Are Men and Women different?
Yes
90% (63)
90% (63)
No
10% (7)
10% (7)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: Do you think Men and Women are different? Why?

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT
 

In terms of how we think.

I think they are. In some way's through societal pressure, in some way's inherently. I think it is significant, though obviously no single difference is universal.

I'd like to know what other Escapists think.

Of course they are. Emphasize the differences too much and you'll get flamed online. It's a question that really requires a faster form of communication than tweets or forum posts AND should be had without the shitstorm-awaiting crowd over one's head like it always is on the internet. Y'know, the average moron - no matter what they think they are still morons.

I think that there is more variation in thinking within genders or sexes than between them. A very qualified, limited-in-scope 'yes'. Which for the purposes of this poll is a 'no'.

A little. Both through society teaching and neural connections. But it's like the difference between sky blue and robins egg blue.

The problem comes from when "brain differences" is used to almost exclusively disbar women from male dominated jobs (even when they weren't always male dominated) even though it's never applied the other way around (for instance, a man's brain is never questioned when working jobs like nursing. In fact, their differences are often rewarded and held higher than the original women)

If there were significant differences, they would have been found and proven until now.

The stuff decades of proper science did find is always small in comparison to individual differences and might be due to culture or sampling method. So i would say any differences are pretty negligible.

It's reasonably to believe so.

Physiology, our brains are kinda different, it probably has some affect.

Culturally, we're raised different and have different expectations, this also has some affect.

There's a bunch of things, both nature and nurture that appear to indicate men and women, in general terms, think differently.

Now, I'm not going to say it's some grand difference which is impossible to overcome, but, it's fair to assume there's some minor things at the very least.

undeadsuitor:
A little. Both through society teaching and neural connections. But it's like the difference between sky blue and robins egg blue.

The problem comes from when "brain differences" is used to almost exclusively disbar women from male dominated jobs (even when they weren't always male dominated) even though it's never applied the other way around (for instance, a man's brain is never questioned when working jobs like nursing. In fact, their differences are often rewarded and held higher than the original women)

Because men don't complain about why there's less men than women in those jobs. I won't even touch the "disbar" part.

And FYI, women have better emotional intelligence than men that could easily explain the gap in those kind of jobs.

OT, yes, evolution, deal with it.

I think men and women are each generally inclined to think in different ways, but it is certainly not universal. There are men who "think more like women" and women who "think more like men".

Kind of like how women are usually shorter than men, but some women are the woman who plays Brienne of Tarth. Would be shitty if there was a "tall person contest" and she was not allowed just because other women are usually shorter.

When you think about it, it's actually kind of an ill-posed question if you try to look at it scientifically. The first problem is how "man" and "woman" are qualified. By "men", do we mean "all men", or "most men", or "men on average", which are all terms that can have very different meanings in practice. Also, do we mean biological males or people who just identify as men? In the same way, do we mean that these differences exist at all times, at most times, or as an average over time?

Then there's the problem of causation. It's never going to be possible to fully disentangle social influences from biological ones. For instance, a common claim is that male brains and female brains are "wired" for different tasks. But the problem in testing this is that the brain is constantly rewiring itself and optimizing its structure to handle the tasks it has to do. So if the stereotypes, for instance, are "women are more emotionally sensitive, men are better at math", then the consequences of following those gender prescriptions is that women will spend more time reading emotions and men will spend more time doing math, and these divergences in ability will be reflected in brain structure in representative samples of men and women.

Then there's the problem of measurement. How are those differences in thought supposed to be quantified, let alone measured? You can't just ask people what they think, because people lie. A lot. A classic example is when you try to ask men and women about their sexual preferences and behaviors. Men tend to exaggerate both how interested they are in sex and how often they have had sex, whereas women tend to do the opposite. You can try to use fMRI scans, but good luck, those are basically a step above tarot cards in terms of the quality of data they give you, and it's usually so cost-prohibitive that getting a large enough representative sample is not possible. You can use test scores like the SAT or GRE or cognitive tests but those come with their own problems in terms of reliability because people bring their biases and assumptions with them when they go in to take a test and the influence of social messages on attitudes towards certain subjects changes people's tendency to practice or study those subjects and skills.

And on top of that, there's an ontological problem. If a theory is created that explains the differences in terms of biology, then a single counter-example discredits it. If a theory is created that explains the differences in terms of sociology, then you'd need to see that the difference isn't stable across cultures, and there are legitimate biological and non-biological reasons why cultures that don't show those differences may be very rare.

So the answer is it's a pointless question and don't think about it. You'll never get a complete working theory of what men and women are like, the best you can hope for from a scientific standpoint is a rough understanding of the typical behavior (with "typical" being properly qualified for the given experiment) of men and women (with "men" and "women" also being properly qualified) in specific situations.

inu-kun:

undeadsuitor:
A little. Both through society teaching and neural connections. But it's like the difference between sky blue and robins egg blue.

