Originally Posted by Oracle
It's less what they say you can't be, and more what they say you can be. Because of these aforementioned gender roles that society still perpetuates, the jobs children are pushed towards are different. There's been an improvement in recent years, but you'll still see that there's a gender divide even as children between jobs, and a lot of it seems to be based around gender stereotypes. Boys are more likely to want to grow up to be athletes, firefighters, astronauts etc. etc. while girls are more likely to want to grow up to be doctors, teachers, scientists, and chefs/bakers. It's also worth noting that, despite more girls wanting to be doctors, there's twice as many male doctors compared to female doctors in America. And female doctors performing, on average, better than male counterparts.
Basically, biology should be playing a minuscule amount in representation within a field. All genders are equally qualified, it just appears that the societal narrative steers genders into different fields.
I feel like I should pipe up here.
These stereotypes that society has around gender roles (which you say is the societal pressure pushing people to pick jobs), where do they come from? Like most stereotypes, they're rooted in reality. In this case, rooted in biology. Instead of biology playing a small role, biology is playing the directing role.
I don't think it's controversial to say that stereotypes around gender roles have weakened significantly in the past half century. That said, the underlying biology the resulted in those stereotypes is still present. Our biology hasn't changed, but our society has. So boys still wanna be firefighters, girls still wanna be teachers.
Like I said earlier, I reckon that our unconscious biological pressures are more influential than societal pressures nowadays.
tldr; gender role stereotypes are just a manifestation of biology
Last edited by Ele; Jul 10, 2017 at 08:09 PM.
Originally Posted by Ele
I feel like I should pipe up here.
These stereotypes that society has around gender roles (which you say is the societal pressure pushing people to pick jobs), where do they come from? Like most stereotypes, they're rooted in reality. In this case, rooted in biology. Instead of biology playing a small role, biology is playing the directing role.
I don't think it's controversial to say that stereotypes around gender roles have weakened significantly in the past half century. That said, the underlying biology the resulted in those stereotypes is still present. Our biology hasn't changed, but our society has. So boys still wanna be firefighters, girls still wanna be teachers.
Like I said earlier, I reckon that our unconscious biological pressures are more influential than societal pressures nowadays.
tldr; gender role stereotypes are just a manifestation of biology
Even with a root in biology, how accurate can some of these notions be considering how long ago they might have been formed? I can understand saying only men should be soldiers back in the day when war consisted of wielding swords and spears and required a large degree of physical strength. But saying only men should be soldiers today, when war has largely been mechanized and the skill set required to wage war is different from before, begs whether our notions about biological differences may need to be changed because of how the roles themselves have shifted.
This also doesn't hold up with more modern roles. For example, I mentioned that a larger percentage of boys want to be astronauts compared to girls. This is a job that has only existed for less than a century, and is largely a field that is devoid of any specific trait that benefits a specific gender over another. Why is it more boys would want to be astronauts compared to girls? You could say it's because boys are more adventurous, but is it really that simple? Girls are just about as curious as boys at a young age, and biological differences between genders are much more muted at younger ages, so it would stand that interest in exploring space should be somewhat represented among girls. It seems more likely that the most lauded astronauts of our time have been male, and the role itself has been typically typecast as a male profession. As such, girls don't take interest in the job because the job isn't presented to them as an option due to lack of representation or perceived opportunity.
It also fails to explain why more girls than boys want to be doctors, yet there are more male doctors than female doctors and there are more female nurses than male nurses. Is it a shift in goals as they got older? Is it a bias in society to favor males in the perceived dominant role? A subliminal push during their education to take the nursing path instead of the medical practitioner path? Furthermore, from a purely biological standpoint, the role of doctor and nurse would both be performed better by a female than a male, yet the trained medical profession was male dominated for the majority of modern medicine, with women filling a supportive role through nursing. This runs counter to job roles being rooted in biological differences. Rather, it indicates that the medical profession has been populated by males for so long, due to systemic discrimination in the past against women pursuing the required education to be licensed medical practitioners, that the gender role has been falsely attributed to biological disposition, rather than societal opportunity.
We also have to remember that some of these gender stereotypes were formed when the common belief was that females were weak, and thus should be excluded from "difficult" work because it would make them "hysterical" and they should just care for the home while the man earns keep. I hardly see why our modern views of gender roles should be based on outdated, and often outright misogynistic, views of gender.
nyan :3
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
Originally Posted by Oracle
Even with a root in biology, how accurate can some of these notions be considering how long ago they might have been formed? I can understand saying only men should be soldiers back in the day when war consisted of wielding swords and spears and required a large degree of physical strength. But saying only men should be soldiers today, when war has largely been mechanized and the skill set required to wage war is different from before, begs whether our notions about biological differences may need to be changed because of how the roles themselves have shifted.
Nobody is saying that biology demands that only men become soldiers. I'm just saying that because of their biology, men are more likely to be drawn to these roles.
Originally Posted by Oracle
This also doesn't hold up with more modern roles. For example, I mentioned that a larger percentage of boys want to be astronauts compared to girls. This is a job that has only existed for less than a century, and is largely a field that is devoid of any specific trait that benefits a specific gender over another. Why is it more boys would want to be astronauts compared to girls? You could say it's because boys are more adventurous, but is it really that simple? Girls are just about as curious as boys at a young age, and biological differences between genders are much more muted at younger ages, so it would stand that interest in exploring space should be somewhat represented among girls. It seems more likely that the most lauded astronauts of our time have been male, and the role itself has been typically typecast as a male profession. As such, girls don't take interest in the job because the job isn't presented to them as an option due to lack of representation or perceived opportunity.
