#constructivsm | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

religion-is-a-mental-illness · 4 months

Text

A major discussion at the very centre of the gender debate, asks: why are men and women different?

Are they different because we tell them to be different? Through toys in childhood, TV in adolescence, and a continual bombardment of gender norms from society, our media, our family, our friends, from everyone.

Is our gender shaped through society, through ‘social constructivsm’?

Alternatively -

Are our gender preferences innate?

Are we born masculine or feminine; born with our gendered thinking, like we are born with our sexuality?

Are the preferences, behaviours and temperaments of men and women, part of our biology? And if so, are they immutable?

So many questions.

Well, a new study from 2018 has reopened the debate.

Showing that the more equal and wealthy a society, the more men and women grow apart in their behaviour.

That’s right.

The wealthier and more equal the country, the *more* its men engage in risk taking behaviour, and the more altruistic its women become, for example.

It’s an annoying spanner in the works for the social constructivists, and feminists, who insist we are all the same blank slates – and are simply brainwashed, or coloured in, by society. But are we?

Sources:

Scientific American: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/when-times-are-good-the-gender-gap-grows/

Study: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aas9899

Study:

Abstract

Preferences concerning time, risk, and social interactions systematically shape human behavior and contribute to differential economic and social outcomes between women and men. We present a global investigation of gender differences in six fundamental preferences. Our data consist of measures of willingness to take risks, patience, altruism, positive and negative reciprocity, and trust for 80,000 individuals in 76 representative country samples. Gender differences in preferences were positively related to economic development and gender equality. This finding suggests that greater availability of and gender-equal access to material and social resources favor the manifestation of gender-differentiated preferences across countries.

More studies:

Abstract

Men's and women's personalities appear to differ in several respects. Social role theories of development assume gender differences result primarily from perceived gender roles, gender socialization and sociostructural power differentials. As a consequence, social role theorists expect gender differences in personality to be smaller in cultures with more gender egalitarianism. Several large cross-cultural studies have generated sufficient data for evaluating these global personality predictions. Empirically, evidence suggests gender differences in most aspects of personality-Big Five traits, Dark Triad traits, self-esteem, subjective well-being, depression and values-are conspicuously larger in cultures with more egalitarian gender roles, gender socialization and sociopolitical gender equity. Similar patterns are evident when examining objectively measured attributes such as tested cognitive abilities and physical traits such as height and blood pressure. Social role theory appears inadequate for explaining some of the observed cultural variations in men's and women's personalities. Evolutionary theories regarding ecologically-evoked gender differences are described that may prove more useful in explaining global variation in human personality.

Abstract

Using data from over 200,000 participants from 53 nations, I examined the cross-cultural consistency of sex differences for four traits: extraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism, and male-versus-female-typical occupational preferences. Across nations, men and women differed significantly on all four traits (mean ds = -.15, -.56, -.41, and 1.40, respectively, with negative values indicating women scoring higher). The strongest evidence for sex differences in SDs was for extraversion (women more variable) and for agreeableness (men more variable). United Nations indices of gender equality and economic development were associated with larger sex differences in agreeableness, but not with sex differences in other traits. Gender equality and economic development were negatively associated with mean national levels of neuroticism, suggesting that economic stress was associated with higher neuroticism. Regression analyses explored the power of sex, gender equality, and their interaction to predict men's and women's 106 national trait means for each of the four traits. Only sex predicted means for all four traits, and sex predicted trait means much more strongly than did gender equality or the interaction between sex and gender equality. These results suggest that biological factors may contribute to sex differences in personality and that culture plays a negligible to small role in moderating sex differences in personality.

Abstract

Previous research suggested that sex differences in personality traits are larger in prosperous, healthy, and egalitarian cultures in which women have more opportunities equal with those of men. In this article, the authors report cross-cultural findings in which this unintuitive result was replicated across samples from 55 nations (N = 17,637). On responses to the Big Five Inventory, women reported higher levels of neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness than did men across most nations. These findings converge with previous studies in which different Big Five measures and more limited samples of nations were used. Overall, higher levels of human development--including long and healthy life, equal access to knowledge and education, and economic wealth--were the main nation-level predictors of larger sex differences in personality. Changes in men's personality traits appeared to be the primary cause of sex difference variation across cultures. It is proposed that heightened levels of sexual dimorphism result from personality traits of men and women being less constrained and more able to naturally diverge in developed nations. In less fortunate social and economic conditions, innate personality differences between men and women may be attenuated.

Abstract

We investigated sex differences in 473,260 adolescents’ aspirations to work in things-oriented (e.g., mechanic), people-oriented (e.g., nurse), and STEM (e.g., mathematician) careers across 80 countries and economic regions using the 2018 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). We analyzed student career aspirations in combination with student achievement in mathematics, reading, and science, as well as parental occupations and family wealth. In each country and region, more boys than girls aspired to a things-oriented or STEM occupation and more girls than boys to a people-oriented occupation. These sex differences were larger in countries with a higher level of women’s empowerment. We explain this counter-intuitive finding through the indirect effect of wealth. Women’s empowerment is associated with relatively high levels of national wealth and this wealth allows more students to aspire to occupations they are intrinsically interested in. Implications for better understanding the sources of sex differences in career aspirations and associated policy are discussed.

There's no "patriarchy." Men and women are just different.

Hell, here's four studies of primates that show comparable sex-linked tendencies, preferences, habits and instincts as humans:

Sex differences in rhesus monkey toy preferences parallel those of children: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18452921/

Toy story: Why do monkey and human males prefer trucks?: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2755553/

Young female chimpanzees treat sticks as dolls: Growing evidence of biological basis for gender-specific play in humans: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101220121109.htm

Sex differences in response to children's toys in nonhuman primates: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513802001071?via%3Dihub

Social constructivism is complete horseshit. Not only is "Patriarchy Theory" an explicit denial of evolution, but a full-blown conspiracy theory.

https://www.realityslaststand.com/p/the-new-evolution-deniers-in-retrospect

Given that humans are sexually dimorphic and exhibit many of the typical sex-linked behavioral traits that any objective observer would predict, based on the mammalian trends, the claim that our behavioral differences have arisen purely via socialization is dubious at best. For that to be true, we would have to posit that the selective forces for these traits inexplicably and uniquely vanished in just our lineage, leading to the elimination of these traits without any vestiges of their past, only to have these traits fully recapitulated in the present due to socialization. Of course, the more evidenced and straightforward explanation is that we exhibit these classic sex-linked behavioral traits because we inherited them from our closest primate ancestors.

#The Tin Men #sex based differences #sex differences #sex linked behaviors #patriarchy #myth of the patriarchy #the patriarchy #patriarchy myth #social constructivism #social construct #evolution denial #socialization #patriarchy theory #conspiracy theory #religion is a mental illness

8 notes · View notes