Female vs Male Psychology

[fromderinside]

The fact that there are genetic differences signals much. For instance one chromosome, a lot of genes, are not paired in one sex. Then there's the Adam's rib difference and the split pelvis difference and the birthing difference. With that obvious physical difference it suggests, along with significant chemical differences, one should suspect large differences in behaviors as well. This.

Just in case anyone hadn't already posted this obvious stuff. All that and Kurtosis as I mentioned above.

 

[Shadowy Man]

But women don't want to be programmers, they want to be nurses and teachers. That's what that video discuss and the reasons for that are biological and evolutionary.

But in the early days of computers, weren't most programmers women?

http://www.npr.org/sections/alltech...en-female-programmers-who-created-modern-tech

As part of the oral history project of the Computer History Museum, Jean Jennings Bartik recalled how she got the job working on that computer. She was doing calculations on rocket and cannon trajectories by hand in 1945. A job opened to work on a new machine.

"This announcement came around that they were looking for operators of a new machine they were building called the ENIAC," recalls Bartik. "Of course, I had no idea what it was, but I knew it wasn't doing hand calculation."

Bartik was one of six female mathematicians who created programs for one of the world's first fully electronic general-purpose computers. Isaacson says the men didn't think it was an important job.

"Men were interested in building, the hardware," says Isaacson, "doing the circuits, figuring out the machinery. And women were very good mathematicians back then."

Isaacson says in the 1930s female math majors were fairly common — though mostly they went off to teach. But during World War II, these skilled women signed up to help with the war effort.

 

[thebeave]

It seems sort of odd that you more or less are blaming your parents for "not saving you from yourself". I'm introverted also, and while I had some uncertainty about what I wanted as a career (though I did know it would be in the hard science, computer science or engineering fields) I definitely knew that being a teacher would be a poor choice for an introvert like me. That was a no brainer. I just don't see how you could not know that about yourself. Like someone deciding to become a mechanic, when they know they have no mechanical abilities.

I'm not sure that's so obviously a non-introvert activity. I'm an introvert and I enjoy teaching. I wouldn't handle a heavy teaching load well, but relatively short lectures a few times a week are fun, even if I need to take some time to recharge afterwards.

Yeah, I could see maybe doing it in small doses. Five days a week for 6 hours a day, like a high school teacher, is way too much for this introvert. I'd be exhausted mentally and emotionally at the end of every day. It could also be that I had some anxiety issues about speaking in front of crowds, but that may have been more related to shyness than introversion.

 

[rousseau]

Yes. it's other way around. I say it is bullshit because it is bullshit.

Regardless of what you say or claim, you are wrong.

That ourculture shapes our thoughts, personalities and expectations is not even controversial.

I think you've built a strawman.

''The term culture refers to all of the beliefs, customs, ideas, behaviors, and traditions of a particular society that are passed through generations. Culture is transmitted to people through language as well as through the modeling of behavior, and it defines which traits and behaviors are considered important, desirable, or undesirable.''

''Within a culture there are norms and behavioral expectations. These cultural norms can dictate which personality traits are considered important. The researcher Gordon Allport considered culture to be an important influence on traits and defined common traits as those that are recognized within a culture. These traits may vary from culture to culture based on differing values, needs, and beliefs. Positive and negative traits can be determined by cultural expectations: what is considered a positive trait in one culture may be considered negative in another, thus resulting in different expressions of personality across cultures.''

I never said anything about it being narrow. I's pretty wide within respective clusters.
Name one engineer who has a nursing degree, and no, biomedical engineering is not engineering. Engineering in the usual meaning of the word.

In fact you are claiming that it is narrow. You implied as much when you said ''Name one registered nurse who switched to engineering'' - which is a cheap ploy because this is information not readily available.

Which implies that people who are attracted to nursing are not capable of getting an engineering degree.

Which in turn is bullshit.

