BoysToys

We end up going back to: even if there are differences at population level, there's still quite a big overlap.

We don't see extremes, as in other mammals of males taking off and the female doing all the caring, or the reverse in some birds, fish or frogs.

I remember something about men's brains and/or hormones also being affected by hormones.

And as anecdotal evidence goes, my granddad was much more caring than my grandmother.

Back to my point about both buggies and trucks being wheeled mechanical toys capable of load bearing.

Slow, if you want people to engage with your posts, taking on board what is said about your posting style could be helpful.

And is it that surprising that on a board called Relationships on a site called Mumsnet, it's mostly women discussing relationships?

"I wonder how they would have interpreted their results if they'd picked a toy pram rather than a car"

I imagine they would have come to the exact same conclusion. Evo-psych seems to be the only 'science' that starts with the conclusion.

Correlation does not equal causation. Always amazed when scientists of any persuasion don't get this. Obviously there's an extremely high chance women in our society are more likely to have high EQ as we are encouraged to value high EQ in women.
If you're a physiologist slow you must know about the studies on brain plasticity and the visible differences in brain anatomy that develop depending on environment eg the mouse studies on the visual cortex. Also that the same happens in humans too. If you use a skill and practice it, that part of your brain can be even visibly bigger or more active in some cases and smaller if not used.
We also have good evidence that even tiny babies are capable of developing complex patterns of interaction with their parents in aspects that could be seen as gendered such as caring behaving. This occurs well within the first year.
Personally I'm always surprised there aren't even more gendered differences apparent in the population given the vast differences in the way that society treats the sexes and the extreme sponge-like way children absorb and adapt to even very subtle influences.

Agree completely with evolutionary psychology being evobollocks. It fails even the basics as it mostly consistents of wild hypotheses with no actual empirical way of testing those hypotheses.
I wonder how they would have interpreted their results if they'd picked a toy pram rather than a car

"Anecdotal data I agree but an obsevation that had been corroborated by measures of EQ"

What does that even mean? I read it 4 times and still have no idea.

"In evolutionary terms it could be argued that there is a survival advantage for the sex that gives birth to and suckles offspring to have E>S."

Would it though? I would think a balance of E/S would be more advantageous as both have distinct drawbacks.

It would certainly provide more data if you were going to ignore every basic rule of research methodology.

To be honest I'm not sure that they can draw any conclusions from that study - as I've said in more than one post.

Did you feel very judged by the other parents back when your children were young?
Now you feel vindicated. Those other parents were idiots?

But perhaps their sons had different needs, different personalities, to yours. Maybe when they banned guns it wasn't about you being wrong, but it was right for their family all the same.

"At least this resolves the age-old debate as to whether there’s a direct link between chess-playing ability and intelligence. Clearly not.”

Nigel Short: D. Telegraph 15 April 2015 on women and chess.

"I don’t have the slightest problem in acknowledging that my wife [Rea] possesses a much higher degree of emotional intelligence than I do.

“Likewise, she doesn’t feel embarrassed in asking me to manoeuvre the car out of our narrow garage."

I'd feel bloody embarrassed if I had to ask DH to get my car out of the garage. Perhaps his wife should take some more driving lessons because she is clearly not safe to be on the road, instead of him holding an inadequate driver up as an exemplar of why women (in his view) don't play chess. Because, of course, all men are good drivers…..

Amanda Ross's response:“Judit Polgar, the former women’s world champion, beat Nigel Short eight classical games to three in total with five draws.

“She must have brought her man brain. Let’s just hope Nigel didn’t crash his car on those days, trying to park it. At least this resolves the age-old debate as to whether there’s a direct link between chess-playing ability and intelligence. Clearly not.”

So what do you think causes less girls and women to play chess and what do you think the answer is?

That's my whole point. Isn't there a risk that any kind of disparity just ends up on blaming things outside of ourselves that we can do little about? Doesn't this actually reduce self-empowerment?

And no. It's very possible to look around at external factors and think what can I do to change those, or how can I push harder against those.

History, patriarchy, bias...etc.. All the things you listed could go towards explaining the 98:2 disparity. But you don't seem interested in discussing those. You obviously have the answer you're looking for already.