No evidence that testosterone reduces cognitive empathy • Hacker News Board

Re: No evidence that testosterone reduces cognitive empathy

#191

Post by belorn » Thu, Oct 03, 2019, 12:41 PM UTC

skizm wrote: post #94

anon1m0us wrote: post #84

It's amazing that something so sexist could have been suggested without backlash. Imagine if studies indicated that low testosterone limited or in some way hindered another desirable human capability. People have been fired for it and reputations ruined. Suggesting men are emotionally stunted. Oh that's fine.

I mean, you should be able to claim either if you have evidence. We should be looking for truth, not virtue signalling by withholding findings because it might hurt some people's feelings.

Parent comment could have been written in better tone but the underlying aspect holds some very real historical truth. In the past popular opinion and scientist agreed that estrogen caused emotional instability, and it was infamously used as an argument against the suffrage movement. Now days we know that those studies in the past was severely flawed and that the historical research was shaped by culture rather than rigorous science and facts.

An observed fact and problem with behavior science is that they tend to align based on the culture of where the research is taking place. In Germany around 1940 you got very distinct results in behavior science compared to modern views. Behavior research made during the cold war looks very different depending which side of the Berlin wall it came from, even when accounting for sample size and scientific methods.

There are theories that tries to explain this, like for example that researchers tend to focus narrowly on questions that feel relevant in their personal culture, and then drawing larger conclusions.

Re: No evidence that testosterone reduces cognitive empathy

#192

Post by bumby » Thu, Oct 03, 2019, 1:00 PM UTC

collyw wrote: post #172

BurningFrog wrote: post #127

Another victim in the "replication crisis" bloodbath for psychology. Personally, I'm probably going to wait 5 years before I believe any psychology science claim. Especially if it confirms something I already believe in :)

What is the rate of failure for "harder" sciences, does anyone know? In saying that I think there will be a self correcting mechanism in more physically based science. If something can be replicated it can be built upon and new discoveries made. If something can't be replicated it will end up being forgotten about. Also I do think that science needs a way of reporting failed studies and failed replication. At the mom…

There has been some attempt at this, with the SURE journal for unsurpising economics outcomes being one example.

Unfortunately, this approach seems to be at odds with the incentive structure in academia

Re: No evidence that testosterone reduces cognitive empathy

#193

Post by evrydayhustling » Thu, Oct 03, 2019, 1:08 PM UTC

BurningFrog wrote: post #127

Another victim in the "replication crisis" bloodbath for psychology. Personally, I'm probably going to wait 5 years before I believe any psychology science claim. Especially if it confirms something I already believe in :)

Then, wait another 15+ years before that claim stops being widely held and repeated as a justification for policy, business decisions, etc.

Re: No evidence that testosterone reduces cognitive empathy

#194

Post by another-one-off » Thu, Oct 03, 2019, 1:28 PM UTC

belorn wrote: post #188

another-one-off wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm struggling to think of any aspects of masculinity that I could safely class as 'healthy' in the current climate. For example, traditionally the view that males should be providers for the family would have been considered a healthy aspect of masculinity. That doesn't go unchallenged any more; for example there is a real concern out there that men are too competitive and effective at securing high paid jobs. It is…

What gender norm of either masculinity or femininity is healthy when taken to the extreme? > those involved in the gender activist communities don't seem to allow such a thing as 'healthy masculinity' because it supposes there is something positive can be exclusively/predominantly masculine What would you call people who would say that about femininity and feminine behavior? How do those views function together with…

Is any bias towards one gender doing better in the workplace acceptable? If men and women perform equally and we balance outcomes as is a stated goal in many circles, how could a male full-fill their traditional gender norm as a provider?

This HN comment was the first time I've ever heard of anyone talking about 'healthy masculinity' in a context of the phrase 'toxic masculinity'. The entire thrust that I've heard is that having a unique or predominantly male role in society is what toxic masculinity means in practice.

