When I first joined my engineering school, I felt so bad/inadequate because all the guys were like "yeah this is easy, I totally got this" and I was like "really? it's not that easy imo!" (for me, easy means I understand 100% of the topic) First few exams and I had WAY better marks than all of them, lol.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- oarabbus_ 7y ago
  It's called impostor syndrome, and affects both men and women in frequent numbers
  - 0815test 7y ago
    More specifically, it's called the Dunning-Kruger effect. Impostor syndrome is a broader description that heavily overlaps with the "give up competing due to perceived losses" that the article talks about. (As a side effect of this, one could predict that approaches to mitigation of impostor syndrome (which there are a few of) will be especially helpful if you're concerned about improving women's representation. Somewhat ironically though, the "ideological echo chamber" that is most active in pursuing these goals is not always very open to such notions!)
    - rosser 7y ago
      Dunning-Kruger and Impostor Syndrome are polar afflictions. One has you over-believing in your competence, and the other under-believing in it.
    - SkyBelow 7y ago
      Saying a class is easy is not the Dunning-Kruger effect, especially when the class is easy for the individual. Thinking mastering the entire field is easy because the intro class was easy is a far better match of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Someone who is well aware of how complex a subject is can find a given class to be easy, which would imply they are not under the Dunning-Kruger effect. Confidence alone is not sufficient. Edit: that they ended up with lower marks due to not studying due to overconfidence due to the earlier ease of the topic seems like it would fall under Dunning-Kruger.
Raphmedia 7y ago
I like to casually read articles on that topic. From my perspective and general knowledge, I would say that society shapes people and not just biological differences. Sex-based social structures are very complicated. This comes to mind: "Women reported themselves to be higher in Neuroticism, Agreeableness, Warmth, and Openness to Feelings, whereas men were higher in Assertiveness and Openness to Ideas. Contrary to predictions from evolutionary theory, the magnitude of gender differences varied across cultures. Contrary to predictions from the social role model, gender differences were most pronounced in European and American cultures in which traditional sex roles are minimized. Possible explanations for this surprising finding are discussed, including the attribution of masculine and feminine behaviors to roles rather than traits in traditional cultures." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11519935 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11519935
- LudwigNagasena 7y ago
  >Contrary to predictions from evolutionary theory, the magnitude of gender differences varied across cultures. How is it contrary? I don’t know a single evolutionary theorist who denies impact of culture on behavior.
- pedro_hab 7y ago
  Sure society affects gender expression of individuals to some extent. But the scientific evidence shows innate differences between genders. There are studies out there showing gender differences between human babies (boys and girls) and even between baby chimps. I would consider saying that gender differences are solely or even mostly society based as science denial.
  - Raphmedia 7y ago
    This is irrelevant to what I just said. I merely wrote that differences between men and women are not only biological but also based on social structures. You start by saying that you agree with this and then you make our own statements. I am incredulous about how linking a study from a scientific journal is evidence of science denial.
stirfrykitty 7y ago
Touchy issue, but I've been reading more and more where women in competitive sports are thinking of dropping out if they are forced to compete against men who say they're "women". Quite a few recent sporting events where actual women were trounced by men competing as women.
- jordigh 7y ago
  Please don't refer to transwomen as "women". Gender and sex really is more complicated than just men and women, and yes, I do mean "biologically", not just as some mental abstraction.
  - stirfrykitty 7y ago
    Not quite following what you're trying to convey.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
- dang 7y ago
  "Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
pmdulaney 7y ago
If one adopts an "equality of outcome" theory of justice, what difference does it make?
- sterkekoffie 7y ago
  If our end goal is a body of mathematicians that closely reflects society at large, it's pretty important to understand what factors influence participation in mathematics in under-represented groups, no?
  - pmdulaney 7y ago
    I think our goal should not be a body of mathematicians (or coders or nurses or NBA players) that closely reflects society at large, but an entry process that is fair. And the first and foremost tenet of fairness must be that each human be treated as an individual, not as the member of some group.
    - sterkekoffie 7y ago
      I took your post quite literally--if you believe in equality of outcome, studies like this are important. Personally, I disagree with you in principle, as I think there often aspects of human capital that can only be seen on the level of organization and not the individual. What it means to reflect society in a meaningful way differs depending on the role, but as a practice it has the potential to reduce oversight by leveraging a variety of perspectives.
      - pmdulaney 7y ago
        I appreciate your civility. My advice to you is to avoid bureaucratic/academic language that is nearly devoid of meaning. For example, "there [are] often aspects of human capital that can only be seen on the level of organization and not the individual" and "it has the potential to reduce oversight by leveraging a variety of perspectives."
        7y ago
petra 7y ago
Well, testosterone is the hormone of competition. Males have much more of it. So everything's a competition, for many males. How did society educate men to compete on everything ? Why would it ? And on the other hand, women have low levels of testosterone. But we know one area where they tend to strongly compete: competing on a mate. And it's interesting: Just a whiff of a woman close to ovulation is enough to stimulate another woman's testosterone levels, along with her desire to compete.[1] [1]https://www.livescience.com/39902-women-smell-competition.html https://www.livescience.com/39902-women-smell-competition.ht...
spark28 7y ago
I think it's interesting to look at how you define competition. It actually derives from the Latin 'competere' or 'strive together.' I think you can see this with the "Shalane Effect" aka how the famous Olympic marathoner Shalane Flanagan is elevating her competition, and thus her own performance, by supporting those around her. In the truest sense we can only really compete against ourselves.
adchari 7y ago
Isn't this a bit of a chicken and the egg situation? Are women more likely to give up due to some evolutionary or natural trait, or is it learned due to some societal pressure?
RickJWagner 7y ago
Based on 21 years of marriage (and occasional arguments), no. Absolutely not.

