It's neither sexist nor pseudoscientific, but rather well supported by evidence. Just because you wish a fact weren't so doesn't make it any less true.
back
2 comments
There has been a lot of study into sexual dimorphisms. Check wikipedia for a primer[0]. Or grab yourself a basic neuroscience textbook[1].
That being said, the poster above stated, "Guys are less subtle -- we're wired to be more attracted to the binary good/bad aspect of things. The male power dynamic is powerful/weak. Girls sweat the details." These are very vague statements which do not relate to specific cognitive tasks, so no research can tell you about whether or not "Girls sweat the details." Unless a statement like this is restated, it is not testable, and therefore is not supported by current evidence. If something like "Males performed differently on average at a spatial task A, or a cognitive task B," then maybe you could find some scientific literature.
At the very least, unqualified and vague statements like that posted only serve to confuse, and may be considered potentially sexist.
[0]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_human_psycho... [1] http://www.openisbn.com/isbn/9780878936977/
Thanks for posting links to research. I agree that the poster you refer to could have been more clear in his/her thought, but my general point was that merely discussing sex differences shouldn't be grounds to accuse people of sexism. Regardless of whether you're happy about it or not sex differences exist and on average different genders are better at different tasks. This is pretty solid psychology and no reputable psychologist would disagree with this. What it doesn't mean is that every woman is better than every man in certain areas or vice-versa, but it does mean there are patterns of behavior more common in women than in men, etc.
> sex differences shouldn't be grounds to accuse people of sexism.
I have often seen people hold the assumption that you have a strong opinion on exactly what the mental difference are between male, female, etc with out good research to back it up then it is likely due to sexism.
What percentage of people are jumping to conclusions arbitrarily rather then allowing their conclusions to biased for their own ends. Most seem to assume the latter is more likely.
Sex and gender are two different things, and no reputable psychologist would agree with a statement that blithely conflates them.
The arguments you're making perpetuate structural oppression of women. One might as well talk about how race differences exist and on average different ethnicities are better at different tasks. (That is to say, I find the language you're using morally repugnant.)
Noting a physiological difference is not the same as passing a value judgement. Vive la différence.
The comment I replied to talked about psychology, not physiology.
"Simply noting a difference" is never simple when dealing in stereotypes driven by historical prejudice.
So I take it you think the entire field of behavioral genetics should be banned?
I have no problem with research, my problem is with vague innuendo. More than that, most people aren't qualified to interpret such research, and people who talk about differences between the sexes are usually speaking about their personal beliefs while trying to wrap them in a veneer of science. I find it difficult to believe that a scientist who has done a thorough survey of the research would make a flippant remark like the one I replied to.
Citation needed. It does not mesh with my experience of life. Though it does seem that boys are socially pressured to act as if it were true, which can make it look from the outside as if it is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_human_psych...
This is not a controversial area of psychology. The burden of proof is on anyone making claims to the contrary (like the person I was replying to).
What are you saying? That there are differences between the sexes, psychologically? That's not what was taken issue with, here. That was the specific proposed difference of men being simpler/more straightforward in some psychological sense.
If you meant to refer to the latter, then linking a whole Wikipedia article on psychological sexual differences seems a bit unspecific.
I'm saying that claiming different sexes interact with the world differently and have different strengths and weaknesses does not make you a sexist. I also claim that there is strong evidence to support this assertion and that the vast majority of psychologists and biologists (and virtually every respected one) believe there are innate psychological differences between the sexes not explained through environment alone. The entire field of evolutionary psychology is based on this idea.
You seem to be arguing against something that nobody debated. What we are debating is the specific claim that "guys are less subtle" and "wired to be more attracted to the binary good/bad aspect of things" and that "the male power dynamic is powerful/weak", while "girls sweat the details". My experience is not that the sexes interact with world identically, but that those specific sorts of claims are hackneyed stereotypes and that in reality both men and women are individuals with the full range of complexity that implies. Furthermore, I think it sucks that largely because of the commonality of those sorts of stereotypes that it can be difficult for both boys and girls to behave differently than they are "supposed to".