The problem comes from when "brain differences" is used to almost exclusively disbar women from male dominated jobs (even when they weren't always male dominated) even though it's never applied the other way around (for instance, a man's brain is never questioned when working jobs like nursing. In fact, their differences are often rewarded and held higher than the original women)

Because men don't complain about why there's less men than women in those jobs. I won't even touch the "disbar" part.

And FYI, women have better emotional intelligence than men that could easily explain the gap in those kind of jobs.

OT, yes, evolution, deal with it.

Im sure there are male nurses, male caretakers, and male secretaries who might take issue with you. Hell, Im sure there are stay at home fathers who like to cook and clean instead of working a shitty job who wish they werent expected to act different than they want to.

Evolution is change. Do not cite evolution in a way to be contrary to evolution, unless you think we should all give up standing up straight and walking on land cause we "used to not to".

Of course. For example:
- women are more emotionally stable (they've probably evolved to be that way since, for hundreds of thousands of years, they were tasked with taking care of the children)
- men are better at problem solving (they were tasked with gathering resources and keeping the women and children safe so they've evolved to be good at finding ways to make those things easier for themselves)
- men are more aggressive and competitive (not only because they had to hunt and keep the women and children secure but also because usually, they were the ones who had to compete for the attention of the women and not the other way around)

Well, you might want to first explain how we think.

In any case, while their is always some new pseudoscience coming up to claim what the last debunked pseudoscience claimed, I don't see any particular reason to believe that men and women are inherently significantly different in how they think.

Of course, that overlooks societal factors, which are most definitely significant.

People in general are different and that's a good thing, but using pseudoscience (race realism, skull size analysis, evolutionary psycology) to "prove" someone is inferior/superior to another person is (in the best case) very questionable.

Saelune:

inu-kun:

undeadsuitor:
A little. Both through society teaching and neural connections. But it's like the difference between sky blue and robins egg blue.

The problem comes from when "brain differences" is used to almost exclusively disbar women from male dominated jobs (even when they weren't always male dominated) even though it's never applied the other way around (for instance, a man's brain is never questioned when working jobs like nursing. In fact, their differences are often rewarded and held higher than the original women)

Because men don't complain about why there's less men than women in those jobs. I won't even touch the "disbar" part.

And FYI, women have better emotional intelligence than men that could easily explain the gap in those kind of jobs.

OT, yes, evolution, deal with it.

Im sure there are male nurses, male caretakers, and male secretaries who might take issue with you. Hell, Im sure there are stay at home fathers who like to cook and clean instead of working a shitty job who wish they werent expected to act different than they want to.

Evolution is change. Do not cite evolution in a way to be contrary to evolution, unless you think we should all give up standing up straight and walking on land cause we "used to not to".

Why? How saying that women has more emotional intelligence in average statistically hurts people doing those jobs? It just means that those guys were born with EQ much higher than the average of their gender, a thing they should be proud of.
Edit: Or worked hard to make up to make up for their disadvantage, both are commendable.

So come back in tens of thousands of years since society not being dependent on each gender performing a specific seperate set of tasks is a new thing.

*Whistles inconspicuously*

Of course men and women are different. Not only are males and females different, but individuals are different as well and even our immune systems do not always have the same response. That does not mean either is "superior" than the other, rather they are complimentary. Male and female brains are not even wired the same, and that is awesome! People can be different and equal and that be a great thing.

I have no idea why some people seem to think different is bad. Life would be boring as hell if everyone and everything was the "same".

Yes, but until we're actually in a situation where we know that there are no possible social pressures causing those differences there is little reason to point to any outcome as being biological in origin rather than social, given how much more vast social pressures are on social creatures like human beings.

Further, within group variation is almost certainly much larger than between group.

They think differently, but mostly due to social and cultural influences than biological ones. That being said, such differences are mere generalizations; as each individual's way of thinking is determined more by personal experiences than anything else.

Different? Yes. In an apples and oranges way. Neither is superior to the other, and I really wish people would stop poorly claiming "science" to support biases and stereotypes.

Definitely.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/04/study-finds-some-significant-differences-brains-men-and-women

Both sexes are better at different things than each other.

Men also have a higher standard deviation of IQ, placing them both dumber and smarter than women along the IQ range.

Scientifically? No idea. Anecdotally? Can't tell, because all the people I know are different people. My wife and I do not think alike, even though we have a lot in common. Nothing about the way I think (or, really, the things I think of) is 'masculine' and nothing about the way she thinks (etc.) is 'feminine'; we're just different people.

inu-kun:

Saelune:

inu-kun:

Because men don't complain about why there's less men than women in those jobs. I won't even touch the "disbar" part.

