Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

As women have more equal opportunity, the more their preferences differ from men

science.sciencemag.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 536 posts

Re: As women have more equal opportunity, the more their preferences differ from men

#71

Post by js8 »

didibus wrote: post #65
js8 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why people care so much whether preferences are biological or cultural. (Well, I understand it if we assume they are being dishonest, so assuming that something is not biological allows them to claim that it can be changed to whatever they think is morally superior. The debate whether being gay is cultural is a good example.) If I am given a true freedom to choose, to decide according to my prefere…

For you, they now are your tastes, but if those tastes were acquired by nurture, they don't have to be your children's tastes. Given some tastes lead to less power and riches in our current societal environment. If they are nurtured, it is logical for parents to want to nurture them to more lucrative alternatives. If they are innate though, it's a waste of time to try and change them. So I feel it is definitly somewh…

That's a fair argument. As long as it's you who is interested in your preferences, and not preferences of others, then it's a valid question.

My personal suggestion is to assume that biology plays no role and attempt to change yourself to whatever you feel you want to be. I don't think there is any downside really, because it's ultimately the journey not the goal that counts.

Re: As women have more equal opportunity, the more their preferences differ from men

#72

Post by jahaja »

retrogradeorbit wrote: post #11
starbeast wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you not get the memo? All social constructs are biological. All behaviour has a biological underpinning, how could it be otherwise?

I don't disagree with you at all. There are a huge amount of people who do disagree with you, though. You just commented that you didn't know anyone pushing such a narrative. And that surprised me because it's everywhere. So I thought I'd just flesh out that dominant point of view so that you could identify it in the society around you. What I think this study shows (and its not the first) is that it debunks the noti…

> it debunks the notion that discrimination is the only reason for any differences in gender representation.

Which is also a notion that nobody has ever argued but suits polarized demagoguery.

Re: As women have more equal opportunity, the more their preferences differ from men

#73

Post by cm2187 »

tralarpa wrote: post #58
jernfrost wrote: post #52

I am highly sceptical to this study. Does anyone have a list of what they measured as differences and how they did it? The reason I am a sceptic is because as a Scandinavian I notice easily how much more macho men are in less gender equal societies and how much more feminine the women are. I don’t think it is an accident that the world’s top female boxer is Norwegian rather than say Italian. I do there is something t…

> 60% of published papers in life sciences turns out to be rubbish Research in life science: - Very difficult to conduct repeatable experiments of sufficient size - Lot of pressure because of lack of funding (e.g. hard to get money through projects with industry like engineers) - Done by people with problems with logical thinking - Done by people who apply methods (data analysis, statistics,...) without understanding…

I'd add:

- Done by people who more often than not are politically militant on topics that are politically charged.

Re: As women have more equal opportunity, the more their preferences differ from men

#74

Post by js8 »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #64
js8 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why people care so much whether preferences are biological or cultural. (Well, I understand it if we assume they are being dishonest, so assuming that something is not biological allows them to claim that it can be changed to whatever they think is morally superior. The debate whether being gay is cultural is a good example.) If I am given a true freedom to choose, to decide according to my prefere…

I think the idea is that your culture can enslave you in an idea of who you want to be, which isn't really yours , but rather your culture's. The idea seems to be that this identity has been forced on you, and isn't really yours . This brings up all kinds of nature-vs-nurture questions. It also has a nice recursive issue: Those who hold this view (that you should be free to choose your identity, without your culture…

"I think the idea is that your culture can enslave you in an idea of who you want to be, which isn't really yours, but rather your culture's. The idea seems to be that this identity has been forced on you, and isn't really yours."

Yeah, I agree, but I disagree with this notion. I mean, if you, even after hearing this argument, still think you made a free choice, then it seems to me that any attempt to subvert that is making you less free. Who should know better whether some decision is yours than you? It seems to me that this idea really rejects agency in other people, and that's why I find it disingenuous.

As a side note. The current idea of having 50/50 split in ratio of preferences between men and women as correct culturally bears some similarity to old idea that all left-handed people should be taught to be right-handed. Eventually, it was abandoned in favor of personal choice and the question whether it is cultural or biological is no longer relevant.

Re: As women have more equal opportunity, the more their preferences differ from men

#75

Post by thinkingemote »

jernfrost wrote: post #52

I am highly sceptical to this study. Does anyone have a list of what they measured as differences and how they did it? The reason I am a sceptic is because as a Scandinavian I notice easily how much more macho men are in less gender equal societies and how much more feminine the women are. I don’t think it is an accident that the world’s top female boxer is Norwegian rather than say Italian. I do there is something t…

Interesting observations, but it might be be both true that both genders are more free to spread out the other side, and that the majority are more likely to not be. So with more freedom there is greater social mobility and also less pressure to move. I've not read the paper fully. I wonder if they provide this information as to the scope.