That's one theory. I subscribe to the idea that it's an adventurous dangerous job. Girls are not as adventurous as boys, even at younger ages (yes tom-boys exist, speaking generally). I read the article you got your info from, and I'm really not a fan of what the author of study sees as the endgame here - Seems he wants girls and boys to be wanting to be everything, equally. It reminds me, and I think sort of connects, to people who say that sex is a social construct. Through good intentions, they don't recognise that yeah, there's actual ingrained differences between the sexes. There's always gonna be these differences, so it's naive for them to want equal representation in what people aim to be/job outcomes - There's always going to be areas dominated by men and areas dominated by women. Not saying you don't recognise this, just that the author of the study doesn't.
Originally Posted by Oracle
It also fails to explain why more girls than boys want to be doctors, yet there are more male doctors than female doctors and there are more female nurses than male nurses.
As commentators of that study have point out, this is a more recent development, so that's why. As you noted, in the past, when the stereotypes held more weight, women were pressured in being nurses instead. Now, with that pressure all but gone, they've started becoming more involved with that field.
In 20 years you'll see a lot more women doctors, perhaps even more than men, if that study of 500 kids holds any predictive weight.
But it still doesn't tackle the possibility that our perceptions of what is required for certain jobs is false, and these perceptions skew the jobs that people are more inclined to go in to. The mechanics of each job have shifted over the decades, yet the same underlying personality associated with each job stays relatively rigid.
For example, a car mechanic. The skills and personality we'd associate with such a person would be what? Good with their hands, hard-working, willing to get a little dirty, some basic understanding of vehicles. How many of these skills are intrinsically tied to a specific gender? Women are biologically more dexterous, work ethic is pretty much even across genders. So what about the last two? Are women biologically less disposed to getting dirty than men? That seems pretty ridiculous to be honest. What's more likely is the societal pressure to remain "pristine" or "pretty" at all times for a woman makes them avoid the job. Understanding of vehicles though? What biologically would predispose either a male or a female to understanding a vehicle? Nothing, we haven't been around long enough to evolve any sort of biological influences over this. This is entirely society's perception that vehicles are a "manly" object, and thus encourages males over females. But if we're looking at this from a biological standpoint, a woman should be better qualified to be a car mechanic, and should have no biological disposition to avoid the job. It's almost all societal perception of the job and who should be doing it that shapes the fact that men dominate that job.
I feel like you're attributing too much to the individual, and not enough to the effects of societal pressure. While a person may be predisposed to certain activities because of their gender, this predisposition only matters if it effects their perception of what jobs are appropriate for them. Being empathetic or compassionate is a valuable trait in any field, but society emphasize the effects of it in very specific fields of medical and service industries. We pigeonhole traits to roles, when traits are not exclusively valuable in any given field. It's not only about opening up representation. If people don't want to work the job, they don't want to work the job. But it's about making sure that option is at least perceived as available. And frequently, society subscribes to the view that certain jobs are just better suited for men, despite no rational reason to support it. And it's these types of misplaced beliefs that need to be revised. While it's not a hard discrimination, such soft discrimination still influence decisions.
For example, a car mechanic. The skills and personality we'd associate with such a person would be what? Good with their hands, hard-working, willing to get a little dirty, some basic understanding of vehicles. How many of these skills are intrinsically tied to a specific gender? Women are biologically more dexterous, work ethic is pretty much even across genders. So what about the last two? Are women biologically less disposed to getting dirty than men? That seems pretty ridiculous to be honest. What's more likely is the societal pressure to remain "pristine" or "pretty" at all times for a woman makes them avoid the job. Understanding of vehicles though? What biologically would predispose either a male or a female to understanding a vehicle? Nothing, we haven't been around long enough to evolve any sort of biological influences over this. This is entirely society's perception that vehicles are a "manly" object, and thus encourages males over females. But if we're looking at this from a biological standpoint, a woman should be better qualified to be a car mechanic, and should have no biological disposition to avoid the job. It's almost all societal perception of the job and who should be doing it that shapes the fact that men dominate that job.
I feel like you're attributing too much to the individual, and not enough to the effects of societal pressure. While a person may be predisposed to certain activities because of their gender, this predisposition only matters if it effects their perception of what jobs are appropriate for them. Being empathetic or compassionate is a valuable trait in any field, but society emphasize the effects of it in very specific fields of medical and service industries. We pigeonhole traits to roles, when traits are not exclusively valuable in any given field. It's not only about opening up representation. If people don't want to work the job, they don't want to work the job. But it's about making sure that option is at least perceived as available. And frequently, society subscribes to the view that certain jobs are just better suited for men, despite no rational reason to support it. And it's these types of misplaced beliefs that need to be revised. While it's not a hard discrimination, such soft discrimination still influence decisions.
nyan :3
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
What jobs do you think aren't perceived as available by young girls/boys in today's modern society? We're told from such a young age, and repeatedly, that we can be whatever we want to be. In this PC world also, it's unlikely that anyone would receive much flak for entering a field in which their gender is the minority. Society is so so so much more accepting of these kind of things nowadays.
Also, it seems like you disagree that some jobs are more suited for one gender over the other (you said that's not rational). Do you? Do you think that men and women are equally suited for all jobs?
Also, it seems like you disagree that some jobs are more suited for one gender over the other (you said that's not rational). Do you? Do you think that men and women are equally suited for all jobs?
