As women have more equal opportunity, the more their preferences differ from men • Hacker News Board

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

#331

Post by TeMPOraL » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 5:13 PM UTC

jaxtellerSoA wrote: post #213

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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

> Maybe I'm coming from a place of privilege but that point of view makes me incredibly sad. Why? It makes me sad that anyone would want to force business to take on risk that it wouldn't otherwise in the name of "equality". Choices have consequences, if you choose to stay out of work for a year to raise your child then you will be less employable.

This is probably a point in which state should step in, at least if private greed starts getting out of hand.

Sure, businesses in principle don't value employees that are parents, it's a pure cost for them. But from a higher vantage point, life is not just about commerce. Parenthood may be a problem for business, but it is a critical function for both nations and societies. Unless you propose that the primary driver for society should be accumulation of wealth by whatever means necessary, this is one aspect where capitalism should not be allowed to reach its natural endgame.

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

#332

Post by seagullz » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 5:13 PM UTC

LyndsySimon wrote: post #270

avar wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The alternative is equality of opportunity. If some people in society want to do some activity knowing they won't build job experience while doing so, let them, even if other people don't want to and become more employable as a result. That's freedom. Whether e.g. women on average tend to take more parental leave is only a small subset of those sorts of situations in society. I (a man) took a months-long parental lea…

A similar but slightly different anecdote - I'm a 34-year-old man, and my wife stays home with our two children. We're very aware that this has hurt her earning potential, which means that if I were to die suddenly she'd be in a real financial crisis. To offset that disparity in earning potential, we've had to purchase significant life and disability policies on me.

This, addressed at the macro level, probably calls for the societies to function in ways that incorporate exercise of sufficient sense of solidarity and empathy.

A relevant argument is made strongly here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBSUkDXekMM

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

#333

Post by FiddlyPack » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 5:15 PM UTC

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…

Good work figuring this out for yourself. Part of me wants to say “use your voice to tell your story so others like you don’t feel alone” but having experienced some similar things in my own life, I understand how it’s usually not worth going to battle.

I still wish folks would stay over more often, though.

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

#334

Post by cvwright » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 5:15 PM UTC

illumin8 wrote: post #246

jaxtellerSoA wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe I'm coming from a place of privilege but that point of view makes me incredibly sad. Why? It makes me sad that anyone would want to force business to take on risk that it wouldn't otherwise in the name of "equality". Choices have consequences, if you choose to stay out of work for a year to raise your child then you will be less employable.

I find this response, and the downvotes on the parent comment, incredibly sad. If you want to live in a libertarian fantasy world with no safety net, you are free to create one, and try to attract citizens to your country. Even in prehistoric times, it was generally understood that there was societal benefit to letting women take care of children when they were extremely young and that perhaps letting a new mother sk…

> If you want to live in a libertarian fantasy world with no safety net, you are free to create one, and try to attract citizens to your country.

For better or worse, you just described the early industrial United States. And people flocked from all over the world to come to it.

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

#335

Post by turc1656 » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 5:15 PM UTC

UncleMeat wrote: post #277

grenoire wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Peterson in person is Peterson in his lectures, see comments below. Make up your mind yourself, and try to understand why people like and hate him both ways. He's a pretty compassionate guy as far as I can tell, he just can't tolerate people who aren't willing to have proper discourse with him.

Does his proper discourse include getting to wildly misrepresent the law, marx, marxism more broadly, individual postmodern thinkers, and postmodernism more broadly? Peterson doesn't publish his ideas in academic outlets. He is avoiding the proper discourse.

Why would he publish in academic outlets? Why is that the place of "proper discourse"? No one except academics reads those things. And if he has the ability to reach a far greater number of people through the outlets he has chosen and therefore maximize his reach, why would he ever choose the academic route instead? When you factor in the money from the non-academic route, the case only gets stronger.

And for Peterson in particular, it makes even more sense. He claims academia has been corrupted - particularly the social sciences, like the one in which he is engaged. If you were him, why would you ever write a paper for corrupted academics to denounce you? That's like asking why someone doesn't try to speak at a RNC event and try to convince everyone in the room to switch to the Dem stance on immigration and abortion. It would never happen. Seems to me that Peterson has made rational choices given his set of claims and alleged beliefs. His strategy seems entirely sound as far as I can see. I'd also say that he doesn't shy aware from attending any speaking event or being a guest on any show. He's even said things about how his attendance in potentially adversarial discussions/debates is an important function of the way he does things because there's value in discussing things with people who disagree with him. There's little value, or at least far less, in going on a program that is an echo chamber. I've seen him throw himself into many situations that I would describe as hostile or adversarial. Doesn't seem like he's avoiding any sort of proper discussion and he seems more than willing to defend his statements.