There is talk along these lines, for example;

''DIdnt know where to post this question. I am a Mechanical engineer by degree but work in the aerospace field for the past 7 years. I have been thinking of goign back to school for a career change and would love to go into obgyn nursing. Anyone out there who has made the career change from engineering to nursing? How did nursing school compare to engineering school? How did your engineering background help/ or not help you in nursing school or in your nursing career? Thanks!''


''...but we have three women in our class at Duke that left some sort of engineering to attend our ABSN program - we have 2 former biomedical engineers and a former - literally - rocket scientist; she used to build solid rocket boosters for the US military.

They're all brilliant women and are very interesting to talk to. I can't speak from experience here, but I guess what I'm doing is saying you're not alone and it can be done. Good luck and let us know when and where you apply!''

I agree that culture is a massive influence and I think it makes sense to accept that there is subtle interplay between biology/culture.

I'd say biology/culture can and has been mutually reinforcing in a lot of ways, but as society becomes more free we begin to see the true range of human potential. What would be interesting, imo, would be to see those traits which stay constant despite culture becoming less of an oppressive force. At that point I think we're looking at the long-range characteristics that have arisen due to the sexual/physical dynamic between sexes.

 

[rousseau]

I don't see the judgement part in my post, I see parents teaching their children about the world. I also added a.. "if those things don't interest you, that's ok too".

Maybe it would have been better stated like this:

"Be whatever you want to be, but I might be able to help you understand who you are"

For instance.. I was an introvert for my entire life. My parents didn't notice, and even now I'm not sure they totally understand what an introvert is. I went into teaching at 23 which was a horrible decision for my personality type, and if my parents could have stepped in and suggested it might have been a poor choice based on who I actually am (notice this is congruent with the argument you're making), it could have been infinitely helpful and it might have saved me a lot of time and energy.

Going back to the male/female stereotypes, of course a parent should be supportive in their kids decisions/interests, but if reality can serve as a guide in any capacity, why not leverage that? I'm not saying a parent should dictate life path to their kids, I'm saying understanding women or men has the potential to help a boy or girl understand themselves. Given it's obviously not an absolute guide.

It seems sort of odd that you more or less are blaming your parents for "not saving you from yourself". I'm introverted also, and while I had some uncertainty about what I wanted as a career (though I did know it would be in the hard science, computer science or engineering fields) I definitely knew that being a teacher would be a poor choice for an introvert like me. That was a no brainer. I just don't see how you could not know that about yourself. Like someone deciding to become a mechanic, when they know they have no mechanical abilities.

For one I had no concept of introversion/extroversion in general, so hadn't identified myself as such. I knew that I wasn't entirely keen on teaching in general, but that voice was a little too quiet during the time. Moreover I had just finished a degree in science and didn't know what else to do with my life and for some reason felt a sense of urgency that I needed to start making money.

The thing was, though, that at the time I did have pretty good social skills, and when I was teaching I wasn't bad at it, but when push came to shove it was way too exhausting to carry on in the field.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't see the judgement part in my post, I see parents teaching their children about the world. I also added a.. "if those things don't interest you, that's ok too".

Maybe it would have been better stated like this:

"Be whatever you want to be, but I might be able to help you understand who you are"

For instance.. I was an introvert for my entire life. My parents didn't notice, and even now I'm not sure they totally understand what an introvert is. I went into teaching at 23 which was a horrible decision for my personality type, and if my parents could have stepped in and suggested it might have been a poor choice based on who I actually am (notice this is congruent with the argument you're making), it could have been infinitely helpful and it might have saved me a lot of time and energy.

Going back to the male/female stereotypes, of course a parent should be supportive in their kids decisions/interests, but if reality can serve as a guide in any capacity, why not leverage that? I'm not saying a parent should dictate life path to their kids, I'm saying understanding women or men has the potential to help a boy or girl understand themselves. Given it's obviously not an absolute guide.

