[deyouz]

If you are going to claim something as harmful as that, I want you to present clear evidence and peer reviewed studies to support your claims.

What you were suggesting is that men are better than women at STEM. Simplg saying men have more testosterone doesn't cut it as evidence. (Besides, competitiveness doesn't make you a better researcher or employee, and can even be harmful in a team).

I also need data for the number 2 in that list. At what are men better at than women by a significant ammount? And how does that thing relates to STEM?

And number 3 doesn't prove absolutely anything. Women were subjugated throught history and basically no opportunity to do anything. Even with their limited possibilities, you still have women like Hatshepsut, Ada Lovelace, Marie Currie, Sappho, Ann Lister, Hypathia of Alexandria, etc. And now that they are finally allowed in higher education they outperfom men in terms of degree gained. So there is clearly not something that holds them back from studying. If they have the ability to get a PhD, then they can also be good researchers. Simple as that.

If you are going to continue with this subtle sexist talk (implying men are better than women at STEM), I want clear examples. Thanks.

[allovernow]

Start here [1]. This is delving dangerously close to flame war territory, so I probably won't respond further. But I'd like to point out that because of attitudes like this

>If you are going to continue with this subtle sexist talk (implying men are better than women at STEM)

You're probably unlikely to find too much on the subject - it's dangerous to academic careers to even propose research which could potentially justify any aspects of classical sexism. I'd just like to point out three things:

1. You're aware of the massive differences in physical capabilities, on average, between men and women, right? Which make men and women better suited, on average, to certain tasks? Why would sexually dimorphic specialization stop above the shoulders?

2. This isn't about inferiority, it's about specialization over thousands of generations. We see it in practically every other sexually reproducing species. The fact that humans have some ability to override instinct doesn't preclude gendered differences in average behavior.

3. This doesn't say anything about individual ability. We are talking about distribution statistics. What that means is that differences in average performance lead to different proportional representations in various fields. That doesn't justify discrimination or mistreatment, but it does suggest that, say, forcing gender parity in industry is unrealistic and potentially harmful.

1. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/male-female/201910/m...

[AlexCoventry]

> Start here [1]

I see nothing there but speculation about evolutionary history. It would be a shame if the potential STEM contributions of half of the human race were left fallow because of a half-assed evolutionary just-so story.

[rixed]

Regarding 1: Sexual dymorphism in hominids is not regarded as large compared to other close primates. I don't know where you take this opinion that physical abilities between males and women are "massive", but certainly not from actual measurements. Here are some, conveniently in a single table, for those interested:

https://www.geo.arizona.edu/Antevs/nats104/00lect13dimorph.h...

(Note: We are homo sapiens, pan troglodites is our closest relative still alive the social ape chimpanzee, pongo pygmaeus is the solitary orangutan, gorilla gorilla is the small group living usual gorilla, others are extinct relatives)

[allovernow]

Ok, I know I said I probably wouldn't comment further, but the extent to which people will bend over backwards to deny reality is, frankly, infuriating.

If you narrow your definition of sexual dimorphism to body mass, as in your link, then sure, the difference isn't huge relative to other primates. But even a cursory internet search produces results which absolutely, unequivocally demonstrate that physical performance of males across all measures of strength and endurance is in a league far above that of females, both trained and untrained. By some metrics, like grip strength, the bottom 10th percentile of males outperform the upper 90th percentile of females. Female records for 100m sprints are regularly beaten by teenage boys. Men are approximately 50% stronger on average in measures of both upper and lower body strength - and the gap widens enormously among elite athletes. Lung capacity, injury resistance, training response - I could go on, but I would say that this is more than enough to fit the definition of massive - particularly considering that in practical terms even trained females compare poorly to untrained males by most metrics.

Sorry, it may be an uncomfortable truth, but there is simply no ambiguity regarding the degree of physical specialization among males and females, and I've yet to come across any compelling evidence that the same specialization doesn't apply to the brain. In a truth seeking society, this should not be a controversial topic - the facts are absolutely undeniable, not to mention they almost universally match anecdotal experience.

[rixed]

I am not denying that men have a stronger body than women (endurance is more debatable though). Part of this difference is biological (as noted by the table cited in the previous message, which, as you noted rightly, indeed underestimate the difference by focusing only on body size while it is true that men's bodies have more muscle than women's), and part of it is cultural (men do more physical works, more sports, etc).

Physical specialization is obvious to everyone and an "uncomfortable truth" to no one.

What makes me uncomfortable is how some men use these largely obsolete differences inherited from a time where childbearing was constraining our species so much more than today's world where this is a solved problem (like feeding or keeping ourselves warm) to justify that men with such stronger muscles must also have a better reasoning and therefore be better in STEM positions, or leading positions, at taking decisions, at leading people starting with heading a family, and so on. There is no evidence of this, neither factual nor anecdotal (actually, anecdotal evidence suggest a negative correlation between development of muscles and that of brain). This is just patriarchy, plain and old, aka the ideology behind which men hide their domination. A domination that is not justified by men having a better brain but merely by men trying to control women in order to control their body that they are so dependent of. And this is the real controversial topic in my opinion.

