Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Don't worry about PC. As an old time misogynist, you can take your testosterone and go get lost in left field where you belong.
As a woman in the sciences I had to put up with BS like this, but I thought such attitudes were dying out. Guess I was wrong. So what were YOUR grades in differential calculus? Organic chemistry? Physics? Did you win a scholarship to study climatology at a prestigious university?
Posts like this are what cause women to join the feminist movement. And I'll thank you to keep your ignorant fingers off my ecological sampling techniques.
What did I say that was misogynistic?
I don't think you are being logical. I support equal opportunities for both genders in any field.
Is it sexist to say that biologically women on average have an advantage multitasking? Is it sexist to point out that military studies show piloting a helicopter (which is multitasking intensive) give women an edge?
If not why not? Is that just scientific research and understanding?
No one should say men can't pilot a helicopter well or deny them equal opportunity to become a helicopter pilot. Yet there is a gap and certainly is in part biological, No?
If it isn't sexist to say there is science pointing out women are in fact better on average at multitasking, then why is it offensive to point out men have some biological advantages like putting on muscle?
I have had students tell me in class discussions that men don't have an advantage in putting on muscle, not even with me mentioning more testosterone, and that it is purely our culture why men on average have more muscle and even more....it is sexist to suggest otherwise. Think about that, it is sexist to suggest higher testosterone levels in men are in part responsible for men having more muscles on average...
You as a scientist are fine with this?!
Yes women can add muscle, yes many women are stronger than many men, yes we should encourage women to exercise....but this doesn't change the science on average does it? Should we just lie about testosterone?
Where will this science denying lead us?
Please give me a considered response to my argument and not another ad hominem attack - and for a person who claims to be a scientist, you are appear to be a science denier or a science ignorer.
Last edited by michiganmoon; 04-02-2018 at 01:01 PM..
Is there a general rule of thumb for when I am to deny or ignore science to comply with modern PC?
if you're involved in a workplace in any capacity it is generally better not to mention anything about race or gender, so you don't offend liberals.
and don't mention that 'god' is a construct of the human mind, and capitalism is inherently oppressive to some people, or anything from the vast body of social sciences, in case you offend conservatives.
if you're involved in a workplace in any capacity it is generally better not to mention anything about race or gender, so you don't offend liberals.
and don't mention that 'god' is a construct of the human mind, and capitalism is inherently oppressive to some people, or anything from the vast body of social sciences, in case you offend conservatives.
Not a bad reply thank you.
But I don't think it is as simple as you make it out to be.
For example, I hear liberals openly mention science that supports women as having some sort of an advantage over men on average - without anybody objecting. If you mention science that supports men as having some sort of an advantage over women on average in some regard there IS denying, ignoring, attacking the messenger of science....at least in my experience.
Is one of the science denying rules that PC trumps science in regards to who might be viewed as victim historically? You can't inherently admit that one gender is better suited biologically speaking for some tasks, without opening the door that the opposite gender might also have some biological advantages in other tasks.
But I don't think it is as simple as you make it out to be.
For example, I hear liberals openly mention science that supports women as having some sort of an advantage over men on average - without anybody objecting. If you mention science that supports men as having some sort of an advantage over women on average in some regard there IS denying, ignoring, attacking the messenger of science....at least in my experience.
Is one of the science denying rules that PC trumps science in regards to who might be viewed as victim historically? You can't inherently admit that one gender is better suited biologically speaking for some tasks, without opening the door that the opposite gender might also have some biological advantages in other tasks.
The rules are going to vary depend on the company you keep.
There are biological differences that make the female and the male mind perform differently on average. Yet I've never seen anyone deny or ignore the science that women are generally speaking better at some mental tasks on average like multi-tasking and there is a biological basis for it...while on the other hand I do see people denying/ignoring science that there is a biological basis for the male mind on average to outperform female minds in some areas....or that hormones such as testosterone and estrogen do play a role on the brain. For example, Testosterone impacts spatial processing power.
These biological differences could spell out into career differences just as muscles can.
I've never seen anyone deny or ignore the science that genetics plays a role in your structural traits of your body like how tall you are, but I do see people deny or ignore the science that genetics plays a role in the structure of your brain and this structure impacts intelligence, memory, processing, etc...
Is there a general rule of thumb for when I am to deny or ignore science to comply with modern PC?
