5 ms·

I don't think it's controversial, I just think the title isn't great. It's not saying that differences in the brain between men and women cause gender inequalit

by doix 3y ago

I don't think it's controversial, I just think the title isn't great. It's not saying that differences in the brain between men and women cause gender inequality. Instead, it's saying that gender inequality has been associated with effects on the brain. We are fairly confident that the environment you grow up can affect how your brain develops. It's not unreasonable that growing up in a society with gender inequality will have an effect on how the brain develops.

andrewclunn 3y ago
Reversing causality to try and turn evidence against pure egalitarianism into a pseudo-scientific argument for oppression narrative based political views IS controversial. It just doesn't appear to be to people mired in neo-marxist culture (see the large swatch of Californian natives that frequent this site).
calvinmorrison 3y ago
it's controversial because it uses loaded terms like 'inequality'. Differences in brains, yeah well that's a no duh. So mens brains develop around a high risk tolerance because they're expendable in mines, fighting trenches, lumber operations, fishing, and so forth?
- AndrewDucker 3y ago
  It's saying that the differences are larger in countries with higher gender inequality. That's an interesting result, and worth discussing.
nashashmi 3y ago
I'm not clicking on it, however what I am more interested in is how does the paper determine that mental inequality is influenced by exterior factors, instead of inherent gender differences causing exterior inequalities?
- doix 3y ago
  > I'm not clicking on it, You should :) > however what I am more interested in is how does the paper determine that mental inequality is influenced by exterior factors, instead of inherent gender differences causing exterior inequalities? It's not looking at causality, just association, so it doesn't do what you're asking. What it does do is show that countries with more inequality have more brain differences between genders. You can make your own hypotheses about the causality, for instance, if it was inherit then why would the differences be less prevalent in countries with more equality? There is some discussion in the discussion part of the paper.
  - worksonmine 3y ago
    > if it was inherit then why would the differences be less prevalent in countries with more equality? Maybe that's the causality? Chicken and the egg.
    - doix 3y ago
      Sure, and then you explore that further. If it's genetic, look at first generation immigrants that moved from places with low gender equality to places with high gender equality. If it's something in the environment, research what it could be. Slowly data accumulates and someone can try to show causality, and that's science in a nutshell (as I understand it). Alternatively, we get really good human models and simulate everything, sci-fi style.
      - worksonmine 3y ago
        Some science on the subject exists but considered too controversial for the mainstream. IQ, SAT scores, crime all show similar correlations even after socioeconomic factors are taken into account. One explanation for the gap in SAT scores I've seen is that women and minorities (except asians) perform worse because they expect to perform worse. Plausible to an extent sure but today it seems the science is jumping through all kinds of hoops to prove that genetics have an effect on every part of our body except the brain. I'm not trying to deny that culture and nurture plays a big role, but we choose dog breeds based on personal traits, so why do we expect ourselves to be any different? It applies to all animals but us, nonsense if you ask me. Where I live the second generation immigrants are more prone to crime than their parents were. What's the explanation for that?

by doix 3y ago

andrewclunn 3y ago

Reversing causality to try and turn evidence against pure egalitarianism into a pseudo-scientific argument for oppression narrative based political views IS controversial. It just doesn't appear to be to people mired in neo-marxist culture (see the large swatch of Californian natives that frequent this site).

calvinmorrison 3y ago

it's controversial because it uses loaded terms like 'inequality'. Differences in brains, yeah well that's a no duh. So mens brains develop around a high risk tolerance because they're expendable in mines, fighting trenches, lumber operations, fishing, and so forth?

AndrewDucker 3y ago
It's saying that the differences are larger in countries with higher gender inequality. That's an interesting result, and worth discussing.

nashashmi 3y ago

I'm not clicking on it, however what I am more interested in is how does the paper determine that mental inequality is influenced by exterior factors, instead of inherent gender differences causing exterior inequalities?

doix 3y ago
> I'm not clicking on it, You should :) > however what I am more interested in is how does the paper determine that mental inequality is influenced by exterior factors, instead of inherent gender differences causing exterior inequalities? It's not looking at causality, just association, so it doesn't do what you're asking. What it does do is show that countries with more inequality have more brain differences between genders. You can make your own hypotheses about the causality, for instance, if it was inherit then why would the differences be less prevalent in countries with more equality? There is some discussion in the discussion part of the paper.
- worksonmine 3y ago
  > if it was inherit then why would the differences be less prevalent in countries with more equality? Maybe that's the causality? Chicken and the egg.
  - doix 3y ago
    Sure, and then you explore that further. If it's genetic, look at first generation immigrants that moved from places with low gender equality to places with high gender equality. If it's something in the environment, research what it could be. Slowly data accumulates and someone can try to show causality, and that's science in a nutshell (as I understand it). Alternatively, we get really good human models and simulate everything, sci-fi style.
    - worksonmine 3y ago
      Some science on the subject exists but considered too controversial for the mainstream. IQ, SAT scores, crime all show similar correlations even after socioeconomic factors are taken into account. One explanation for the gap in SAT scores I've seen is that women and minorities (except asians) perform worse because they expect to perform worse. Plausible to an extent sure but today it seems the science is jumping through all kinds of hoops to prove that genetics have an effect on every part of our body except the brain. I'm not trying to deny that culture and nurture plays a big role, but we choose dog breeds based on personal traits, so why do we expect ourselves to be any different? It applies to all animals but us, nonsense if you ask me. Where I live the second generation immigrants are more prone to crime than their parents were. What's the explanation for that?