I think if we think of a graph. In less equal places the peak of the graphs occur closer to each other and are narrower. In more equal places the peaks of the graphs occur further from each other but are wider.

http://i.imgur.com/dSq5f0v.png for example

Re: As women have more equal opportunity, the more their preferences differ from men

#76

Post by tralarpa »

Majestic121 wrote: post #61
tralarpa wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 60% of published papers in life sciences turns out to be rubbish Research in life science: - Very difficult to conduct repeatable experiments of sufficient size - Lot of pressure because of lack of funding (e.g. hard to get money through projects with industry like engineers) - Done by people with problems with logical thinking - Done by people who apply methods (data analysis, statistics,...) without understanding…

> - Very difficult to conduct repeatable experiments of sufficient size Fair point > - Lot of pressure because of lack of funding (e.g. hard to get money through projects with industry like engineers) Fair point > - Done by people with problems with logical thinking What ? > - Done by people who apply methods (data analysis, statistics,...) without understanding them What ? > I welcome all downvotes. Asking for downv…

I don't say those people are stupid. But if you look at the publications it's very obvious that they are not trained in the same way as other scientists. The jumping to conclusions, the application of methods without knowing their constraints, the lack of imagination when exploiting a problem (i.e. asking questions like "Are there other theories that could explain our results").

I have been in several situations where those people were explaining to me one of their research problems (in a friendly chat) and then I ask a question ("What about...?") that appears logical to me and they stare at me and reply "Why didn't you tell us you are working in this field, too?".

> If you actually want to make your message go through

What message? Go through what/where?

Re: As women have more equal opportunity, the more their preferences differ from men

#77

Post by DoreenMichele »

skookumchuck wrote: post #62
DoreenMichele wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For another data point: I'm an American woman. I swear like a sailor. Sadly, this has failed to be man-repellent. If only! My life would be vastly simpler if my foul mouth just got me left the hell alone by men. Also, everything I have read and experienced suggests that other women are a huge source of social pressure on female behavior, possibly far more than male sexual predilections. An actress once said "I dress…

When I pick up my date, if she's obviously spent effort to dress nice for our evening, it's a big plus for me. A lot of men (me included) check for a ring and do not approach if there is one. Not all men are dissuaded by that, of course. Consider there are a lot worse things than being attractive to men. Attractiveness makes for many opportunities, studies show that attractive people get paid more and get better tips…

Consider there are a lot worse things than being attractive to men.

Plenty of women have been raped and stalked. Some would be hard pressed to name worse experiences than the ones they have had for the crime of being attractive.

Re: As women have more equal opportunity, the more their preferences differ from men

#78

Post by js8 »

ido wrote: post #66
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the idea is that your culture can enslave you in an idea of who you want to be, which isn't really yours , but rather your culture's. The idea seems to be that this identity has been forced on you, and isn't really yours . This brings up all kinds of nature-vs-nurture questions. It also has a nice recursive issue: Those who hold this view (that you should be free to choose your identity, without your culture…

yeah, for example 100+ years ago (or today in conservative environment) there were/are probably a lot of gay people who genuinely believe they are not and suffer their whole live, not even cause they are afraid to "come out" but cause they don't even accept themselves.

If you suffer, and think that under different circumstances you could make different choices, with which you would be more comfortable, then you don't really have the free choice.

But that's not what I am talking about. I am talking about society where people do have the free choice, and they are happy with it (or at least in correct proportions). Then these are their genuine preferences, and it shouldn't matter whether they come from the culture or biology.

Re: As women have more equal opportunity, the more their preferences differ from men

#79

Post by tralarpa »

cm2187 wrote: post #73
tralarpa wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 60% of published papers in life sciences turns out to be rubbish Research in life science: - Very difficult to conduct repeatable experiments of sufficient size - Lot of pressure because of lack of funding (e.g. hard to get money through projects with industry like engineers) - Done by people with problems with logical thinking - Done by people who apply methods (data analysis, statistics,...) without understanding…

I'd add: - Done by people who more often than not are politically militant on topics that are politically charged.

I don't think it's really their fault. There are not many funding sources and those few that exist are usually coming from big players (companies, governments, etc.), so you are basically forced to pick a side if you want to do research.

It's not like a researcher in engineering or computer science who can start a small collaboration with a local company and solve some optimization problem for them and publish a paper on it.

Re: As women have more equal opportunity, the more their preferences differ from men

#80

Post by Broken_Hippo »

js8 wrote: post #48
torben-friis wrote: post #37

I wonder how it adjusts for culturally pushed gender differences. Women could have the same opportunities as men but be expected to have different tastes, be subjected to different experiences growing up, etc. which could affect their choices in latter life.

I don't understand why people care so much whether preferences are biological or cultural. (Well, I understand it if we assume they are being dishonest, so assuming that something is not biological allows them to claim that it can be changed to whatever they think is morally superior. The debate whether being gay is cultural is a good example.) If I am given a true freedom to choose, to decide according to my prefere…

It honestly changes the way we work with something.

Biological differences aren't things we can easily change right now. Skin color or the shape of one's fingernails or the length of one's legs. Some biological things have real world things that go with it. Skin color, for example, could put you at greater risk of skin cancer or a greater risk of low vitamin D. One simply accepts and lives with these things and works with them.

If they are cultural or from nurture, it means that as a society, we can change things. It isn't that your tastes are an issue (mostly), but that society notices that, perhaps, men don't spend as much time with children or that women are doing things differently. In these cases, we can do things like start treating boys and girls more similarly. We can teach them similar things in school. In short, we can change how we nurture and change society (albeit slowly in some cases).

Post reply on HN