First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Based on science, how much of masculinity and femininity is created by society?
13282 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / Marshall, Michigan
Offline
Posted 7/19/17 , edited 7/19/17
Based off of scientific evidence, are male and female behavior patterns derived from culture or biology or both?
How does this conform or diverge from ideas of intersectionality?
Another question: It has often been noted that occupational distribution of men and women is not the same; what distribution (equality or the current one or another distribution) will bring the most happiness?
Please cite sources with reliable scientific data.
7626 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / Pacific North West
Offline
Posted 7/19/17 , edited 7/19/17
Interesting question. It does seem like "Independent" almost masculine women are far more prevalent in my experiences then say 20 years ago. I will have to keep tabs on this topic.
15260 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / AH / Helipad
Offline
Posted 7/19/17 , edited 7/20/17
My inclination is to say that it's a combination of both nature and nurture that determines how we act. I'm too lazy to look up articles, so ignore my opinion if you want.
29207 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 7/19/17 , edited 7/20/17
Thankfully, little to no one denies men and women to have physical and mental differences. The best studied differences between the sexes are to do with mating. They had found similarities, that both men and women wanted “intelligent, dependable, cooperative, trustworthy, and loyal partners”.

They also had found differences though. Women rated financial prospects twice higher than men. Where men, contrastingly, placed more emphasis on youth and physical appearance. Is anyone surprised? “Men like pretty, young, faithful women, while women like rich, ambitious, older men.” A casual glance through entertainment would confirm this.

“Gender roles are at least partly automatic, blind, and untaught, to use William James’s terms.”

When boys are reassigned as girls, most will declare themselves as boys during the adolescence. Furthermore, recent study demonstrates that those born with ambiguous genitalia that escaped the surgeon’s knife have less psychological problems.

When it comes to children’s toys, child psychologist Sandra Scarr has named “niche picking”: “the tendency to pick the nurture that suits your nature”.

Likely the cause and effect is circular.

“People both like doing what they find they are good at and are good at what they like doing. This implies that sex difference is at least jump-started by instinct, by innate behavioral differences that predate experience.”


"The first and most general moral is that genes are enablers, not constrainers. They create new possibilities for the organism; they do not reduce its options."

Think of genes as rather simply: If-Then Logic. You cannot separate nature and nurture, culture and biology as you put it. Anyone that argues that it is one or the other is transparently displaying their lack of knowledge on the subject.

"Genes are cogs in the machine, not gods in the sky. Switched on and off throughout life, by external as well as internal events, their job is to absorb information from the environment at least as often as to transmit it from the past. Genes do more than carry information; they respond to experience."


Source Used: The Agile Gene: How Nature Turns on Nurture by Matt Ridley

Here's an interesting sample from the book that best exemplifies some of this relationship:







Another question: It has often been noted that occupational distribution of men and women is not the same; what distribution (equality or the current one or another distribution) will bring the most happiness?


This question is inherently flawed. Individuals are not blank slates, but slates with a predisposition, not certainty. Evolution has no direction, no mind of its own--to constrain potential is both detrimental and uncertain. You do not predetermine the result, you comprehend it.
29772 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / toronto ontario c...
Offline
Posted 7/19/17 , edited 7/20/17
This is clearly an attempt to get others to do your school work. There are plenty of great sociology books out there that delve into gender, work, family etc. Go and read them.
Ejanss 
17109 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/19/17 , edited 7/20/17

jtjumper wrote:

Based off of scientific evidence, are male and female behavior patterns derived from culture or biology or both?
How does this conform or diverge from ideas of intersectionality?
Another question: It has often been noted that occupational distribution of men and women is not the same; what distribution (equality or the current one or another distribution) will bring the most happiness?
Please cite sources with reliable scientific data.


I'll believe scientific theories about the "fluidity" of gender when you can show me one woman who thinks the Stooges are funny.

This point has never been yet disproven.
13282 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / Marshall, Michigan
Offline
Posted 7/19/17 , edited 7/20/17

the_warrior_of_ruin wrote:

This is clearly an attempt to get others to do your school work. There are plenty of great sociology books out there that delve into gender, work, family etc. Go and read them.


If that was my plan I would have used stackexchange. My intent is evoke informed and meaningful discussion founded on solid evidence so that those who participate (including myself) can enhance their perspective and better contribute to society and this forum.
31397 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
51
Offline
Posted 7/19/17 , edited 7/20/17
I took psychology. It's taken for granted that every aspect of personality is influenced by both nature and nurture, though the degree to which applies more varies trait by trait.
29772 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / toronto ontario c...
Offline
Posted 7/19/17 , edited 7/20/17

jtjumper wrote:


the_warrior_of_ruin wrote:

This is clearly an attempt to get others to do your school work. There are plenty of great sociology books out there that delve into gender, work, family etc. Go and read them.