The gender theorists will have their own internal world with a lot of nuance, but the stuff that is leaking out into law and corporate diversity initiatives looks a lot more like true gender blindness. The logical flip side of that, it is quite hard to construct a positive masculine role model. The raw physical differences suggest male strength, but any actual exercise of strength apart from showing off is probably either illegal, uneconomic or low status work (sporting excellence a glaring exception). Compare that to giving birth which is incentivised, an amazing long term economic investment into old age and quite high status (mothers occupy a special place in the world). It is simply a lot easier to construct a positive feminine image than a masculine one in a world where only physical realities make a difference and everything else is expected to be gender blind.

Obviously there are positive roles for males to fill, but the idea that they are masculine in some sense isn't really acceptable. Males can fill them in their capacities as humans, but they can't be distinguished from women. What can 'healthy masculinity' mean in such a world? Adding the word masculine in doesn't add anything. 'Healthy masculinity' is basically 'Healthy femininity'.

Re: No evidence that testosterone reduces cognitive empathy

#195

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Oct 03, 2019, 1:37 PM UTC

another-one-off wrote: post #194

belorn wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What gender norm of either masculinity or femininity is healthy when taken to the extreme? > those involved in the gender activist communities don't seem to allow such a thing as 'healthy masculinity' because it supposes there is something positive can be exclusively/predominantly masculine What would you call people who would say that about femininity and feminine behavior? How do those views function together with…

Is any bias towards one gender doing better in the workplace acceptable? If men and women perform equally and we balance outcomes as is a stated goal in many circles, how could a male full-fill their traditional gender norm as a provider? This HN comment was the first time I've ever heard of anyone talking about 'healthy masculinity' in a context of the phrase 'toxic masculinity'. The entire thrust that I've heard is…

> The gender theorists will have their own internal world with a lot of nuance, but the stuff that is leaking out into law and corporate diversity initiatives looks a lot more like true gender blindness. The logical flip side of that, it is quite hard to construct a positive masculine role model.

Gender blindness in formal institutions does not prevent positive gendered role models.

Nor, even, does abandoning the social enforcement of gender stereotypes outside of formal institutions. Insofar as there are healthy expressions of classic gender images, producing examples of them does not require formal or informal social institutions to enforce classic gender roles or impose gender bias inspired by those roles.

Re: No evidence that testosterone reduces cognitive empathy

#196

Post by moosey » Thu, Oct 03, 2019, 1:47 PM UTC

humanrebar wrote: post #119

moosey wrote: post #105

What I'm more interested in seeing is whether or not being in a dominant group in society reduces empathy. Historically, we might have looked at the lack of empathy of specific groups and made assumptions about the group in general, but perhaps it simply has to do with whether or not that group finds itself dominant in society whether it be economically, politically, or socially. All of these groups in Western societ…

> All of these groups in Western societies have been, and often still are, dominated by men. But not by all men. If all of the top 1% are men, for instance, there are still 49% of men out there that are both make and not elite. It's possible you are just observing different men now. Or observing men differently.

I agree. I'm not denying this. This is exactly why it should be called dominance and not privilege. And it does have real impacts on both groups.

Re: No evidence that testosterone reduces cognitive empathy

#197

Post by TheOtherHobbes » Thu, Oct 03, 2019, 2:06 PM UTC

krapp wrote: post #190

tomp wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a typical "motte and bailey" conversational strategy. The reality is, proponents of the idea of "toxic masculinity" provide almost no examples of "healthy masculinity" (or "toxic femininity").

>The reality is, proponents of the idea of "toxic masculinity" provide almost no examples of "healthy masculinity" (or "toxic femininity"). Almost any article you read about toxic masculinity and in every discussion where it comes up, proponents take pains to point out, often in laborious detail, and to futile effect, that the term isn't meant to assign toxicity to all masculine behaviors. One shouldn't need to provi…

Actually one should provide exactly that, because otherwise the concept can be used to justify bullying.

"I don't like what you're doing" can become "That's toxic male behaviour" - which immediately politicises and amplifies something that may be a trivial personal/domestic disagreement.

As for toxic femininity - it seems it cannot exist. See e.g.

https://geekfeminism.wikia.org/wiki/Toxic_femininity

...which explicitly states that toxic femininity doesn't exist as a political phenomenon, and where toxic behaviour does happen (hardly ever...) it's the fault of patriarchy.

In this view all toxic gender behaviour is caused by masculinity.