And FYI, women have better emotional intelligence than men that could easily explain the gap in those kind of jobs.

OT, yes, evolution, deal with it.

Im sure there are male nurses, male caretakers, and male secretaries who might take issue with you. Hell, Im sure there are stay at home fathers who like to cook and clean instead of working a shitty job who wish they werent expected to act different than they want to.

Evolution is change. Do not cite evolution in a way to be contrary to evolution, unless you think we should all give up standing up straight and walking on land cause we "used to not to".

Why? How saying that women has more emotional intelligence in average statistically hurts people doing those jobs? It just means that those guys were born with EQ much higher than the average of their gender, a thing they should be proud of.
Edit: Or worked hard to make up to make up for their disadvantage, both are commendable.

So come back in tens of thousands of years since society not being dependent on each gender performing a specific seperate set of tasks is a new thing.

If you want to live like a Caveman, thats on you. I however prefer to be more "evolved" :)

Definately to some extent, especially in social contexts. As someone fresh out of high school, i can confirm that both community and conflict play out differently between men and women. I never saw girls who started fistfighting in the hallways like some guys did, but at the same time, many more girls changed schools because they felt frozen out or bullied. Bullying within gender groups differ from men to women

We kind of need to do an experiment, like in Twins, to see how people grow up without current societal impacts, but I imagine it might be tricky to find enough people willing to donate their newborns to science.

No ... in the sense that there's inevitably going to be far more difference between brains regardless of gender as opposed to any significant departure solely due to them being men and women. And we can measurably see that. If anything, by framing the question as is inevitably leads to the wrong answer that invariably you brain is going to be changed by other factors more.

Kind of like saying how dog breeding contributes to global warming, because inevitably humans having pets is belching more CO2 than humans without pets.

Count me in the Hormonally yes, Intelligence wise no, and the way women and men are today is due to society.

To fundamentally see if women and men are truly different mentally, you would have to raise a good number of men and a good number of women devoid of all societal norms and chart their lifetimes.

And do it several more times to make sure it's not just a statistical anomaly.

Which would make a movie I'd want to watch, as long as there's no romantic subplot.

I think everyone is different from each other period. Individuality ftw.

Whitbane:

Both sexes are better at different things than each other.

But not all things are rewarded equally, now are they?

Do you think Men and Women are different?

Yeh, sure.

Why?

My experience...

I'm not about to conduct a study or anything, this is what I got.

Smithnikov:

But not all things are rewarded equally, now are they?

Indeed. Take for instance this travesty:

"Records show that America's flagship universities are doling out an average of $175,088 per year for administrators tasked with leading their diversity efforts.

That's more than three times the average American household's annual income, and just about enough to cover the sticker price of out-of-state tuition for six students."

"University of Virginia Vice President and Chief Officer for Diversity and Equity Marcus Martin, for instance, earns $349,000 annually (the highest of any salary identified by Campus Reform), while University of Texas at Austin Vice President for Diversity and Engagement Gregory Vincent pulls in a comparable $331,000 per year."

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=9428

They're different. Some of it is social constructions, other is inherent behavioral traits, different ways to think things through. Not universal, but common enough to warrant generalization.

Yeah, obviously.

Given hormonal differences and thousands of years of differing societal expectations, how could we not be different to at least some degree?

Going any further than that however inevitably results in a nature-vs-nurture argument that I am woefully unqualified to conduct, as are the vast majority of the people on this forum.

inu-kun:
OT, yes, evolution, deal with it.

Considering that not so long ago you made a thread asking questions about evolution that displayed an understanding of the subject below that of a high school science textbook, it's fucking bizarre to see you use "evolution" as a one-word argument.

Zhukov:

inu-kun:
OT, yes, evolution, deal with it.

Considering that not so long ago you made a thread asking questions about evolution that displayed an understanding of the subject below that of a high school science textbook, it's fucking bizarre to see you use "evolution" as a one-word argument.

Ain't it hilarious when conservatives have no issue dragging out evolution for that kind of argument while turning around and handing money to people like Phil Robertson, Kent Hovind and NephilimFree later on?

Smithnikov:

Zhukov:

inu-kun:
OT, yes, evolution, deal with it.

Considering that not so long ago you made a thread asking questions about evolution that displayed an understanding of the subject below that of a high school science textbook, it's fucking bizarre to see you use "evolution" as a one-word argument.

Ain't it hilarious when conservatives have no issue dragging out evolution for that kind of argument while turning around and handing money to people like Phil Robertson, Kent Hovind and NephilimFree later on?

Well, if it's the exact same individual conservatives doing both those things, then yeah, sure.

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here