Why is this important in economics? First, women now control a signficant slice of the pie, and secondly, women have an increasingly strong political voice to match their growing economic power.
This is chiefly a political battle between liberals and traditionalists. Identity politics is here to stay.
Economics is strong influenced by policy.
On the programme, scientists argue there is no obvious neurological explanation for the gender divide, with no significant difference between male and female brains. Both are highly plastic and largely influenced by childhood experiences.World Economic Forum
Justin Trudeau wants to raise his sons as feminists. New research backs him up
Charlotte Edmond
6 comments:
It's not women per se. Women overall have wildly differing views. Hence why Hilary Clinton was surprised. Apparently quite a lot of people who happen to be women don't identify with them.
This is another bunch of 'science' that will be ripped apart by a different set of scientists with a different pre-conceived view.
You would think the case of David Reimer would have put a severe dent in this extreme belief. That's hard evidence. The hardest evidence in fact.
I didn't think neuroplasticity was that powerful, we will have to wait and see.
", scientists argue there is no obvious neurological explanation for the gender divide, with no significant difference between male and female brains."
That's pure ideological drivel. That's not what the science shows at all. Large, cross cultural studies consistently show differences. Gendered difference in interest in things-vs-people has been linked to pre-natal testosterone (ie, biological differences). And the more gender equal the country, the largest the temperamental differences between men and women.
Considering the large differential in reproductive costs, from an evolutionary perspective, one would expect there to be psychological differences between men and women (gestating, giving birth, and then having a helpless infant 100% dependent on you, is no small thing). It'd be very surprising if they turned out exactly the same.
Whatever happened to the idea that we should treat people as individuals?
Neil, the David Reimer case is pretty amazing. The poor child preferred to play with other boy children, preferred rough and tumble play, liked guns over dolls and *even wanted to pee standing up*. It's like, jesus, how's it not obviously that gender is biological?
But that's just one case, there's many more.
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/HopkinsStudy.html
In that study, 25 boys born with cloacal extrophy (born without a penis), were castrated and raised as girls. All of the children showed typical boy behavior. None of them behaved as girls.
But that's not to say that we shouldn't offer equal opportunities to all individuals irrespective of the averages of the group they belong to, of course we should. I really don't get why left has such a problem with that. There definitely is a strand of science denial on the left. I find it very strange.
"Whatever happened to the idea that we should treat people as individuals?"
I don't know.
At what point did putting tags on people and classifying them into groups stop being stereotyping and prejudice?
Similarly the idea that pity is more powerful than anger. No, let's hate those people we labelled 'nazis' because confirming their beliefs is a really smart idea. Now they can justify to themselves carrying automatic weapons at the next parade.
Another interesting phenomenon here in the Dominican Republic. Same physical response of the children
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/03/12/the-astonishing-village-where-little-girls-turn-into-boys-aged-1/
Post a Comment