I would be genuinely interested in some details about the alleged misrepresentations you stated. If you are willing to share, I have an open mind and admit to not having studied most of those topics at great length so if Peterson is misrepresenting them, I would love to hear the details. I am particularly interested in how he might be misrepresenting the law, as that is something I do study (although not Canadian law).

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

#336

Post by hoaw » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 5:16 PM UTC

clord wrote: post #267

Someone1234 wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is worth noting that Nima Sanandaji, the author of that and many similar books, is a proponent of small state, free markets, low tax, self determination and responsibility. In other words, he is a libertarian type, that doesn't support the welfare state, and by extension doesn't support requiring employers to offer maternity and paternity leave. He has also argued that Scandinavia is doing well due to the free mar…

I downvote you because the research withstands your attempted ad hominem attack. If the result is good we should not cast dispersion just because the researcher has a particular bias. In fact those times when your ideology does not line up with scientific results are precisely when you should sit up and take notice that perhaps your ideology is failing you.

As far as I know the research doesn't say much, and therefor doesn't withstand much either.

They can't tell you why preferences are different. It is all implied. A much more straight forward explanation is that developed countries have long histories. To become developed you need to have developed industries for a long time without too many wars. The idea that the preference of Indian women, were many industries are being developed as they get into job market, is remotely comparable to the preference of Swedish women were industries have already been developed for centuries isn't credible. It simply isn't an equal comparison. Yet, that is exactly what people are drawing these conclusions from.

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

#337

Post by LyndsySimon » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 5:16 PM UTC

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.

> Because if it is purely cultural then aiming for 50/50 gender parity across all industries is a reasonable goal.

If that's the case, then I see how it could be an attainable goal, but what is the basis of asserting that differing are something undesirable?

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

#338

Post by castlecrasher2 » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 5:16 PM UTC

DoreenMichele wrote: post #266

pixl97 wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you spent so much time trying to create an environment, you forgot to make friends? That said, modern generations are more about going out and doing things in short social engagements. People 'feel' very busy, and the idea of an overnight stay may be too much commitment for someone that doesn't feel they have a strong friendship with you.

There were many differences between my life and my mother's life. I don't actually want to hash this out further. It would be nice if the entire internet would not make wild speculation about why I failed to replicate the extraordinarily wonderful social life my mother managed to have.

Well maybe if you just tried harder, it would work! /s

I'm right there with you. People are much different than they used to be; it's normal now to not even know your neighbors, let alone talk with them. I've had people decline dinner invitations, and former friends outright ignore my messages. I mean, I hope I'm not the problem but the thought crosses my mind. It sucks, especially if you want those relationships you saw your parents have but no one else around seems to.

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

#339

Post by AnthonyMouse » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 5:17 PM UTC

KirinDave wrote: post #223

classicsnoot wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 o…

> 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."

You're comparing a difference in wages to a difference in population. The maximum range of a population difference is 100%, e.g. 0% of men go to college and 100% of women, which would be a scandalously large difference. The maximum range of a wage difference is arbitrarily large, e.g. a $200,000 doctor makes 1000% of what a $20,000 fast food worker does and that is not at all unexpected. It isn't even maximally large of the differences that exist in practice -- compare the compensation of Fortune 500 CEOs with part time migrant workers.

Moreover, if you want to see a large difference, what's with the gender balance in the prison population?

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

#340

Post by LyndsySimon » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 5:18 PM UTC

izzydata wrote: post #234

apatters wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 coll…

We shouldn't push anyone into anything. Why is it ok for a man to be a garbage collector and not a woman? That sounds like gender inequality to me. You can't have it both ways.

I don't think anyone is saying that's it's "not OK" for a woman to be a garbage collector. Some are saying that the fact that women are generally not garbage collectors is a problem.

I honestly don't know where I stand on that. While I absolutely believe that much of the disparity in preference is cultural, I'm apt to believe that some of it is biological. Further, I'm not sure eradicating that cultural bias is beneficial.