It's generally accepted that male and female brains are wired differently. Unfortunately some folks interpret different as being inferior.
It's never good to deny or ignore science. It is fine to challenge accepted science, but this is better done by someone with a background in the branch of science being challenged.
That said, sometimes science impinges on very sensitive social subjects. For example, Darwin delayed publishing The Origin of Species for 23 years, because he knew it would set off a furor among Christians. Today there seems to be sensitivity to anything that could remotely be interpreted as implying superiority of one gender or race versus another. Undoubtedly that is because of our recent history, in which such notions of superiority were used to denigrate and exploit entire groups of people.
I am not saying anyone should be discriminated against and nowhere did I imply that should be the case. I think you may be reading what you want to read.
It is obvious that averages don't mean everyone must fit an exact mold. Some men can multi-task very well. But, is there not a lot of science saying women do it much better on average and this should not be denied? This seems to be accepted by everyone. Why are other examples of science so easily denied?
Men will gain more muscle on average than women....this is biological. Testosterone. Sure, some women are stronger than some men, sure your exercise and diet also play a role....yet it is established science that men are clearly naturally better suited to muscle growth - no? I've even had students challenge me on this...and deny this saying that men and women are equal in terms of ability to build muscle.
I am saying point blank, my experience is that I don't know anyone that has denied the science that there is biological advantages of the female brain in certain regards, but I do know many people who will deny, ignore, get angry when you point out the science that there are biological advantages of the male brain on average.
I know no one that denies that genetics plays a role in your bone structure. Yet I know plenty of people who deny, ignore, get angry when you point out genetics plays a roll in the structure of your brain.
Why is this?
Is there a simple guide to help us when we should dent science?
Honestly I don't understand the whole question/point of the thread.
Has the OP come across people that he/she believes is denying "science" (and I'd ask what science as scientists deny each others results/conclusions quite often - that is a part of scientific studies to continously try to prove a theorem).
I don't know of anyone who would deny the fact that there are biological differences between genders and between groups of people based on biogenetics.
I do know that the OP has called me personally a "science denier" at times because I don't agree with him/her on the idea that IQ test results are attributed to specific genes. No matter how many times I tell the OP that "intelligence" depends on the definition of the scientists and on what a particular test is testing AND on if there are genes associated with said tests. As of today there are no specific genes associated with intelligence. To deny this - that there are no specific genes associated with "intelligence" is very much in line with scientific findings. As noted, there is no definitive definition of intelligence and so one cannot associate genes with such a broad term.
On multi-tasking, I also don't believe that women are better at multi-tasking than men based on genetics. I would take this position based on the same reasons as "intelligence." What is the definition of multi-tasking?
On physical traits it is very easy to relate physical traits to specific genes. This is not the case with behavior. However, just like physical traits - personality and behavior are generally believed to be genetic.
Don't know anyone who disagrees with this. IMO the OP and others just get upset when people disagree with them. Scientists are used to people disagreeing with them. They'll just keep on proving that what they concluded is true based on more research/studies. People on forums will just get their panties all in a bunch and act like people who don't agree with them 100% are "science deniers" lol.
There are biological differences that make the female and the male mind perform differently on average. Yet I've never seen anyone deny or ignore the science that women are generally speaking better at some mental tasks on average like multi-tasking and there is a biological basis for it...while on the other hand I do see people denying/ignoring science that there is a biological basis for the male mind on average to outperform female minds in some areas....or that hormones such as testosterone and estrogen do play a role on the brain. For example, Testosterone impacts spatial processing power.
These biological differences could spell out into career differences just as muscles can.
I've never seen anyone deny or ignore the science that genetics plays a role in your structural traits of your body like how tall you are, but I do see people deny or ignore the science that genetics plays a role in the structure of your brain and this structure impacts intelligence, memory, processing, etc...
Is there a general rule of thumb for when I am to deny or ignore science to comply with modern PC?
Every human is different. Each individual should be assessed on his/her own strengths/weaknesses. Generalizations are beguiling.
Let’s not forget about Marie Curie and Susan Jocelyn Bell Burnell to name a couple of scientists and Zaha Hadid in architecture.
As for PC, just state evidence-based documented data and be polite and you’ll be fine. Speaking like a poorly educated, misinformed political pundit won’t do. Ignoring science will make you look like you were left behind whether it’s PC or not.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
