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

101–110 of 536 posts

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

#101

Post by js8 »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #80
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…

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…

I understand, of course, that it makes the difference when you want to change things. But my main question is, why do you want to change things, even in case where everybody is free to choose?

I am not really sure I buy into "treating boys and girls the same" either. I think what's more important is to give them options (perhaps against their will, to get them outside the comfort zone).

It seems to me that schools already largely do treat everybody the same, even to the point where it is being truly annoying to open-minded individuals. I am not sure it's ideal to treat all kids the same, but rather recognize their individual differences.

For example, my parents sent me to summer camps to learn some outdoor skills. I wasn't very good at it and I didn't enjoyed it as much as I probably should as a stereotypical male. But on the other hand, I think it was right thing to do.

So, if despite these attempts to make me into an expert in wilderness survival, I didn't become one, and rather became computer geek, which was certainly out of fashion at the time, I have serious doubts about the theories that cultural ideas are so influential to the actual behavior of children.

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

#102

Post by andai »

sonnyblarney wrote: post #90
icebraining wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is distinguishing the two. People (and not just women) feel understandably cross when they come across real obstacles - which may seem very subtle to others - preventing them from choosing a path, and then hear someone else say it's just a result of preferences.

It's more complicated than that even. If women in a 'perfectly equal opportunity' environment, very rarely 'choose' to participate in some fields ... then those fields will probably develop social and institutional dynamics that make it more difficult. The Canadian Navy did a study in the 1990's that showed if there were only a small number of women on a deployed ship, that they had a hard time, but once there was a…

If a startup has mostly women, is that a problem too?

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

#103

Post by andai »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #93
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'm fairly visual-spatial. I now make little websites and take photos and play SimCity. But when I was a homemaker, this largely got expressed as an interest in clothes and household decor because those were basically the avenues open to me. It wasn't particularly fulfilling. I thought dressing well and being pretty would get me a happy marriage. It didn't. I thought having a nice home would get me a satisfactory soc…

You do sound fairly exceptional. Would you rather not be?

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

#104

Post by tarkin2 »

triodan wrote: post #14

I think this phenomenon was known a while back as the gender equality paradox[0]. It's always nice to see more data on the topic. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-equality_paradox

It's not much of a paradox surely.

Those countries introduced equality systems because the imbalance.

Now of course those same countries with the imbalance have those introduced systems.

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

#105

Post by DoreenMichele »

andai wrote: post #103
DoreenMichele wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm fairly visual-spatial. I now make little websites and take photos and play SimCity. But when I was a homemaker, this largely got expressed as an interest in clothes and household decor because those were basically the avenues open to me. It wasn't particularly fulfilling. I thought dressing well and being pretty would get me a happy marriage. It didn't. I thought having a nice home would get me a satisfactory soc…

You do sound fairly exceptional. Would you rather not be?

I tend to feel about my life like that comment about democracy: It's the worst thing ever... Except for all the rest.

Also: Hell is other people.

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

#106

Post by jernfrost »

daenz wrote: post #68
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…

>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. Don't take this the wrong way, but you're making an argument against a study that ranged over 80,000 individuals and 76 countries by using your own personal anecdotes of people you've met. Can we agree that the study takes into account far more pe…

I did not say it was wrong, merely that I was sceptical which is a good attitude in science. I am trying to understand how they did the study. Does not matter how many people took the study if the study is flawed: are the metrics they use sensible to measure gender differences e.g.

I don’t think it is wrong to use anecdotes as a rough estimate to decide whether you accept the study at face value or not.

If I told you 50% of Americans are illiterate based on a study of 90 000 people you would be sceptical of that claim based on your own experiences which run counter to this claim.

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

#107

Post by kamaal »

sharpneli wrote: post #87
icebraining wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is distinguishing the two. People (and not just women) feel understandably cross when they come across real obstacles - which may seem very subtle to others - preventing them from choosing a path, and then hear someone else say it's just a result of preferences.

Indeed. It is not easy to always distinguish what is due to obstacle and what is due to preference. However if we say that any difference from equal representation is due to obstacle then in reality we will introduce new obstacles in order to get a end result that is different from preferences. There is no silver bullet here. The obstacles must be found and torn down individually. Making obstacles elsewhere will just…

>>It is not easy to always distinguish what is due to obstacle and what is due to preference.

That's because even without the role of society, a person's preferences are made out of mental outlook they have developed over time. What one person finds to be impossible, the other person might find it to be perfectly easy to do. There is nothing you do to fix that. That largely depends on personal enterprise and what the person wants to do in life.

I have seen people throw away perfectly fine opportunities while in position of advantage. I have also seen people run though opportunity famine, move mountains and earth all to create a small opening some where.

Ultimately its just on the person. And most importantly You can't fix people against their will.

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

#108

Post by xor1 »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #77
skookumchuck wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Plenty of people have been harmed due to their wealth. Does that mean you would rather be poor than rich?

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

#109

Post by Jweb_Guru »

js8 wrote: post #70
Jweb_Guru wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because in one case, things "must" be this way and there is no reason for introspection--given exactly equal opportunities, both groups would choose the same thing they are already choosing. In the other, that's not the case at all, and it may be necessary to (for example) pass legal reforms in an effort to make sure that both groups actually are free to choose.

I am not really sure what you're trying to say. Can you give an example, perhaps? In particular, can you give an illustrative example which explains the difference between "free to choose" and "actually free to choose"?

Do you think there is something innate that changed genetically about women that led to them being much less likely to be computer programmers now than they were in the 1970s, but much more likely to be biologists? If not, there is probably some other factor at work leading to these changing "preferences," even though as far as I know women have had no legal barriers to working in either field throughout that period.

Or, to bring up a very timely example: currently there are no legal barriers to coming out as transgender (in the U.S., anyway). I still think it's reasonable to say that people are not "free to choose" to transition, because in many cases they will be ostracized or (legally) discriminated against for it. This is similar to the status of homosexuality (though it is a less direct analogy since there were many more laws explicitly prohibiting homosexuality).

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

#110

Post by sonnyblarney »

andai wrote: post #102
sonnyblarney wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more complicated than that even. If women in a 'perfectly equal opportunity' environment, very rarely 'choose' to participate in some fields ... then those fields will probably develop social and institutional dynamics that make it more difficult. The Canadian Navy did a study in the 1990's that showed if there were only a small number of women on a deployed ship, that they had a hard time, but once there was a…

If a startup has mostly women, is that a problem too?

The issue is not 'mostly' it's 'extremely'.

Basically when a system is 98% absent of something, it can be hard for some to adapt.

I'm not one for quotas but we should be aware of this.

A startup with all dudes might have a hard time hiring their first woman. Maybe they might want to hire a few positions at once.

Post reply on HN