Your personal example does does fit your suggested parenting approach on the basis of gender stereotypes. If anything, your personal anecdote argues against such stereotyping. You say that you were/are an introvert. Males are stereotypically assumed to be extroverts. Your parents failure to see that you were an introvert may have stemmed from their own Pre-conceived ideas of how males act.

Either way, suggesting careers on the basis of gender stereotypes is exactly the opposite of what you say you would have liked from your own parents - that they see YOU as the individual you were, and guide you based on your individual personality.

All due respect to this post I feel like the original point I made came to a logical conclusion so I'd prefer to just end it there.

 

[DBT]

You claimed I missed Lippa's work, but Lippa's work is consistent with the position that I have held constantly, that children are influenced by both biological and social factors. You seem to think that I am denying the existence of biological factors, but that is rubbish; I simply reject your claim that biology is the dominant factor, because that has not yet been established by science.

In other words you reject the argument and evidence provided in that video.
Don't bother repeating that video agrees with you and that I misinterpret everybody there.

I can testify that you misinterpret my remarks.

 

[barbos]

but as society becomes more free we begin to see the true range of human potential.

Yes, we will see true range.
Norway is as free&unoppressive as you can get, yet women want to be engineers even less than in oppressive societies.

 

[barbos]

But in the early days of computers, weren't most programmers women?

http://www.npr.org/sections/alltech...en-female-programmers-who-created-modern-tech

As part of the oral history project of the Computer History Museum, Jean Jennings Bartik recalled how she got the job working on that computer. She was doing calculations on rocket and cannon trajectories by hand in 1945. A job opened to work on a new machine.

"This announcement came around that they were looking for operators of a new machine they were building called the ENIAC," recalls Bartik. "Of course, I had no idea what it was, but I knew it wasn't doing hand calculation."

Bartik was one of six female mathematicians who created programs for one of the world's first fully electronic general-purpose computers. Isaacson says the men didn't think it was an important job.

"Men were interested in building, the hardware," says Isaacson, "doing the circuits, figuring out the machinery. And women were very good mathematicians back then."

Isaacson says in the 1930s female math majors were fairly common — though mostly they went off to teach. But during World War II, these skilled women signed up to help with the war effort.

I think you answered your own question, women were used as calculators before computers. So some of them naturally moved to "programming" in the early days of computers.

- - - Updated - - -

In other words you reject the argument and evidence provided in that video.
Don't bother repeating that video agrees with you and that I misinterpret everybody there.

I can testify that you misinterpret my remarks.

I am not surprised.

 

[RavenSky]

I don't see the judgement part in my post, I see parents teaching their children about the world. I also added a.. "if those things don't interest you, that's ok too".

Maybe it would have been better stated like this:

"Be whatever you want to be, but I might be able to help you understand who you are"

For instance.. I was an introvert for my entire life. My parents didn't notice, and even now I'm not sure they totally understand what an introvert is. I went into teaching at 23 which was a horrible decision for my personality type, and if my parents could have stepped in and suggested it might have been a poor choice based on who I actually am (notice this is congruent with the argument you're making), it could have been infinitely helpful and it might have saved me a lot of time and energy.

Going back to the male/female stereotypes, of course a parent should be supportive in their kids decisions/interests, but if reality can serve as a guide in any capacity, why not leverage that? I'm not saying a parent should dictate life path to their kids, I'm saying understanding women or men has the potential to help a boy or girl understand themselves. Given it's obviously not an absolute guide.

Your personal example does does fit your suggested parenting approach on the basis of gender stereotypes. If anything, your personal anecdote argues against such stereotyping. You say that you were/are an introvert. Males are stereotypically assumed to be extroverts. Your parents failure to see that you were an introvert may have stemmed from their own Pre-conceived ideas of how males act.

Either way, suggesting careers on the basis of gender stereotypes is exactly the opposite of what you say you would have liked from your own parents - that they see YOU as the individual you were, and guide you based on your individual personality.

