Conversation

Aella
@Aella_Girl
To state my actual views here: I believe male and females are not 100% identical, overall, in their natural preferences. In a world where all sexism was eliminated and socialization was equal, I would be *shocked* if employment and gender makeup of all fields became equal. 1/
10
277
Aella
@Aella_Girl
Replying to
@Aella_Girl
There's also that men seem to be higher variance, from what I can tell - both more and less skilled (although on average there seems to be little or no difference). Thus, in the top (and bottom) 1% of skill of systems-oriented fields, I'd expect the vast majority to be male.
13
140
Spencer Greenberg 🔍
@SpencrGreenberg
Replying to
@Aella_Girl
For what it’s worth, in our research on gender where we tried to find all self-reported differences in personality between males and females we had some unreliability in reproducing the “people vs things” distinction, so did not end up including it. Our notes from 3 studies:
Image
3
11
Show replies
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Aella
@Aella_Girl
Systems as in - things, objects, processes, like math, programming, logistics, structures. People as in - society, communication, emotion, like psychology, teaching, therapy, connection.
1
1
Show replies
Morgan Holt
@morgan__holt
Replying to
@Aella_Girl
There is evidence that 24 hour old babies show those preferences for systems and people. But I would imagine that after the personality forms, at around 20 years old, the spectrum from systems to people is probably more like a bell curve.
Nesdon Booth
@Nesdon
Replying to
@Aella_Girl
Since our cognition requires generalization to make predictions, it's understandable that we are prone to prejudge an individual based on their group's traits. So the counter argument makes the inverse error, claiming there are no differences between generalized groups.
1