271–280 of 600 posts
Then why do boys/men seem better at inventing things (edit: from past statistics)?
How is it possible that girls perform better academically (in 2015) yet are under represented in the top tier of jobs? Either women have no interest in money, academic skills have no bearing in getting high paying jobs, or discrimination is more prevalent then you’d think. I suppose all three could be true.
Men are over represented at the top _and_ at the bottom. So the average may be higher for girls, but that’s across all girls. This is what the bell curves are and a result of men’s being very wide and girls’ being very narrow. This is known as the variability hypothesis. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variability_hypothesis?wprov=s...
Anyone with young boys and girls will notice that girls are much more likely to obey rules and instructions. A lot of doing well in school is about following rules and instructions, and it seems pretty natural that girls will do better. Also, most teachers are women. I haven't checked, but I'd assume most school administrators are women. It seems natural that they'd construct a system that's more suited for females t…
> I'd assume most school administrators are women. At least in the United States, this isn’t at all true. A disproportionate number of administrators (especially when adjusted for the normal male/female teacher breakdown) are male. There have also been many studies that show that teachers call on boys more, praised them more (they acknowledge girls, praise boys), and talk with them more. So your assumptions are compl…
> At least in the United States, this isn’t at all true.
54% female, 46% male
Earlier quoted context omitted.
None of this explains why women are capable of following these rules and men are not. Are you saying men are biologically predisposed to not follow such simple rules?
When the rules are to "sit still" and "be quiet", yes, probably so. Boys are diagnosed with ADHD at a rate of 12.9% vs 5.6% for girls [1]. I've heard many counselors and psychologists (in my counseling program) suggest that many cases are misdiagnosed. Sit in any classroom or ask any teacher who their problem children are, and they're almost always boys. They're louder, more violent, more likely to disobey, and have…
How is it possible that girls perform better academically (in 2015) yet are under represented in the top tier of jobs? Either women have no interest in money, academic skills have no bearing in getting high paying jobs, or discrimination is more prevalent then you’d think. I suppose all three could be true.
I'd argue mostly for 1) and 2).
Here is my model:
1. Men have higher variance on any skill, even if men and women have the same average level, men will outnumber women at the highest and lowest levels by 2 or 3 to 1.
2. The median girl is much more likely to do her busy work because her teacher tells her to. Boys are more likely to do some bit of work only because they see some advantage to themselves. Boys are more likely to do unassigned work if they see some sort of long-term advantage to it (eg, learning programming on the side). The boy of 40th percentile aptitude, who knows he will never have a job doing math, isn't going to try that hard at his math homework. But that same boy might tinker with his car on the side and become a great mechanic.
When we reach the real world, males are finally doing work that has a pay-off, not just busy work. So they actually start trying hard, as compared to schoolwork where the median girl does more homework than the median boy.
The median girl works harder than the median boy at busywork. But when we reach the real world, the top man in a given career path is working just as hard as the top woman, and because of higher male variance, there are more men of top abilities that get the top positions.
On top of that, in my experience, women do make different choices with career paths. Men do seem to seek career paths that pay well, women often want to go into "non-profits" and areas with a "social mission." It's interesting how we moved toward an expectation that women work instead of staying home -- but we taught girls that the purpose of work is "self-actualization", while more men still have the expectation that they are to find a job that can support a family. (These are gross generalizations, and broad trends I have observed, obviously, many exceptions exist).
And as others pointed out, many women, correctly IMO, would much rather stay home with their babies or take a "mommy track" job than take a high-powered career path.
White guy here. No regular male is silly enough to stay on University here. Think about it. There are lots of foreigners but no locals.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the US, there's a significant gender gap in administration, especially above the school leader level. Also, larger schools (middle, high) are more likely to be run by men than woman.
> run by what do you mean by this ?
In the context of the school it would mean the administration, the school board, and if its a private school the owners or trustees.
There's a lot of speculation in this forum about whether this is because of different distributions of IQ, effects of testosterone, etc., but how can we possibly determine if these are true differences or the result of parents, teachers, and other people in society treating young children differently based on their gender?
The amount of insecurity in the thread is a little embarrassing gentlemen. Let's be open minded and entertain the possibility that women are indeed more capable and that societal constructs drag down their career opportunities.
How is it possible that girls perform better academically (in 2015) yet are under represented in the top tier of jobs? Either women have no interest in money, academic skills have no bearing in getting high paying jobs, or discrimination is more prevalent then you’d think. I suppose all three could be true.
FTA:
> Women who go to university are more likely than their male peers to graduate, and typically get better grades. But men and women tend to study different subjects, with many women choosing courses in education, health, arts and the humanities, whereas men take up computing, engineering and the exact sciences. In mathematics women are drawing level; in the life sciences, social sciences, business and law they have moved ahead.
This paragraph seems to support the idea of my above musing.
> academic skills have no bearing in getting high paying jobs
I highly doubt that there is no correlation, but I doubt that education is the sole factor. Girls performance over boys is a slight, but significant, edge, but since success likely draws from a handful of other factors, a few of them having a counter slight, but significant edge, might be enough to swing the other direction.