All due respect to this post I feel like the original point I made came to a logical conclusion so I'd prefer to just end it there.

Well, you are certainly entitled to your feelings, and you are also entitled to refrain from continuing the discussion further, but unfortunately your conclusions were not at all logical. Sorry.

 

[thebeave]

Christina Hoff-Sommers (aka Based Mom), who frequently publishes videos on gender equality issues, released a video earlier this year addressing this very topic of male and female preferences in careers as it relates to the prosperity and freedom of the nation:

 

[barbos]

Christina Hoff-Sommers (aka Based Mom), who frequently publishes videos on gender equality issues, released a video earlier this year addressing this very topic of male and female preferences in careers as it relates to the prosperity and freedom of the nation:

She agrees with norvegian video and I think she even refers to the same study. And I agree with her too.

 

[Toni]

but as society becomes more free we begin to see the true range of human potential.

Yes, we will see true range.
Norway is as free&unoppressive as you can get, yet women want to be engineers even less than in oppressive societies.

I'm a bit prejudiced because I know a number of women who are engineers, as well as a couple of Ph.D.s in mathematics and physics and more in chemistry and biology. One or two in computer science but most have too good of social skills for that field (jk. kinda). Of course, women are also astronauts and have careers in all sorts of non-traditionally feminine (to the repressed and insecure among us) fields. Of course, there have always been women in science and mathematics.

I also know men who are nurses and elementary school teachers.

The world is less rigid with gender and career roles, despite the fact that girls are practically force fed pink and boys camo. I don't think that there has been a leap in evolution. I don't think these women--or the men in more traditionally 'female' occupations are sports or really very atypical from a biological or neurological standpoint.

 

[barbos]

Yes, we will see true range.
Norway is as free&unoppressive as you can get, yet women want to be engineers even less than in oppressive societies.

I'm a bit prejudiced because I know a number of women who are engineers, as well as a couple of Ph.D.s in mathematics and physics and more in chemistry and biology. One or two in computer science but most have too good of social skills for that field (jk. kinda). Of course, women are also astronauts and have careers in all sorts of non-traditionally feminine (to the repressed and insecure among us) fields. Of course, there have always been women in science and mathematics.

I also know men who are nurses and elementary school teachers.

The world is less rigid with gender and career roles, despite the fact that girls are practically force fed pink and boys camo. I don't think that there has been a leap in evolution. I don't think these women--or the men in more traditionally 'female' occupations are sports or really very atypical from a biological or neurological standpoint.

Magic of anecdotal evidence.

 

[barbos]

Speaking of women astronauts/cosmonauts. Father of russian space flight Korolev after the first woman (Tereshkova) flight to space apparently said "There will be no other woman in space while I am alive" He died 3 years later but russians had not sent another women into space in 20 or so years. So Russians were content with just being first and were and still are not really eager to send women into space, even now when spaceflight became ordinary.

 

[Toni]

I'm a bit prejudiced because I know a number of women who are engineers, as well as a couple of Ph.D.s in mathematics and physics and more in chemistry and biology. One or two in computer science but most have too good of social skills for that field (jk. kinda). Of course, women are also astronauts and have careers in all sorts of non-traditionally feminine (to the repressed and insecure among us) fields. Of course, there have always been women in science and mathematics.

I also know men who are nurses and elementary school teachers.

The world is less rigid with gender and career roles, despite the fact that girls are practically force fed pink and boys camo. I don't think that there has been a leap in evolution. I don't think these women--or the men in more traditionally 'female' occupations are sports or really very atypical from a biological or neurological standpoint.

Magic of anecdotal evidence.

But but but: YOU said girls wanted to be nurses and teachers. I guess you were wrong.

Some girls do want to be nurses and teachers. So do some boys.

Girls want to do many different things. And grow up to become scientists, doctors, mechanics, farmers, astronauts, nurses, teachers, pharmacists, architects, and so on.

