[ender89]

Stop being thick headed, there are all sorts of differences between men and women, just like there are all sorts of differences between individual men or individual women. The point is none of those differences make women unsuited to leadership or incapable of being a scientist or something, and the system currently rewards alpha-male bullshit (another fallacy, the alpha male thing is based off of a basic misunderstanding of wolves or something and is total bullshit and shouldn't be rewarded) instead of actual leadership qualities. Everyone would actually be better off in the workplace if we moved away from rewarding those traits and becoming, as you said, woman-friendly.

[GreaterFool]

My statement may appear thick headed without context. However, I am simply repeating a feminist talking point. It is not my opinion or belief that there are no differences between men and women. It is the feminists who argue that!

Also, I think it is a gross oversimplification to equate "masculine traits" with being an "alpha male" caricature. The article specifically talks about assertiveness and agreeableness.

Women, on average, score lower on assertiveness and higher on agreeableness. Why? It could simply be upbringing and societal pressures. But then why shouldn't women simply aim to be more assertive, through training and self-improvement, rather than deride this personality trait as "alpha male" and "to be avoided"?

High levels of testosterone are associated with assertiveness. So men, on average, end up being more assertive. Upbringing and societal pressures probably skew that even further. But, being a male, I wasn't given a golden ticket to success. I am still learning how to be assertive and at the same time non-confrontational. I recognize it as beneficial trait though. A trait that will contribute to my life success.