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

221–230 of 536 posts

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

#221

Post by madeuptempacct »

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 having a nice home would get me a satisfactory social life. It didn't.

How does that even make sense? Were you hoping to live around wealthier people and impress them with your nice sofa?

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

#223

Post by KirinDave »

classicsnoot wrote: post #191
0x445442 wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah but why would those differences become greater after the introduction of the equality systems? That's the paradox.

It is only a paradox if one has calcified their thinking about the desires of women _in general_ in a particular way. If one starts from the presumption that men and women are exactly the same (in terms of desires and methods), than it is indeed a paradox. If one retains the traditional perspective, a much disliked but surprisingly defensible position, of the disparate desires of men and women, these results comport…

> If one retains the traditional perspective, a much disliked but surprisingly defensible position, of the disparate desires of men and women, these results comport well with the presumption.

It's odd though how so often this "traditional" viewpoint is eager to suggest, "These are the preferences of women and their outcomes," when it's suggested women result in a net disadvantage, but is a crisis when men see these outcomes.

An excellent example of this is how a 6-10% wage gap is considered an acceptable outcome of biological differences and choice, but a 10% average difference in primary education among young men is a crisis, with multiple think tanks suggesting society caters too much to young women and that being a young man is "a liability."

This position is so common you can find it represented internationally in both the US and several European nations. It shows up in think tank materials like PraegerU videos and on America's Fox news.

In the context of the paper at hand, it seems particularly poignant how much effort goes to making one case but not the other.

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

#224

Post by naasking »

starbeast wrote: post #44
Yetanfou wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you mean you don't know anyone personally who tries to push this idea? If so, neither do I. If, on the other hand, you mean you have not heard of anyone pushing this idea you have not visited a university, heard a political discussion, read a newspaper, turned on a (modern equivalent of a) radio or (modern equivalent of a) television. It might also be that you live in a country which has thus far been freed of thi…

I have heard plenty of call for equal treatment and calling for appreciation of personal perception, range of experiences, etc. If someone was arguing that genders are identical, rather than making an argument about societal treatment of people by others, which is what the actual argument seems largely to be about, they'd be effectively arguing that gender doesn't exist.

> If someone was arguing that genders are identical

There has been considerable and consistent outcry whenever anyone even hints at the idea that gender disparities could be due to irreconcilable gender differences, rather than disparities resulting from social pressures. Many people have been fired even for suggesting it.

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

#225

Post by apatters »

alliecat wrote: post #202
apatters wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 m…

> If you’re suggesting that we shouldn’t push women into dangerous jobs but it’s okay to push men into them

No I didn't suggest this.

My question was not about energy policies. Let's substitute coal miners for waste collectors (colloquially referred to as garbage men, because 99% of them are male), and ask the question again.

Garbage collection is male dominated -- should we push more women into becoming garbage collectors?

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

#226

Post by zwischenzug »

probably_wrong wrote: post #160
knorker wrote: post #111

Woah there, you can't say that! That's what Damore got fired for!

Stealing from myself from an old comment [1]: there is a difference between what Damore intended to say (assuming the best case) and what his memo actually said. He might have wanted to say "women tend like other things", but his memo ended up saying "women are incapable of doing this thing". He may have had good intentions, but in writing the difference matters. A similar result is seen when authors argue that widel…

Where did he say that?

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

#227

Post by mindcrime »

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

But it isn't "discriminating based on parental leave". It's "discriminating" based on experience. The reason why someone takes a year (or whatever) off isn't the issue.

Does this feel unfair in some sense? Yeah. But would it be less unfair to artificially punish the person who didn't take time off? Questionable...

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

#228

Post by KirinDave »

0x445442 wrote: post #162
tarkin2 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Ah but why would those differences become greater after the introduction of the equality systems? That's the paradox.

What's curious to me about this stance is no one questions if the measures taken, when coupled to there outcomes, don't suggest failed policies.

"Well we made policies and they didn't do what we expected, therefore women are making choices!" seems to me (with an American bias perhaps) to be a failure in the design or implementation of the policies, rather than immediately blaming women.

I'm surprised how credulously people engage these policies

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

#229

Post by hprotagonist »

madeuptempacct wrote: post #221
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…

>I thought having a nice home would get me a satisfactory social life. It didn't. How does that even make sense? Were you hoping to live around wealthier people and impress them with your nice sofa?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keeping_up_with_the_Joneses

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

#230

Post by z5h »

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?

I think the question "why is parity a desirable goal" is valid and important. I don't think we need any examples to support the question, it stands on its own.
Post reply on HN