53 points by Bostonian 7y ago

notus 7y ago

I can't read it. Why do they give up?

colechristensen 7y ago
Abstract >We use lab experiments and field data from the Dutch Math Olympiad to show that women are more likely than men to stop competing if they lose. In a math competition in the lab, women are much less likely than men to choose competition again after losing in the first round. In the Math Olympiad, girls, but not boys, who fail to make the second round are less likely to compete again one year later. This gender difference in the reaction to competition outcomes may help to explain why fewer women make it to the top in business and academia.
- Zenst 7y ago
  The whole mentality of presuming those that do not win will try try again and learn from the experience often ignores that for some, it is logical to learn from the experience and move on in another direction all together. Hence a further deeper study would be inciteful. Did those who did not try again, try something else and shift focus and how well did they do in that new focus. That would be the biggest question.
  - noobiemcfoob 7y ago
    Follow this strategy too many times and you're out of new foci. It's particularly concerning if you're more fragile against the early challenges associated with a new endeavor. Many things won't look fruitful until you stick with them long enough to see over the first hill.
    - colechristensen 7y ago
      Risk-taking diversity has value in a population. It is believable that there are sex and age based differences in the distribution of risk taking as a result of both culture and biology. Bias for or against an individual based on these tendencies is wrong when used to pre-judge that person. What about the outcome bias for people or groups with differing risk tendencies? Is it morally necessary to compensate for different risk strategies? Which ones and to what degree? Which sources of cause should get this privilege and which shouldn't? There is a vocal group that insists that any disparity in outcome needs to be corrected, at least for their preferred groups. There is another that insists that it is immoral to punish (in any way) the hard work and other characteristics that lead to success outcomes.
      - noobiemcfoob 7y ago
        You...really seem to be reading into my post. Moral necessity for rewarding different risk strategies? No, I'm not making any overarching claims to be taken up and enforced by a government or similar entity. And diversity of most sorts has value in a population. Actually, my biggest take away from all this is that it is even more important to stop framing things as zero-sum competitions and more as collaborations where an individual can find a space fitting of their grit, skills and interests.
- pkaye 7y ago
  I'd be curious if this applies to all countries.
- lonelappde 7y ago
  Take that study with a mountain of salt. Gender, math, and artificial contests is a fraught combination of topics.
- twic 7y ago
  Related finding from interviewing.io: http://blog.interviewing.io/we-built-voice-modulation-to-mask-gender-in-technical-interviews-heres-what-happened/ http://blog.interviewing.io/we-built-voice-modulation-to-mas...
ISL 7y ago
While the article is paywalled, the data and analysis code are not. I'm not familiar with the programming language nor the file format. In addition, a 2016 draft of the paper appears to be available here (found by searching for the paper's title): https://site.stanford.edu/sites/g/files/sbiybj8706/f/buser-yuan-2016.pdf https://site.stanford.edu/sites/g/files/sbiybj8706/f/buser-y...
- seeker61 7y ago
  I think the language is Stata's built-in "do-file" language. The datasets are probably Stat's format as well.
TimTheTinker 7y ago
Did you give up attempting to read it? :-D
stevesimmons 7y ago
Why did you give up? Are you a woman? (... just kidding, of course...) Ungated PDF is here: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Do-Women-Give-Up-Competing-More-Easily-Evidence-the-Buser-Yuan/e4fe7bf9660b1c219a238c892fe82b47a395a292 https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Do-Women-Give-Up-Compe...

