[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/his/ - History & Humanities


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: DoG.jpg (25 KB, 331x499)
25 KB
25 KB JPG
This place talks(argues) a lot about race, ethnicity, and creed a lot. What are your general thoughts on sex differences and sex politics? Are they real, is sex a social construct? Has feminism been good? Have women made as many positive contributions to humanity as men? Are men and women really different or are all differences socially constructed and artificial?
>>
It's all real.
>good
>positive contribution
Whatever it means. I'm neutral about this stuff, but people who deny biological differences between women and men are delusional.
>>
I have no problem with people identifying with a gender that historically doesn't relate to their genitals, but I also realize that they're suffering from something we call a mental illness (Gender Dysphoria).

As a schizo, I know what dysphoria feels like, and if transitioning helps that, I will respect your identity. I, however, will not force it on a person who thinks otherwise. The reason people think otherwise is that this is pretty new to mainstream politics, therefore doesn't have enough legitimacy within our cultures.

For instance, in my opinion, all of these new genders can be helpful in creating a family, finding people you're attracted to or get along with etc. However, if no one knows about these genders, it will lack legitimacy in our common culture.

The people that push trans rights are college liberals, and college liberals end up teaching our kids; in our lifetime, it may not be considered a mental illness anymore, much like homosexuality.
>>
>>6620292
>Has feminism been good?
It probably hasn't been nearly as important as its proponents and critics believe.
>>
>>6620337
Almost every civilization controlled women in particular ways that were different from how it controlled men. Feminism is the idea that civilization should treat women as men, and not pay attention to the specific ways in which women can exert power in society. Yet no society that has even approached this idea has survived or grown. We're living on borrowed time, propped up by technology, our economy trying to compensate for the social disintegration this forced sameness causes.
>>
Women are essentially children and should be subservient to men. This is the one thing Islam gets right.
>>
>>6620363
All civilizations before our were created by primitive violent warlords and their entire history was marked by nearly constant warfare. We live in completely different times.
>>
>>6620292
Sex is obviously not a social construct, and it creates differences between men and women beyond just genitals and muscle mass.
It's also obvious not all the differences are biological. There is nothing in our biology that says men can't wear skirts.


As for "positive contributions" depends on what you're talking about. Obviously both men and women are important to humanity, but if you're talking about things like innovation, men are going to be doing most of it.
In the end though, these sorts of "boys vs girls" comparisons are meaningless to people as individuals. The vast majority of men aren't going to make a difference anyway.

Feminism has been good in freeing women as individuals to pursue a goal that might have been restricted to her because of her sex.
However at some point feminists started believing that all difference between men and women is social and anything less than 50% of females performing any role could only be the result of prejudice.
Most feminists also presume that women are held back by men or an imaginary masculine patriarchy instead of their own very feminine gender.
>>
>>6620292
This topic is arbitrary. We can see clear physical and psychological differences between females and males, this has been observed through out history and we shouldn’t change the public perception of something just because of some outliers and academic confirmation bias.

The whole gender question is just a fade of teens and young adults because in our highly individualistic culture we WANT to be different than others, hence why we call ourselves with a different gender and pronoun so we can be something special. It’s pretty much what punks were in the 70’s and 80’s and emos were in the 2000’s
>>
I can tell you gender isn’t real cand that trannies are inherently anti feminist
>>
>>6620846
Shit, why did it tell me it didn’t go through?
>>
File: 1557853259636.png (105 KB, 252x241)
105 KB
105 KB PNG
>>6620292
>men have 15 times more testosterone
>testosterone has profound psychological and physical effects
>gender differences are a "delusion"
>>
>>6620292
As long as humans, or indeed any non-human organisms at all, participate in zygotic reproduction the categories of male and female are necessary to explain the mechanics of baby-making.
>>
Genetic differences with a positive feedback from society
>>
"They" gatekeep science not by knowing the subject matter, but by writing popsci books reiterating long-dead fallacies


only a matter of time
>>
>>6620363
>>6620363
Feminism is an emergent product of industrialization.

Automation of labor means the socio-economics are so different from agrarian era humanity that seeing the two as similar in the kind of humans they represent is an appeal to tradition at best. You ignore the dynamics shifts of industrialization and rapid technological change- mind that agriculture itself caused a major social-economic change which is why you get more matriarchal systems in pre-agrarian civilizations.

