Israel Bombs Another Safe Zone
News1 min ago
It Seems We Are Not Allowed A "wrong" Opinion!
122 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Saw this on one of aog's links...
http://
http://
Nature or nurture?
We literally have no way of telling.
But things like this don't exactly help the nature argument:
https:/
Subtext:
"Hey girls, be pretty, lovely fashion, hair, beauty, giggle giggle giggle".
"Hey boys, think about your future! What do you want to do for a living? How can you contribute?"
Hmmm...
We literally have no way of telling.
But things like this don't exactly help the nature argument:
https:/
Subtext:
"Hey girls, be pretty, lovely fashion, hair, beauty, giggle giggle giggle".
"Hey boys, think about your future! What do you want to do for a living? How can you contribute?"
Hmmm...
Back to seriousness for a minute... I wonder if a lot of this is hurt by the innate imprecision of language. It's all very well stating that "women are more likely than men to overthink" or what have you, as the study may well be true, but it is clearly and obviously glossing over the fact that the overlap is sizeable in almost every case.
I am not sure that this point is ever really emphasised properly. The memo in question acknowledged it, vaguely, before going on really to ignore that in pursuit of whatever else it was trying to say.
I'm happy to accept that there are differences in men and women overall, as an average, but it has to be taken alongside the massive variations between men and women themselves. And that was kind of what prompted the question I had to start with. How can biological differences alone account for such wide disparities as a 4:1 ratio among computing engineers? How can it be that, even if men are more predisposed to become computing engineers on average, that we still pick more of the "above average" men than the "above average" women?
There are simply more factors at play in these gender gaps, in most fields, than can be accounted for purely by any biological differences. Even if those differences are "only" being exaggerated by society then it's worth acknowledging that. Ironically, one of the reasons is that indeed men and women can bring different perspectives, life experiences, etc. to the job, and therefore employers could proportionately lose out on this variety if they are missing some diversity in the workforce.
I am not sure that this point is ever really emphasised properly. The memo in question acknowledged it, vaguely, before going on really to ignore that in pursuit of whatever else it was trying to say.
I'm happy to accept that there are differences in men and women overall, as an average, but it has to be taken alongside the massive variations between men and women themselves. And that was kind of what prompted the question I had to start with. How can biological differences alone account for such wide disparities as a 4:1 ratio among computing engineers? How can it be that, even if men are more predisposed to become computing engineers on average, that we still pick more of the "above average" men than the "above average" women?
There are simply more factors at play in these gender gaps, in most fields, than can be accounted for purely by any biological differences. Even if those differences are "only" being exaggerated by society then it's worth acknowledging that. Ironically, one of the reasons is that indeed men and women can bring different perspectives, life experiences, etc. to the job, and therefore employers could proportionately lose out on this variety if they are missing some diversity in the workforce.
I know I am hole picking but the problem that I see with that research is that the brain scans were performed on adult males and females who presumably had been raised in that gender with all that implies in terms of familial and societal moulding and expectations. Its known (I will pull out the research when I can find it) that babies' brains and neural pathways remould as they begin to hear and identify language depending on what language it is that they hear. I would suggest that its possible therefore that if a child is raised in the expectation that it will have female attributes, then the neural pathways could, at least in part, remould to facilitate that?
Hasn’t always panned out that way......I have just read a book about transgender issues and the history of their treatment. Its called Galileo’s middle finger. Its not an easy read and the author can be plenty annoying but the story of treating children whose physical gender is not clear at birth is an interesting one.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.