howiroll 7y ago

B...but it’s the social discrimination that makes girls give up more easily! It has nothing with their sex! This paper is sexist!

cphoover 7y ago

Oh boy here we go...

ericmcer 7y ago

Some will point to this as evidence that the unequal outcomes in our society are not a result of sexism, but biological differences between sexes. Others will say society has taught women to give up more easily on their aspirations. Who knows what the truth is? Is it really worth chasing when the end goal is trying to label individuals based on a set of predetermined qualities?

ThrustVectoring 7y ago
Economically, a good chunk of unequal outcomes are a necessary evil in order to incentivize the behavior necessary for an efficient economy. If being a high-ranking corporate officer didn't pay better than lower-ranking ones, nowhere near as much work would be put into competing to climb the corporate ladder. You can read more about it by getting into Tournament Theory, but the basic gist is this: "winners" get paid more than their output is worth, "losers" less, but the average participant's compensation tends to be proportional to the average value of work. It's useful when the difficulty of measuring output is so burdensome to make piece-work uneconomical. There's other categories where the pay incentives are necessary. Taking on physically dangerous, unpleasant, or taxing work (eg, oilfield workers), or doing jobs that require a large investment in skill development (doctors, software developers). If you don't have the pay differential, a lot of important jobs just won't get done. >Is it really worth chasing when the end goal is trying to label individuals based on a set of predetermined qualities? It absolutely makes a big difference when it comes to public policy. If the unequal outcomes are because one sub-group is more willing to take the risks we want to avoid or develop the skills we don't have time to learn, it's extremely counterproductive to try to fix those outcomes. The inequality is the price we pay to get people to do things they'd rather not. Backtracking on these incentive gradients is short-sighted at best.
- wolco 7y ago
  "If being a high-ranking corporate officer didn't pay better than lower-ranking ones, nowhere near as much work would be put into competing to climb the corporate ladder." I disagree a lot of people seek a higher ranking job because of power. Once they have the power they give themselves more. Would you rather clean bathrooms or tell others when to clean them for the same pay?

nurettin 7y ago

I think this is a positive thing. People who don't give up usually end up where they aren't supposed to, with peers who are simply better. Not to say they are totally useless, but they wouldn't have made the cut without their drive, which just means they pushed themselves above their limits to achieve something they shouldn't have. Now they are occupying space more deserving people could have been. Is that the wise thing to do? Looking at you guys.

imesh 7y ago
I think there are very few subjects where natural talent will be more productive than drive and work ethic. Not sure how you could test or prove something like this though.
- SkyBelow 7y ago
  It would depend on how you define natural talent. A certain level of natural talent is absolutely necessary, but that level of natural talent is found in the majority of people. If you don't consider that natural talent and only consider some specific level above the baseline as qualifying, then the impact of natural talent verses hard work is much lower.
saagarjha 7y ago
I like being around people who are better than me :(
luckydata 7y ago
Sounds like the mentality of a loser. Nobody that has ever done anything meaningful in their lives think this way.
dllthomas 7y ago
Why isn't drive itself a part of who deserves what?
- nurettin 7y ago
  it is, the drive to make it to finals and win is valuable, the drive to fail and try again, is it wise is what I am asking for the given reasons above.