While you may argue differentiation on gender roles is a constant, the specifics of these roles clearly change over time and there is no reason to expect or demand that women hold to agrarian gender norms in an industrialized civilization.
>>
>>6620292
We had this argument before. I don;t feel like it today.
But my overall views are:
Gender roles are mostly a social construction though it is likely biologically real(every culture has it, just the concepts behind each are different). Men and women probably have slightly different perspectives about some things and mentally process information through different methods, but overall, it's social education and performance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rww_p8CO37U
>>6620305
Which biological differences do you mean mostly physical or mentally? I agree with the former.
>>
>>6621029
>on sex drive and body habitus
FTFY
For example, it's been shown that generally women also need emotional/mental stimulation with sex to really get off while men can generally get off with just sex.
>>
>>6623284
I mostly agree, but there are definitely traits/roles that are purely nongenetic.
>>
>>6620292
>is sex a social construct?
Vice versa. Society is a sexual construct. Sex came first, society second.

>Are men and women really different or are all differences socially constructed and artificial?
They are different enough to the point where all matriarchies are dead and all surviving societies are patriarchal. So that should also answer about sex politics.
>>
>>6623550
>>6620305
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KrOZe2SxoQ&list=RDRww_p8CO37U&index=2
This is part one. Start here, sorry.
>>
Define sex
>>
>"What are your general thoughts on sex differences and sex politics?"

Regarding sex differences ot sure myself as to where to draw the line of what's artificial of men and women and what's natural to them. Nobody knows for sure and sociologists and neurologists are still trying to figure out.

Regarding "sex politics", it's usually bullshit. For example, should discussion on "beauty standards" really take up time we could be using to discuss the comercial war that's happening since the end of the Cold War? Probably not.

>"Has feminism been good?"
Some men imply things like "feminism is Satan's architecture 'n shieeeet" but I disagree. Birth control, for example, is a good thing; perhaps young people are already having sex, yet they have no conditions of having children. Wouldn't it be best if both the husband and the wife had conditions to sustain the child?
Post-1990s feminism is shit without a doubt, though. They debate useless things, just like I said earlier, like "beauty standards".

>"Have women made as many positive contributions to humanity as men?"
No, men happened to be more agile and dominated women first. Women couldn't have made as many contributions because they were too busy serving their husbands.

>"Are men and women really different or are all differences socially constructed and artificial?"

Read what I typed earlier.
>>
True feminism is what separates the west from Islamic evil.

Tragically feminists supporting Islam is too common despite the rape culture that festers in their society.
>>
File: 1546432852919.jpg (137 KB, 800x800)
137 KB
137 KB JPG
>>6620292
My thoughts are as follows.
Homosexuals and crossdressers should be flung from the tops of the tallest places and feminists should be burned at the stake as the abortionist witches that they are.
>>
>>6620292
FUCK FEMMES
FUCK MALES
FUCK SEX
FUCK GENDER
FUCK FLESH
FUCK WEAKNESS
FUCK FRAGILITY
FUCK THE TYRANNY OF NATURE
FUCK THE TYRANNY OF LESSER HUMANITY
#CYBERGANG #CYBERGANG #CYBERGANG
>>
>>6620292
Gender and Sex are the same, it's only thanks to current technology (in the strict sense and in a social sense) that we can bypass the restrictions and roles "imposed" by nature.

>>6623550
Are you for real?
Men have penises, women have vaginas. Whatever you put into the "male or female" role in a given society won't change one is a man and the other is a women. This is a concept current progresism cannot seems to grasp.
In one society men are berry pickers, in the other are consorts, in another they are kings. But men at the end
>>
>>6620367
This. Google Assembly Women
>>
>>6620292
>Has feminism been good?
Women had a pretty sweet gig going and an uppity minority convinced them that freedom and independence were worth the tradeoffs. Over half of women I talk to wish they didn't have to work and could just be housewives instead.
>>
File: 1557967656904.gif (3.14 MB, 400x500)
3.14 MB
3.14 MB GIF
>>
>>6624725
How old are you?
It's literally in jest most of the time. Besides, most people regardless of gender would like to not work and you cannot deny this. i here plenty of guys saying, I wish I could win the lottery. The house wife joke is an easy running joke for women. A it was never socially acceptable for men, so it is pretty out of place for them to make the joke.
>>
>>6624664
>Men have penises, women have vaginas. Whatever you put into the "male or female" role in a given society won't change one is a man and the other is a women. This is a concept current progressive cannot seems to grasp.