If that was my plan I would have used stackexchange. My intent is evoke informed and meaningful discussion founded on solid evidence so that those who participate (including myself) can enhance their perspective and better contribute to society and this forum.


I'm not fully sold, considering you named some kind of cheat site so quickly. Asking people on a site like this would be untraceable for the most part as well. I guess I should give you the benefit of the doubt since I don't know you, but you gotta admit, your opening questions and dialog in general seems fairly scripted and lacking in personality. Leading me to believe it was/is scripted in some way.
If it aint, then you have my apology.
29207 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 7/19/17 , edited 7/20/17

encrypted12345 wrote:

I took psychology. It's taken for granted that every aspect of personality is influenced by both nature and nurture, though the degree to which applies more varies trait by trait.


And individual by individual.

13282 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / Marshall, Michigan
Offline
Posted 7/19/17 , edited 7/20/17

Ejanss wrote:

I'll believe scientific theories about the "fluidity" of gender when you can show me one woman who thinks the Stooges are funny.

This point has never been yet disproven.


What has been shown in experiments are that men and women have differing preferences.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13596-male-monkeys-prefer-boys-toys/
13282 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / Marshall, Michigan
Offline
Posted 7/19/17 , edited 7/20/17

PrinceJudar wrote:


Another question: It has often been noted that occupational distribution of men and women is not the same; what distribution (equality or the current one or another distribution) will bring the most happiness?


This question is inherently flawed. Individuals are not blank slates, but slates with a predisposition, not certainty. Evolution has no direction, no mind of its own--to constrain potential is both detrimental and uncertain. You do not predetermine the result, you comprehend it.


Many groups have cited the unequal distribution of occupations as oppressive to women and contributing to an earnings gap between men and women. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/reports/2014/05/19/90039/explaining-the-gender-wage-gap/
I'm wondering what society should do about this.
One example from personal experience is when I used to do caretaking of mentally disabled folks. Almost all my coworkers were women. The pay was low, the work difficult, we were understaffed, and were scrutinized constantly. I kept thinking we could have had better and more workers if the pay was better. This leads me to wonder if a lot of female dominated industries are underpaid.
29207 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 7/19/17 , edited 7/20/17

jtjumper wrote:
Many groups have cited the unequal distribution of occupations as oppressive to women and contributing to an earnings gap between men and women. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/reports/2014/05/19/90039/explaining-the-gender-wage-gap/
I'm wondering what society should do about this.
One example from personal experience is when I used to do caretaking of mentally disabled folks. Almost all my coworkers were women. The pay was low, the work difficult, we were understaffed, and were scrutinized constantly. I kept thinking we could have had better and more workers if the pay was better. This leads me to wonder if a lot of female dominated industries are underpaid.


I don't particularly listen to such groups. Action towards such is unnecessary. The wage gap is comprehensible because female and male interests are predisposed towards certain occupations (males are more risk taking than their female counterparts, and risk often is associated with more earning). There are a number of underpaid industries that should be attended towards--but whether they are female or male dominated is an arbitrary matter that redirects from the main issue: That some occupations are disconcertingly underpaid.



23260 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 7/19/17 , edited 7/20/17
Ya know there is a thing called being HUMAN. Many survival concepts overlap there. The only real masculine/feminine traits are related to reproduction. The rest is just culture or historical left overs.
31397 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
51
Offline
Posted 7/19/17 , edited 7/20/17

jtjumper wrote:

Many groups have cited the unequal distribution of occupations as oppressive to women and contributing to an earnings gap between men and women. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/reports/2014/05/19/90039/explaining-the-gender-wage-gap/
I'm wondering what society should do about this.
One example from personal experience is when I used to do caretaking of mentally disabled folks. Almost all my coworkers were women. The pay was low, the work difficult, we were understaffed, and were scrutinized constantly. I kept thinking we could have had better and more workers if the pay was better. This leads me to wonder if a lot of female dominated industries are underpaid.


How much money is earned depends a lot on how risky it is. That particular job is hard, sure, but it's not the riskiest job. If it's a government job, then all of the low ranking jobs have low pay and understaffing by default because the government can't pay each individual that much. If they increased the pay, then there would be a decent chance that you would be even more understaffed because of the capabilities of the employer.
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.