nocitrek 7y ago

This is common sense to anybody who had lived past his puberty, yet you cannot say it in this crazy neoliberal world. You really need a study for this?

luckydata 7y ago

This seems to be consistent with the principle that nature experiments with males but plays conservatively with females. I don't think it's an accident that both the smartest AND the dumbest people in any population will be males. Females play too important of a role for the specie, while males are very expendable so they can afford to try more dangerous things more often. If a male is removed from the genetic pool it's easy to make up for him, while losing a female reproductively is a tragedy.

y4mi 7y ago
That's not how evolution works though. It's not about what's best for a species. It's about which individual breeds how much before death. And looking at it from that point of view makes it even more straightforward. Especially if you consider that historically approximately 80% of males died without having offspring.
- spectrum1234 7y ago
  This is actually not true. It's about whats best for the gene. If a gene in a male has a higher standard deviation than in a female, this can all be explained at the gene level.

arnioxux 7y ago

There are firsthand accounts from women who did compete successfully on why it's harder for them (for example first answer is from a female IOI silver medalist): https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-more-women-participate-in-programming-contests?share=1 https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-more-women-participate-in-pro...

0-_-0 7y ago
That answer basically came down to "there are few women in competitive programming because there are few women in competitive programming".

neilv 7y ago

Possibly a different version of the paywalled paper, freely available: T. Buser, H. Yuan, ``Do women give up Competing more easily? Evidence from the Lab and the Dutch Math Olympiad,'' 2016-11-10. https://pure.uva.nl/ws/files/7151108/Buser_and_Yuan_2016.pdf https://pure.uva.nl/ws/files/7151108/Buser_and_Yuan_2016.pdf

Isamu 7y ago

Recently on a podcast I heard the assertion (so I don't know of a study) that female students may be observed to do better on average in math classes than males, but males were disproportionately much more confident about their abilities than females. I have observed this difference myself anecdotally, it is sometimes almost comical in young males to have completely unearned confidence in math and technical skills. I have always thought this is tied to normal effects of testosterone.

boubiyeah 7y ago

I must have some very womanly traits then. When I first joined my engineering school, I felt so bad/inadequate because all the guys were like "yeah this is easy, I totally got this" and I was like "really? it's not that easy imo!" (for me, easy means I understand 100% of the topic) First few exams and I had WAY better marks than all of them, lol.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
oarabbus_ 7y ago
It's called impostor syndrome, and affects both men and women in frequent numbers
- 0815test 7y ago
  More specifically, it's called the Dunning-Kruger effect. Impostor syndrome is a broader description that heavily overlaps with the "give up competing due to perceived losses" that the article talks about. (As a side effect of this, one could predict that approaches to mitigation of impostor syndrome (which there are a few of) will be especially helpful if you're concerned about improving women's representation. Somewhat ironically though, the "ideological echo chamber" that is most active in pursuing these goals is not always very open to such notions!)
  - rosser 7y ago
    Dunning-Kruger and Impostor Syndrome are polar afflictions. One has you over-believing in your competence, and the other under-believing in it.
  - SkyBelow 7y ago
    Saying a class is easy is not the Dunning-Kruger effect, especially when the class is easy for the individual. Thinking mastering the entire field is easy because the intro class was easy is a far better match of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Someone who is well aware of how complex a subject is can find a given class to be easy, which would imply they are not under the Dunning-Kruger effect. Confidence alone is not sufficient. Edit: that they ended up with lower marks due to not studying due to overconfidence due to the earlier ease of the topic seems like it would fall under Dunning-Kruger.