Anon, who is denying that? Did I not just say I agree with the idea that their is a lot of physical difference(vagina, penis, muscles, hair distribution) between men an women? I swear, your arguments are one huge strawman most of the time. That, or you refuse to listen to what we're actually saying.
If you're talking about the people who say there is more than one gender, then take that up with them. I wasn't saying that.

What it means to be a man and what it means to be a women(ideologically/behaviorally, NOT primary and secondary sex characteristics wise) depends on the culture.
>>
File: Islam vs west.jpg (16 KB, 281x179)
16 KB
16 KB JPG
>>6624539
They don't support Islam's patriarchy any more than they support Christianity's/nonmuslim nations! I think what they are saying is that in many ways, they are just as oppressive, just differently. Moreover, the accusation that women can't wear hijabs and be true feminists which is just bullocks!

Compare girls having to wear tops/bras vs girls having to wear hijabs. Both are still taboo for women because of a degree of oversexulization of women's bodies(obviously different degrees). Meanwhile, most nonmuslim girls still feel too ashamed to go outside topless or without a bra.
That feeling of socially conditioned modesty and shame will probably won't go away anytime soon, but it doesn't mean you can't be a good feminist and still refuse to go out topless. without a bra. No need to FORCE girls to start doing it now despite how uncomfortable it makes them just because feminism. It's the same thing with Hijabs.

I know you like to think that feminism is about forcing all women to act the same, but it really isn't.
>>
>>6625152
Hijabs are a literal symbol of Islamic patriarchy that their laws demand. It isn't like women in the West are forced to walk around in bikinis when single.
>>
>>6623496
>the socio-economics are so different from agrarian era humanity that seeing the two as similar in the kind of humans they represent is an appeal to tradition
Cringe!

>mind that
Cringe & Crumpets!
>>
>>6625152
Except one girl is free to wear whatever she pleases. Bikinis, "men's" clothes, normal clothes or even a hijab if she so wants.
The other girl is free to wear a hijab.
>>
>>6620292
Trannies are mentally ill

roasties belong in the kitchen with no rights
>>
>>6625198
No, you idiot. There are Muslim women and feminists who don't wear hijabs. There are those same people who also have the option to not wear it but decide to because they don't feel comfortable/it's apart of their style. That is what I'm talking about. Example, look at what France tried to pull with that law forbidding hijabs That's what feminists are annoyed about. They don't literally like or try to defend the patriarchy of Islam. They are saying it's just a different side of the same coin so going out of your way to call it out is hypocritical.
>>
>>6625188
This isn't in reference to those Muslims that have no choice. That picture is in response to people including other women, who assume that a muslim woman can't possibly ever decide to wear the hijab, even when she doesn't have to, out of her own preference and that in doing so, she can't be feminist/ is oppressed. see>>6625242
>>
>>6625195
Nice arguments.
>>
>>6623496
Damn, well put, anon. I couldn't have put it better myself. Yes, that is essentially the argument against appeals to nature and people who assume that just because gender roles and distribution of were beneficial at one point, that they must be at all points.
I'll add the egregious assumption that because it was efficient and beneficial that it is ESSENTIAL.
Those are two different things so gender roles, thus have never been ESSENTIAL; just useful.
>>
>>6623496
>you get more matriarchal systems in pre-agrarian societies
no you dont
>>
>>6625308
I think what he means is you get less patriarchal systems and more egalitarian ones. A lot of hunter gather tribes in African wildernesses are pretty gender neutral/equal. Yes, they still have a concept of 2 genders and roles to a degree, but less strict than other cultures.
Rape is very low in those communities and women walk around topless like men. Just saying.
>>
>>6620292
that author is badscience. misrepresents a lot of work:

https://quillette.com/2017/03/21/cordelia-fines-testosterone-rex-a-review/

https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2017/09/21/testosterone-rex-a-biased-polemic-wins-the-royal-society-book-prize/
>>
biological sex = science, XX = female, XY = male, XXY = klinefelter syndrome, XY with unexpressed Y = XY with unexpressed Y
gender identity = whatever dude, wear high heels, do what you want