The line between that and "Masculine behaviour is inherently toxic (unless controlled and directed by women)" is a very thin one.

These definitions concentrate on tribal/political stereotyping, not on the behaviours themselves.

The idea that some behaviours are toxic - and it doesn't matter who is doing them - seems to be a conceptual leap too far in these contexts.

Re: No evidence that testosterone reduces cognitive empathy

#198

Post by Fr0styMatt88 » Thu, Oct 03, 2019, 2:12 PM UTC

gerbilly wrote: post #187

BurningFrog wrote: post #127

Another victim in the "replication crisis" bloodbath for psychology. Personally, I'm probably going to wait 5 years before I believe any psychology science claim. Especially if it confirms something I already believe in :)

It's a kind HN received wisdom that all psychology studies are false or invalid. Personally, I see this blanket dismissal as one of the blind spots of our otherwise intelligent community. Perhaps because so many of us are engineers, and that it strokes our egos to see the softer sciences fail?

Psychology is like trying to debug a program with nearly zero tools, not even a reliable ‘printf(..)’. I don’t think it’s ego-stroking so much as it is just frustration at the seemingly intractable complexity of human behaviour.

Re: No evidence that testosterone reduces cognitive empathy

#199

Post by BurningFrog » Thu, Oct 03, 2019, 2:13 PM UTC

gerbilly wrote: post #187

BurningFrog wrote: post #127

Another victim in the "replication crisis" bloodbath for psychology. Personally, I'm probably going to wait 5 years before I believe any psychology science claim. Especially if it confirms something I already believe in :)

It's a kind HN received wisdom that all psychology studies are false or invalid. Personally, I see this blanket dismissal as one of the blind spots of our otherwise intelligent community. Perhaps because so many of us are engineers, and that it strokes our egos to see the softer sciences fail?

There are surely many valid ones.

Problem is, right now you can't tell which they are.

Re: No evidence that testosterone reduces cognitive empathy

#200

Post by username90 » Thu, Oct 03, 2019, 2:20 PM UTC

krapp wrote: post #190

tomp wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a typical "motte and bailey" conversational strategy. The reality is, proponents of the idea of "toxic masculinity" provide almost no examples of "healthy masculinity" (or "toxic femininity").

>The reality is, proponents of the idea of "toxic masculinity" provide almost no examples of "healthy masculinity" (or "toxic femininity"). Almost any article you read about toxic masculinity and in every discussion where it comes up, proponents take pains to point out, often in laborious detail, and to futile effect, that the term isn't meant to assign toxicity to all masculine behaviors. One shouldn't need to provi…

Pretty people has labeled all masculine traits as toxic, maybe not the same individuals but as a group they have. That is the problem with ill defined concepts, "toxic masculinity" is not a scientific term since people can interpret whatever they want as toxic.

A men's rights advocate could say that chivalry and self sacrifice is toxic masculinity since it puts a lot of unfair pressure on men.

A female feminist could say that locker room talk and objectification of women in games is toxic masculinity since it is hostile to women.

A male feminist could say that boys rough play is toxic masculinity since it hurts or leaves out those who want to do calmer things.

A pacifist could say that action games and contact sports are toxic masculinity since they promote violence.

A body image advocate could argue that huge muscles, strength and body building is toxic masculinity since it hurts the self esteem of overweight or scrawny men.

Divorced fathers could argue that traditional fatherhood as a money provider who aren't allowed to complain is toxic masculinity.

Extroverted people could argue that the male geek culture which avoid social contact toxic masculinity since they ruin the social atmosphere.

Introverted people could argue that male initiative taking for relationships is toxic masculinity since it bothers a lot of people who aren't interested.

Politicians could argue that male intellectual stubbornness and bias for action is toxic masculinity since it leads to shootings and terrorism.

So let me ask you, what part of masculinity can't be labeled toxic? I have seen all of the examples above in the wild. What are the examples of positive masculinity? Everyone has their own version of that as well. For example, many feminists thinks that positive masculinity is men helping women. But it is not healthy for men to be pressured to help women, so that masculine image is not very positive for men. Also I am pretty sure that there you can find people who would label any one of the above as positive masculinity. In other words, the term is meaningless as it is formulated today.