Raphmedia 7y ago

I like to casually read articles on that topic. From my perspective and general knowledge, I would say that society shapes people and not just biological differences. Sex-based social structures are very complicated. This comes to mind: "Women reported themselves to be higher in Neuroticism, Agreeableness, Warmth, and Openness to Feelings, whereas men were higher in Assertiveness and Openness to Ideas. Contrary to predictions from evolutionary theory, the magnitude of gender differences varied across cultures. Contrary to predictions from the social role model, gender differences were most pronounced in European and American cultures in which traditional sex roles are minimized. Possible explanations for this surprising finding are discussed, including the attribution of masculine and feminine behaviors to roles rather than traits in traditional cultures." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11519935 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11519935

LudwigNagasena 7y ago
>Contrary to predictions from evolutionary theory, the magnitude of gender differences varied across cultures. How is it contrary? I don’t know a single evolutionary theorist who denies impact of culture on behavior.
pedro_hab 7y ago
Sure society affects gender expression of individuals to some extent. But the scientific evidence shows innate differences between genders. There are studies out there showing gender differences between human babies (boys and girls) and even between baby chimps. I would consider saying that gender differences are solely or even mostly society based as science denial.
- Raphmedia 7y ago
  This is irrelevant to what I just said. I merely wrote that differences between men and women are not only biological but also based on social structures. You start by saying that you agree with this and then you make our own statements. I am incredulous about how linking a study from a scientific journal is evidence of science denial.

stirfrykitty 7y ago

Touchy issue, but I've been reading more and more where women in competitive sports are thinking of dropping out if they are forced to compete against men who say they're "women". Quite a few recent sporting events where actual women were trounced by men competing as women.

jordigh 7y ago
Please don't refer to transwomen as "women". Gender and sex really is more complicated than just men and women, and yes, I do mean "biologically", not just as some mental abstraction.
- stirfrykitty 7y ago
  Not quite following what you're trying to convey.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
dang 7y ago
"Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

pmdulaney 7y ago

If one adopts an "equality of outcome" theory of justice, what difference does it make?

sterkekoffie 7y ago
If our end goal is a body of mathematicians that closely reflects society at large, it's pretty important to understand what factors influence participation in mathematics in under-represented groups, no?
- pmdulaney 7y ago
  I think our goal should not be a body of mathematicians (or coders or nurses or NBA players) that closely reflects society at large, but an entry process that is fair. And the first and foremost tenet of fairness must be that each human be treated as an individual, not as the member of some group.
  - sterkekoffie 7y ago
    I took your post quite literally--if you believe in equality of outcome, studies like this are important. Personally, I disagree with you in principle, as I think there often aspects of human capital that can only be seen on the level of organization and not the individual. What it means to reflect society in a meaningful way differs depending on the role, but as a practice it has the potential to reduce oversight by leveraging a variety of perspectives.
    - pmdulaney 7y ago
      I appreciate your civility. My advice to you is to avoid bureaucratic/academic language that is nearly devoid of meaning. For example, "there [are] often aspects of human capital that can only be seen on the level of organization and not the individual" and "it has the potential to reduce oversight by leveraging a variety of perspectives."
      - 7y ago

petra 7y ago

Well, testosterone is the hormone of competition. Males have much more of it. So everything's a competition, for many males. How did society educate men to compete on everything ? Why would it ? And on the other hand, women have low levels of testosterone. But we know one area where they tend to strongly compete: competing on a mate. And it's interesting: Just a whiff of a woman close to ovulation is enough to stimulate another woman's testosterone levels, along with her desire to compete.[1] [1]https://www.livescience.com/39902-women-smell-competition.html https://www.livescience.com/39902-women-smell-competition.ht...

spark28 7y ago

I think it's interesting to look at how you define competition. It actually derives from the Latin 'competere' or 'strive together.' I think you can see this with the "Shalane Effect" aka how the famous Olympic marathoner Shalane Flanagan is elevating her competition, and thus her own performance, by supporting those around her. In the truest sense we can only really compete against ourselves.

adchari 7y ago

Isn't this a bit of a chicken and the egg situation? Are women more likely to give up due to some evolutionary or natural trait, or is it learned due to some societal pressure?

RickJWagner 7y ago

Based on 21 years of marriage (and occasional arguments), no. Absolutely not.