Is there really more to it than that? Trannies who brainwash their 9 year old into having sex reassignment surgery are less than 0.1% of the population and an evolutionary dead end and some trailer trash will genocide them in the not too distant future after things start to collapse. It's a nonissue, unless I'm missing something.
>>
>>6625331
>I think what he means is you get less patriarchal systems and more egalitarian ones
that's not true at all, you have no idea what you're talking about
>tribes in african wilderness are pretty gender neutral/equal
you have provided no evidence at all of your retarded claims
>Rape is very low in those communities and women walk around topless like men. Just saying.
That's not at all the case, please don't post unless you have something to say that's substative or have a question in the appropriate thread otherwise just lurk
>>
>>6625354
>https://quillette.com/2017/03/21/cordelia-fines-testosterone-rex-a-review
Not quite. they were just saying she mostly speaks of easy to debunk studies but rarely follows up to other reference scientific critiques of these easy to debunk studies that give a more balanced view. She doesn't necessarily misrepresent, except in the case of her not referencing the fact that this one researcher she mentioned actually made a update to his study. She could have just not known about these though. Still, I feel you; it's important to cover all your bases ad anticipate any objections when embarking on arguments like this.
>>
File: !kung San.jpg (39 KB, 500x333)
39 KB
39 KB JPG
>>6625401
I don't?
>Hadza people
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2009/12/hadza/
While the men do most of the hunting and gathering( I didn't say these cultures have NO gender roles, just less rigid and obviously different). Relax, you're getting so caught up in your feeling you aren't even comprehending well.
>!Kung:
Read this book called Return to Nisa.
Great anthropology piece about them.
But here is a blurb:https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1044&context=anthropologyfacpub
generally men hunt, women gather but to do this, both are usually far away from the camp/home. It's worth noting that most calories come from vegetables and fruits since meat is hard to come by so yeah. They have a concept of "men and women work." "Women work" also includes things like building/dismantling huts.

>Ovahimba:
more patriarchal with polygamy, but women strangely walk around topless most of the time and no one cares.
https://www.gistmania.com/talk/topic,354068.0.html

Now, it's not right to assuem that these tribes today are living relics of past hunter and gather's and culture is always changing , but over all, they are still more egalitarian and rigid than say an agrarian culture.
>that is not the case.
Brah i read this in a report somewhere. I'll find it. It makes sense even from a non gender standpoint. There is less population density with these tribes, so less likely to have weirdos and assholes that rape. Also, explains why infectious disease doesn't devastate them much.
>>
>sure physical differences exist but mental differences do not
you ppl make me so angry

women and men have been subjected to literal billions of years of divergent evolutionary pressures and it manifests as differences both in mental and physical faculties

women are so lame and interchangeable because literally 90% of all women that ever lived went on to reproduce whereas only 20% of men did

women are subhumans compared to men in the literal sense of the word
>>
>>6620823
Gender as we know it was largely invented/pushed by a degenerate pedophile "sexologist" (for when your perversions are too much for normal psychologists/sociologists) too so I don't really know why we take it seriously.
>>
>>6620292
>is sex a social construct?
No, maybe gender is but not sex
>Has feminism been good
For leftists sure, for everyone else patriarchy worked much better
>Have women made as many positive contributions to humanity as men?
You tell me
>>
>>6625880
>for leftist sure
Are you implying that Leftist and liberals make up a small percentage of the population?
Anyway, lurk more>>6623496
>>6625709
>only humans evolve
You are such an idiot and you actually think you're intelligent. That's the horrible part.
You don't meet women on a regular basis hence why the very small sample sizes you have observed in a collective clique in your highschool (a time when people haven't even figured out their identity yet) may seem that way to you.
Human creativity was an ongoing process that manifested in may different ways all in the name of survival. There was not just one way to procure it.
>literally billions of years
Homo sapians havent even exist for millions of years. The oldest hominid like creature(still looked like an ape, is 5.8 millon years. That took one google search dammit! you couldn't even do that yet you want to be taken seriously?
You literally have the most sophomoric knowledge of evolution and "science," oh, I mean evolutionary PSYCHOLOGY, I have ever seen. Psychology is a nonsense field filled with assumptions and as it deals with a system whose mechanisms we literally don't understand well at all, (consciousness) but somehow evolutionary psychology is not. Funny how that works.
>>
>>6625709
>billions of years
Come on, lol. Amniotes don't even exist that long. Synapsids from which mammals evolved appeared for the first time in Carboniferous.
>>
>>6625709
Life has been subjected to billions of years of evolution. Humans 100-200K. Our hominid ancestors much more.
>>
my belief, which is applicable to both race and sex politics is that it ultimately doesn't matter if the differences are real, socially constructed or somewhere in the middle

