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

201–210 of 536 posts

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

#201

Post by xyzzy_plugh »

toxik wrote: post #192
msh wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know that book, but it's wrong on childcare being less affordable. Atleast in Denmark and Sweden child care is heavily subsidized, to the point of being free for very low income parents (in dk). So there is no way it can make economic sense for mothers not to work. And stay at home moms (for more than 1-2 years) is rare compared to the USA.

You still pay the opportunity cost, even if you are getting a monthly income. Why should I hire the person who was away for a solid year on parental leave over the guy who has been working diligently during that time? Forcing parents to have equal amounts of parental leave, as we do in Sweden (well, we incentivized it,) is a form of imposed equality of outcome. Equality of outcome is often said to be some disease of…

> Why should I hire the person who was away for a solid year on parental leave over the guy who has been working diligently during that time?

Maybe I'm coming from a place of privilege but that point of view makes me incredibly sad.

I can't imagine being able to discriminate based on parental leave

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

#202

Post by alliecat »

apatters wrote: post #190
ramblerman wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because if it is purely cultural then aiming for 50/50 gender parity across all industries is a reasonable goal. If it is not, it is a 'terrible', 'terrible' idea to approach gender equality from that angle.

Why would 50/50 gender parity across all industries ever be a desirable goal? Coal mining is male dominated -- should we push more women into becoming coal miners?

Coal mining is a historic industry; we should not be pushing anybody into coal mining (Looking at you, Australia)

I’m assuming you picked coal mining because it’s an example of a dirty, dangerous position in an industry that’s rightfully stigmatised by most modern countries.

If you’re suggesting that we shouldn’t push women into dangerous jobs but it’s okay to push men into them, then I would counter that we should make dangerous jobs safer for everybody and no, there’s no fundamental reason that women should not have the opportunity to work in these industries.

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

#203

Post by ido »

js8 wrote: post #78
ido wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 whet…

I understand you and agree to a point. But people are not such simple machines. Having a society with toxic (to our perspective) mores can have really subtle and strange (but still negative) effects.

A gay man in Saudi Arabia who is deeply religious and conform to fundamentalist Islam cultural mores can genuinely believe he is not gay and that god is testing him, or that he is not attracted to his wife, or just not that sexual, while being unhappy and not thinking "if only I could I would have lived as a gay man!".

Culture goes really deep.

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

#204

Post by Frondo »

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #201
toxik wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You still pay the opportunity cost, even if you are getting a monthly income. Why should I hire the person who was away for a solid year on parental leave over the guy who has been working diligently during that time? Forcing parents to have equal amounts of parental leave, as we do in Sweden (well, we incentivized it,) is a form of imposed equality of outcome. Equality of outcome is often said to be some disease of…

> Why should I hire the person who was away for a solid year on parental leave over the guy who has been working diligently during that time? Maybe I'm coming from a place of privilege but that point of view makes me incredibly sad. I can't imagine being able to discriminate based on parental leave

I'm coming from the same place, except I don't think it's privilege, I think it's wanting to build a world where anyone can take a year off for anything and not have that held against them if they later want to go work for someone.

We're living in an era where, resource-wise, we could be post-scarcity, but politically, it's all locked up in a shitty, shitty system.

I want to keep imagining a world in which people are truly free, and not just free to keep grinding away at a job because the alternative is starvation or privation.

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

#205

Post by ramblerman »

apatters wrote: post #190
ramblerman wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because if it is purely cultural then aiming for 50/50 gender parity across all industries is a reasonable goal. If it is not, it is a 'terrible', 'terrible' idea to approach gender equality from that angle.

Why would 50/50 gender parity across all industries ever be a desirable goal? Coal mining is male dominated -- should we push more women into becoming coal miners?

> Why would 50/50 gender parity across all industries ever be a desirable goal?

If women and men "are indeed biologically identical in their job preferences" you could argue a good measure for real equality of opportunity would be 50/50 parity across industries. Because given a fair shake everyone would be evenly distributed across all industries (since we have the same preferences).

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

#206

Post by naasking »

taneq wrote: post #140
Tomminn wrote: post #47

The strongest correlations seem related to the wealth of the country. One reading of this finding is that more effort is directed toward gender performance in rich countries. This could be due to a number of factors. I wouldn't discount the difference in the quantity of media consumed by both countries.

That's what spun me out when I first traveled in Asia. Backpacking through Thailand there was (as far as I could see) pretty equal representation in almost all different job roles, from street vendors to travel agents to IT. (Come to think of it, tuk-tuk drivers and taxi drivers were universally male, though...) After years of being told that all women loved tech and only shied away from it because it was full of hor…

> it was strange to see so many accomplished, professional women in a culture that gave women no special treatment whatsoever.

The evidence was in front of you here too: women broke into law and medicine which were arguably the professions with the most prestigious "boy's club" status, and they did it with little help once it was legal.

The idea that a bunch of "neckbeards" with keyboards could scare away women from STEM is bordering on the absurd.

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

#207

Post by Cantonese »

ramblerman wrote: post #144
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…

Because if it is purely cultural then aiming for 50/50 gender parity across all industries is a reasonable goal. If it is not, it is a 'terrible', 'terrible' idea to approach gender equality from that angle.

Why do you think of equality as equal outcome? Instead of equal opportunity.

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

#208

Post by TheAdamAndChe »

throw2016 wrote: post #94

Here is an interesting discussion and debate between 2 experts in the field on sex differences. Cordelia Fine in her book Delusions of Gender [1] reports even something as simple as telling girls before a maths test that this is a test in which girls have done well results in dramatically higher scores suggesting the field is still in its infancy and fundamental questions about gender roles and culture remain. Simon…

> ...perhaps its best to leave the field of sex differences to experts who continue to study but do not have the answers or data to draw any conclusions.

A difficulty here is the substantial liberal bias in social sciences[1]. How can we avoid it affecting the outcomes of their studies?

[1]: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-social-science...

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

#209

Post by naasking »

aleeds wrote: post #179
taneq wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what spun me out when I first traveled in Asia. Backpacking through Thailand there was (as far as I could see) pretty equal representation in almost all different job roles, from street vendors to travel agents to IT. (Come to think of it, tuk-tuk drivers and taxi drivers were universally male, though...) After years of being told that all women loved tech and only shied away from it because it was full of hor…

Consider that "women dealing with horrible misogynistic neckbeards" and "women that get no special treatment" are in fact, compatible. For women every day, those negative experiences are the difference from men that keep them from being in the industry.

> For women every day, those negative experiences are the difference from men that keep them from being in the industry.

That's conjecture that isn't supported by any evidence. And in fact, there's considerable evidence that women don't choose STEM for far more fundamental reasons.

The very existence of the gender equality paradox, and the fact that women have achieved gender parity in fields they actually care about but which were arguably even more sexist, like medicine and law, and did it without people fawning over whether they are having "negative experiences", completely undermines your narrative.

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

#210

Post by sonnyblarney »

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…

"I thought X would get me Y and being disappointed."

This is most of us, most of the time, in most endeavours, and I don't think it's a gender thing.

Post reply on HN