I'm not comfortable with this ideology despite being a man not only because I'm ashamed of it, but also as a father of a daughter whom I hope won't be limited in how she will experience life because the other half of the species try hard to maintain an obsolete domination, and I sincerely hope she will kick the ass of all ape-like men thinking that it is "absolutely undeniable" that more muscles means better brain.

[deyouz]

Yeah, I can do that too.

■Women are smarter than men.

Once women started demanding equal rights, their IQ scores—which had lagged slightly behind men’s for decades—not only caught up with men’s, they surpassed them. According to IQ expert James Flynn, women now outscore men on intelligence tests in Europe, the US, Canada, and New Zealand—and women scored higher everywhere. “The complexity of the modern world is making our brains adapt and raising our IQ,” Flynn says. “But women’s have risen faster.”

■Women are more sensual than men.

According to researcher Israel Abramov of the City University of New York, women have a much more finely tuned ability to see slight variations in color than men do—which is why no straight men know what “mauve” or “taupe” are, but all women do. Women also have a superior sense of hearing and can distinguish between different scents far better than men can.

■Women are better at finding things than men.

Everyone knew that already, but it took psychology professor Diane Halpern to establish that women are better at navigating any given area by using landmarks, which makes them better at finding the lost keys and the missing remote control than men are.

■Women have better immune systems than men.

Estrogen gives women a better natural defense system against bacteria and viruses, according to a study at McGill University.

■Women tolerate pain better than men.

After all, they have to endure the equivalent of a bowling boll popping out of their vagina every time they give birth. But an episode of the show MythBusters proved that women can hold their hands in freezing water 19% longer than those crybaby men.

■Women have better memory than men.

A study at Aston University in England concluded that are better than men at remembering things two minutes, 15 minutes, and 24 hours after learning them. A Mayo Clinic study said that not only do women naturally have a better sense of memory than men, the gap widens with age.

■Women handle stress better than men.

Researchers at the University of Western Ontario concluded that women are far better than men at handling the stress of job interviews. Female brains also secrete more oxytocin—AKA the “cuddle hormone”—than male brains, making women calmer under fire than men are.

■Women are better at multitasking than men.

Multiple studies on multitasking have shown that women are far superior to men when it comes to handling multiple jobs at once. This must be why no man in world history has been able to simultaneously cook spaghetti, talk on the phone, and change a diaper.

■Women are better computer programmers than men.

This goes against every possible sexist stereotype, but a study at the University of Sussex found that girls created much more highly sophisticated coding systems when designing 3D games than boys did.

■Women make better doctors than men.

A Canadian study concluded that female doctors are much more likely than male doctors to adhere to physicians’ guidelines and to prescribe the right drugs for any given ailment.

■Women make better leaders than men.

The International Journal of Business Governance and Ethicspublished research concluding that female-led companies are more successful than ones led by males. A Pew Research poll found that the public agrees—women make fairer, more compassionate, and more trustworthy leaders than men do.

■Women are better drivers than men.

Studies show that male drivers are 77% more likely to die in car accidents than female drivers. A study of car accidents in New York City found that over five years, a staggering 80% of crashes where pedestrians were killed or seriously injured involved male drivers. This is why women pay lower car-insurance premiums.

■Women make better cops than men.

Authorities in Peru and Russia have begun switching over to female-dominated police forces because women’s superior psychological, communication, and negotiation skills make them better than men at handling volatile situations.

■Women make better students than men.

A joint study by the University of Georgia and Columbia University found that female students are better at acquiring and retaining knowledge than men. And Department of Education stats show that men are more likely than women to drop out of college.

■Women are better with money than men.

A study conducted by Barclays Wealth and Ledbury Research found that female investors experience a higher return on their investment than men do mainly because testosterone impels men to take unnecessary risks. A 2005 study by Merrill Lynch said that women also sell off their bad investments more quickly than men do.

Sources: http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1827162,0...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9401241/...

https://psychcentral.com/news/2013/01/05/why-girls-do-better...

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/09/education/09college.html?...

https://newrepublic.com/article/121432/biology-professor-man...

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology-science/science/men...

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/where-men-see-...

https://edition.cnn.com/2015/03/17/health/male-memory/

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/11640371/Why-women-...

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-24645100

https://www.glamour.com/story/women-are-better-than-men

http://healthland.time.com/2011/06/28/why-women-are-better-a...

You can claim there are differences in the physical body between men and women and no one will deny you that. However, it is just ridiculous to claim that me make better scientists than women without supporting your claim with rigurous data. Saying they might have better spatial isn't enough to make them much better scientists than women. Especially when there is evidence that women excel at learning and the highest IQ score ever recorded was that of a woman.