from a pragmatic point of view what matters is that all of humanity now believe themselves to be functionally identical to white men, and so we have to treat them that way regardless of weahter or not it's true, because there's more of them than there are of us and we will never, ever be able to convice them otherwise
>>
>>6623575
>>on sex drive and body habitus
No. Testosterone changes your behaviour in many ways. It makes you more violent. It makes you more confident. It makes you more comfortable with taking risks.
>>
File: 1557164774871.jpg (1.86 MB, 3840x2160)
1.86 MB
1.86 MB JPG
>>6620292
It's all really rather simple: there are two genders, male and female, with a very small percentage of people born with birth defects who are intersex.
There are a very small percentage of men who identify as women - this is a mental illness.
There are a very small percentage of women who identify as men - this is a mental illness.
>>
>>6625956
>Homo sapians havent even exist for millions of years. The oldest hominid like creature(still looked like an ape, is 5.8 millon years.

Jesus Christ, how can you possibly be so retarded to think that's an argument. You think before hominid, male and female were the same??? They can be different before they enter the classification of humanoid you fucking twat.

>Psychology is a nonsense field filled with assumptions and as it deals with a system whose mechanisms we literally don't understand well at all, (consciousness)

First of all, no. Psychology deal with the unconscious. It has approximately the same reproductability as medicine. Would you say medicine is a nonsense field because we don't know everything about human conditions? Maybe you would, you don't seem really smart. And what you're looking for is predictive validity, wich certain subfield of psychology gives you.
>>
>>6626413
What about when you were born as male, but your behavior does not fit into the standards of masculinity so people refuse to describe you as a man?
>>
>>6625956
I mean, if we can mesure the same kind of difference in personnality in every culture we test, with different methods then it stand to reason those differences are true.
>>
>>6626459
Then you're big gay.
>>
>>6626459
If you were born male, then that makes you a male. It's all really rather simple.
>>
>>6626413
This. Just because some people are born without limbs, doesnt mean the ones that have them but deny them are not mentally ill.
>>
>>6626517
Yes, yes, but what about people? Are they mentally ill? I mean, I was born male but people refuse identify me as a male. They tell me that I am not a man.
>>
>>6626594
Do you have a dick?
>>
>>6626602
Yes.
>>
>>6626615
then you're a man.
Why do other not call you a man? Where do you live?
>>
>>6626413
Except it isn't
The truth is, over the last five hundred years we have tried to understand the brain and every cavity of how it works, and still we have no real idea how it works.
We know that there are certain compounds that react in certain ways in the brain, but we do not know even a quarter of how the brain works in the context of the entire human body.
I feel then that it is more accurate to say that there are two biological SEXES, male and female (with the occasional intersex person), but (mental) gender lies on a spectrum. This is something I feel most people are misconstruing either malevolently or just through ignorance.
You might call it a mental illness, but if their cure is transitioning or simply crossdressing, why would you be against it?
Personally I think calling it a mental illness is pretty unfavourable. Kinda similar to calling a disabled person a "useless cripple", but that's just taste I guess.
>>
sex and gender are social constructs man.

sex determining chromosomes don't have any effect on human behaviour or physiology at allllllllll
>>
>>6626657
>transitioning
Should be illegal before you are 30.

About 88% of children who have gender dysphoria do not hold those beliefs when they grow older.
>Source: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90229789
Only 12% of boys who believe they are transsexuals still believe so when they are older.
>Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18194003
Close to 80% of children who feel transsexual will abandon their sexual confusion as they age.
>Source: http://www.wsj.com/articles/paul-mchugh-transgender-surgery-isnt-the-solution-1402615120
>>
>>6626745
Transsexuals who undergo sex reassignment surgery are more likely to commit suicide.
>Source: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885
>>
>>6623550
The brain is an organ like any other, why wouldn’t there be mental differences?
>>
>>6626657
Explain why in every country men are more interested in things, then.
>>
>>6620292
Gender roles are natural and good.

