[simias]

This "naturally/biologically" is the crux of the issue really, where does nature stop and society begin?

And even if nature biases one way or an other, does it explain the measured discrepancy completely? Am I to believe that there's basically a shortage of "nurturing" men, as there is a shortage of technically inclined women?

We also see that the proportions vary very significantly between countries, so clearly there's a societal factor at play, one way or an other.

So I don't really like these types of shortcuts, because clearly the most nurturing man is probably more so than the less nurturing woman. We should judge people on their own merit, not their gender, race or other factors.

[ams6110]

Sure, individuals are individuals.

I was addressing the larger question of why not many men become nurses. Not saying that those who do are not nurturing and good at what they do.

[simias]

Well you were saying that the only answer was of a biological nature, I was pointing out that while it probably factors one way or an other it's a bit presumptuous to say that it's the only reason.

In particular your example: "Many women would be uncomfortable or refuse to have a male caregiver help bathe or dress them." I think there's a massive cultural component to this, rather than some innate behavior. And the fact that there are many male gynecologists show that many women aren't that picky with their intimacy...