So do boys. They aren't all as limited in their world view as you are. Most are smarter, too.

 

[barbos]

Magic of anecdotal evidence.

But but but: YOU said girls wanted to be nurses and teachers. I guess you were wrong.

Some girls do want to be nurses and teachers. So do some boys.

Girls want to do many different things. And grow up to become scientists, doctors, mechanics, farmers, astronauts, nurses, teachers, pharmacists, architects, and so on.

So do boys. They aren't all as limited in their world view as you are.

I don't believe you are that dumb, so stop trying.

Most are smarter, too.

That would be statistical impossibility.

 

[Will Wiley]

1. Is there any evidence that could show there is no psychological difference between men and women?

2.Is there any evidence that would/could show there is a difference?

 

[Toni]

But but but: YOU said girls wanted to be nurses and teachers. I guess you were wrong.

Some girls do want to be nurses and teachers. So do some boys.

Girls want to do many different things. And grow up to become scientists, doctors, mechanics, farmers, astronauts, nurses, teachers, pharmacists, architects, and so on.

So do boys. They aren't all as limited in their world view as you are.

I don't believe you are that dumb, so stop trying.

Most are smarter, too.

That would be statistical impossibility.

Wouldn't that depend on where you fell on the scale?

 

[ronburgundy]

Sounds like this thread could use a dose of non-ideological posturing that appears to be heavy in most pro and anti responses to the OP question.

There is a mountain of evidence that testosterone and estrogen have independent and differing causal impacts the brain in both structural and functional ways that are central to countless aspects of human cognition and emotion, from memory, control of attention, and spatial navigation to sleep cycles, mood, impulsive decision making, and sensitivity to external stimuli. The evidence comes from many types of studies, including tracking changes across puberty, aging, and cyclical fluctuations, people in hormone replacement therapy, people in gender reassignment protocols, and experiments on animals. For example, castrating male rats hinders the ability to navigate a maze, but injecting them with testosterone improves their navigation). In contrast, increase in estrogen during the female menstrual cycle impairs spatial tasks (IOW, the two hormones of opposite effects on cognition).

To deny pervasive and meaningful average differences in brain-based behavioral differences between the sexes requires denying that the sexes differ in their levels of testosterone and estrogen, and it is an undeniable fact that they do, and to a extreme degree with little overlap in the distributions.

But of course, levels of these hormones vary greatly within gender and within each person over lifespan and even time of day, and can even be impacted by learned behaviors (taking a physical "dominance" posture increases testosterone levels in both genders). Plus, these hormones are not the sole cause of variance in any of the brain-based psychological variables they impact. Thus, there is large within gender variance and overlap of the distributions, as well as notable differences in central tendencies of each group and/or differences in the shape of the distributions. The size of the between gender differences will also vary, depending upon the age of the people.

Yet, none of these qualifications negate the fact that men and women are born with a biological difference that causes largely non-overlapping levels of exposure to different hormones that in turn have well established causal impact on structural and functional aspects of the brain and their corresponding psychological variable (many of which are in turn causal determinants of outward actions and behaviors.

Of course, all the above is just the more proximal effects of different hormone levels in the bodies of males and females after they are born, and doesn't count the sizable effects on organizational brain structure due to sex differences in the fetal brain being "washed" in hormones during the first trimester (btw, unsurprisingly statistically abnormal levels of hormone exposure during this period has been causally tied to gender-identity issues, and homosexuality).

Despite all of this, how these differences relate to things as complex and multiply determined as career choice (i.e., nurses and engineers) is not at all straight-forward, and would, at most, merely dispose a person to be more or less likely to wind up in one career over another, but only to a degree that could be easily countered by experience-based factors. Thus, such biologically based differences would account for only a portion of the observed between group differences in these areas.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Oh and it's always interesting to meet 'experts' on the Internet.

Everyone is an expert on the internet, didn't you know that?