Women are natural caretakers while men are natural providers and monogamy is one of the cornerstones of western civilization that sexual liberation has been keen on destroying.

As Aristotle said, women should not be educated as it does not benefit them or society.
>>
>>6626774
Yes, But testosterone gets converted to estrogen to cross the blood brain barrier so yeah. The main differences would come from different distribution of hormone receptors(structural proteins) anyway, not the hormones themselves.
I'm sure there are some effects on the methods of which things are compartmentalized or process, but to say it must affect how well and effective men vs women are at thinking and coming to logical conclusions is dubious. see>>6623619

>>6626500
We haven't really done that to the fullest extent though.
>>
>>6626961
>We haven't really done that to the fullest extent though.

We've done it enough to notice that the country who were the richest and most equal are the one where gender differences are the biggest.

Those differences are why, for exemple, men are more likely to be in CS.
>>
>>6626961
>but to say it must affect how well and effective men vs women are at thinking
I doesn't really affect the "quality" of thought, more the subjects of thought.
Men are more prone to thinking about abstract things, women, more about people.
Which is why, the more free a country is, the more women tend to choose jobs that fulfill that tendency.

More prosperous, egalitarian and healthy nations have more psychological differences between men and women.
>http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/2007-19165-013
More advanced societies have more differentiated gender roles.
>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19824299
Gender stereotypes are correct predictors of math and reading ability. >http://www.pnas.org/content/106/26/10593.abstract
>>
>>6626981
Men’s’ and women’s’ brains are wired differently. >http://www.uphs.upenn.edu/news/News_Releases/2013/12/verma/
>>
Gender and sex can't be understood without a materialist approach. A materialist approach fits the evidence not only of behavior and relations we see today, but also way into the past. Sex and gender and reflections of reproductive labour, and change according to the labour society requires. We can see this in eunuchs. Eunuchs were used for domestic labour, which is assigned to women. To settle the contradiction of making a man do domestic labour and thus retain the stability of the gender system, the ancients created another seperate gender, eunuchs, and removed their testicles. This solved the problem, as now it wasn't "men" doing domestic labour, undermining the gendered division of labour, it was eunuchs. You can see examples of this all through history. So yes, sex and gender exist, but if society changes, they can also change.
>>
>>6626961
Not necessarily how effective they are at thinking, but how they go about thinking
>>
We really need some kind of academic version of the Nuremberg trials for all of the blank slate faggots teaching at universities. If you are still a radical relativist muh social construct thinker past your early twenties then you honestly deserve the rope.
>>
>>6626455
You specifically said MEN AND WOMEN have had these same differences for billions of years, numb nuts. Men and women are homo sapiens so any specific differences they developed are specific to humans. It is erroneous to refer to those same homonids as "men and women" and to a certain degree, think all the differences they specifically had are found in humans today.

Basically, it is just illogical to say men and women(homo sapiens) for "billions"(which btw, you still have not addressed this egregious fuck up you made) of YEARS when those supposed differences were basically in a different species.
The correct thing to say, is that a form of sexual dimorphism has existed for a few millions* of years in primates.

>psychology is an ok field as long as it's not social psychology, even though humans are also "evolutionary" social beings
Lol this Cope. Psych studies all carry this burden of "are we making theories out of something that may be statistically more likely to just be due to chance( or 3rd variable that we aren't measuring), making type I errors all over the place, or can we be certain it is truly significant?"
The rest is trying your damned hardest to design an experiment that can account for all these 3rd variables and remove this uncertainty while being actually representative of the variance in of the human population of 7 billion people. You're usually forced to pic a specific population(like medicine).
It really is a cluster fuck t.b.h. I don't hate them for it because it's really not their fault; it's the nature of what they are trying to study.
Evolutionary psych is the worst of them all since it is literally all retrospective. Hardly any experiments can be set up to truly test it since that point you are dealing with the same issues I mentioned psychology must deal with.
In terms of gender, you are also trying to design an experiment where you can correlate the differences you see in behavior to gene expression on X and Y chromosomes.
>>
>>6627048
It must be hard to deal with the amount of cognitive dissonance a person that denies something so universally verified and obvious as the psychological differences between men and women. Let alone the physical ones.
>they can't represent 7 billion people
Yes they absolutely fucking can.
All over the world. ALL. over. the fucking world. Men have the control over state power. Everywhere. Even in the all-so praised scandinavian countries.
And I'm supposed to pretend that this is not because of consistent psychological differences between men and women?
ALL. OVER. THE. FUCKING. WORLD. The vast majority of people that chosse to enlist in the army are men.
All over the world, men commit a lot more crime, especially violent crime than women.
Men are the vast majority of homeless people.

Furthremore, I don't understand who the fuck benefits from this bullshit theory people like you push.
No one benefits from literally following objectively incorrect assumptions.
If you want to make the world better for women, you have to take into account that they are fundamentally different.
>>
>>6626981
That is another assumption though that I am talking about. Not subject per se(though to a specific degree yes) but method!
Women do think abstractly just through a different mechanism. I feel he touches upon in in that video with how men and women compartmentalize information and use it.
What I mean is for example, It seems women are more comfortable and capable at integrating things and working with multiple ideas( and things) at once. Men are more comfortable with working with one thing at a time/ in a step wise fashion.
These have implications of course: it may explain why autism is more common in men for example(an extreme version of the male brain?) or depression and multiple personality disorder in women(extreme integration of thoughts cause rumination on sad things and a jumble of consciousnesses?)
>>6626985
It basically just confirms what I'm saying and that men are better at spatial reasoning like we kind of guessed before, women better at multitasking. It doesn't mean that men and women can't excel in many similar arenas in life though.
btw, this article actually shows that women are quite the abstract thinkers contrary to what the anon I'm replying to said but in a more intellectual sense, men in a more practical sense perhaps, ON AVERAGE. That doesn't mean men and women on average can't excel in either of those things regardless.
>>
>>6627021
They go about thinking in a different way but it can be just effective at producing similar outcomes is what I mean. Basically, how the brain compartmentalizes it
>>
>>6627097
Note that according to Darwin, men have, in various traits, a greater standard deviation than women.
That is to say, they have the same average intelligence, but men have a greater percentage in the extremes.
That explains why men are over-represented in both low qualification(and income, and high qualification (and income) jobs.
>https://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/SexDifferences.aspx
>https://qz.com/441905/men-are-both-dumber-and-smarter-than-women/

"where it has been observed that human males are more likely than females to have either very high or very low intelligence. The sex-difference in the variability of intelligence has been discussed since at least Charles Darwin.[1]"
>Despite mean IQ-scale scores of 100, modal scores were about 105. Even above modal level, males showed more variability than females.
- https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00096.x
>>
>>6627089
YOU fucking idiot. That you for showing me you know NOTHING about research and the scientific method. Studies try their very best to get sample sizes with enough variance to represent the human variance on earth(racially, culturally, etc). They never fully succeed at this, but they try. Any good study worth reading will try their hardest but still acknowledge where they failed. You're just a scientifically illiterate brainlet.
>all over the world
Shut up,moron. The oldest civilization where these things have all been happening has only been around for about 5000 years. That is not enough to to cause significant changes in allele frequency. Darwin's theory of evolution came to life because he had time on his side(Millions and billions of years). Otherwise, it could be seen as bullshit to propose that lizards and humans have similar core genetic similarities in being animals.
>need to take in to account they are different
Of course, but we also need to know where these biological differences end and begin, which is what were are trying to do.
>>
>>6627147
>>6627089
furthermore, physical differences in strength could easily explain these difference(it definitely does for war). So what are you even on about? Everyone agrees men are stonger than women, have more oxygen carrying capacity(Hemoglobin), taller, have physically tougher skin than women(a bit harder to bruise). You make no sense in pointing to significant mental faculty differences to explain this.
>>
File: yosh.gif (46 KB, 128x128)
46 KB
46 KB GIF
>>6627147
>Please ignore tendencies that are extremelly consistent all over the world and focus instead on my sophistic attempt at discrediting empirical studies while simultaniously providing no empirical studies at all that are in line with my own views
>Refrain from drawing conclusions out of consisent, world-wide tendencies, they do not align with my conclusions
Every leftist argument ever.
>>
>>6627172
>>6627137
>>6626981
>>6626985
>>
>>6620292
>>Are sex differences real
Yes, because of biology.
>>is sex a social construct
No, because obviously not. Any biologist will tell you this.
>>Has feminism been good?
A proper answer to this question would probably require half-a-dozen posts. The short answer would be: That depends on what you are asking and who you are asking.
>>Have women made as many positive contributions to humanity as men?
Again, depends on how you define contribution. Women historically have had a large hand in raising future generations and that is an intensely important activity. Anything else women have or have not done historically pales in comparison to that.
>>Are men and women really different?
Yes, because(again,)biology.
>>are all differences socially constructed and artificial
Obviously not, but even if they were "just" social constructs said constructs would still not be something you can just change on a whim without severe negative consequences.
>>
>>6625956
>>6625976
>>6626005
>>6627048
>billions
yes billions. the sexual dimorphism stretches back to our pre human days. even pre hominid days. it stretches all the way back to our proto mammalian days.

deal with it. women are both mentally and physically inferior.
>>
File: 1556538228201.png (1.08 MB, 1591x640)
1.08 MB
1.08 MB PNG
>>6620292
If it's natural and good/healthy, why would you need/want surgery?
>>
File: ASD.jpg (97 KB, 1171x1106)
97 KB
97 KB JPG
>>6620337
Wrong
>>
>>6627044
Based
>>
>>6627048
Cringe
>>
>>6620760
>Most feminists also presume that women are held back by men or an imaginary masculine patriarchy instead of their own very feminine gender.

Why can't it be both?
>>
>>6620319
>all of these new genders can be helpful in creating a family
what
>>
>>6627176
Darwin's theory of evolution is my evidence. Sorry, you're too retarded to see it.

>>6627178
I responded to those posts already. >>6627108
>>6627097

>>6627137
Not him yet though.
Darwin's theory applies to something we are not even sure has significance(IQ) but assuming it is, it's still a curve. where say 8%(vs say 3% of women) of the men are total genious and 8%(where by say 3% of women) of men are total idiots. The ones in between are average.More average females then males. But what does it matter? Is that supposed to mean something? That you have a better chance of a genius with a male? YEah but you also have a better chance of him being an idiot. Over all, you chances of being at least competent, i we are to take IQ seriously is higher if you're female though. These are statistical probabilities anyway, so I don't see how one would use this in a venture in deciding how likely their daughters vs sons are to succeed in life. It's really just pointless pedantry to hang on to this notion that their is "SOMETHING" special about males compared to females. It's silly really, they're all just people.
>>
>>6627278
>Now he's talking about inferiority vs superiority
Anon, just stop. Differences don't even warrant such an conclusion in the first place. However, many animals are also sexually dimorphic so your comment still sounds retarded.

AND FOR THE LAST FUCKING TIME hominids did not exist billions of years ago numb nuts. Not even mammals existed at that time. Do literally know nothing about phylogeny and evolution despite trying to use it as an argument to further your sexism?
Please, just get out. I suppose you believe it's just since this isn't even a science board. Well, it's not.
>>
>>6627278
Your argument and conclusion don't even support each other. How does gametes being there from the start support inherent inferiority of women? Like read up on some animal social behaviors and gender dimorphisms before making a conclusion this retarded.
>>
>>6628548
>imagine being this autistic
>>
>>6628548
>AND FOR THE LAST FUCKING TIME hominids did not exist billions of years ago numb nuts
this was literally addressed in the post you're replying to. human sexual dimorphism predates humanity and continues to this very day account for the mental and physical differences

r u a girl?
>>
>>6620319
>As a schizo
stopped reading there
>>
>>6627278
>women are both mentally and physically inferior
Not really.
>mentally
Women tend towards less standard deviations in IQ, so as a group one can say women are consistently average while men make up both the upper and lower echelons of intelligence.
>physically
Men possess more upper body musculature and are generally more robust, but there are certain adaptations to the female structure (such as wide hips) that favour certain specific tasks (giving birth). In terms of physical differences unrelated to muscles, I remember women are able to distinguish colors better, while men have a greater ability to track moving objects. Aside from that, I'm drawing blanks.

Overall, one can't really say women are strictly inferior, so much as they're physically specialized and mentally average.
>>
Social trends like women in the workforce, no-fault divorce, and legal abortion have far more to do with capitalism than feminism.
>>
>>6627411
Now see it but accounting to each race
>>
>>6628964
>(such as wide hips) that favour certain specific tasks (giving birth)
oh wow women are better at giving birth than men
get ready for your nobel
>>
>>6628875
As stated, that difference of gametes does not support the conclusion.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.