Physical Vs psychological difference between the sexes

Ah but GC by proving that women were actually less suited to be a lawyer would explain why even though they want to be lawyers they rarely reach the top

I totally agree. It’s been shown that people treat male and female children differently even before they are born. How on Earth do we know what is innate and what is socialisation. Boys and girls are treated very differently, both in the home and at school.
It used to be seen as contrary to nature for women to work in the legal profession for instance. We laugh at that now but the argument was that it was neither suited to nor desired by “normal” women to want to do this work. Yet most people entering that profession now are women (although sadly they don’t reach the top in anywhere near the same number). So it turns out that actually lots of women do want to do something that was seen as inherently male.

Feminism means that even if 99 per cent of women opted for 'traditionally feminine' (stereotypical) jobs, leisure. clothes etc.

It's not your post that I'm disagreeing with but more the idea that you were responding to that there are 'male' jobs' and 'female' jobs and indeed 'male' and 'female' family roles. It's only just been 120 years or so that the modern nuclear family has been in existence and this is culturally located in certain industrialised nations only. Pre-industrialisation in agrarian times children would have worked on the farm or in the family business as soon as they could and whereas there were distinct male and female roles as a result of physical strength and also male-privilege these are different to the make-up of so-called men's and women's work today (for example, dairying was traditionally women's work as was baking bread but when producing these staples became larger scale and divorced from many households baking became a male occupation).

Staying home with the children is not something quintessentially female and going out to work is not something indelibly male and nor is this about 'value' or 'values'. This is a very modern thing and not the case in all cultures. I'm not 'valuing' men's roles by going to work and by dreaming as a young child to have a career and being financially independent because working outside the home is not something that is 'male'.

The socialisation is definitely there though. The other day, I asked my DP whether he listened when his mother showed him how to put clothes on the line in a way that would allow them to dry quickly. He said he had no idea how his mother pegged up the washing. Compare to me as a young child when I was taught how to dust, iron, peg up washing, cook and wash floors. I was given dolls and told how to dress them all in preparation for my role as wife and mother. I was told to be deferential, polite and kind (that didn't work) because that's how girls behaved. When knocked over by boys in the playground I was told that this was what happened when one played with boys (the inference being that the swings were their spaces).

That sort of shit from a young age for boys and girls creates 'differences' that are then claimed as 'natural'.

There's just very little evidence for big differences anywhere- i think most of the time its statistically insignificant. I seem to recall significant difference in areas such as males liking round objects more than females did. Its hard to see what impact puberty has . I think you'd need to get rid of all the nurture/social impacts before you can really see what the underlying psychological differences are - and i think pointing out psychological differences of emphasises them just leaves us back into the 1950s or surrendered women area.
The fact that a lot of women want to do the traditional caring type roles doesn't tell you anything about what the true psychological bent is- we've all been brainwashed since birth that this is what women want to do so it would feel unnatural to do anything else

Feminism means that even if 99 per cent of women opted for 'traditionally feminine' (stereotypical) jobs, leisure. clothes etc. they should still have the same chances as any man to opt for stereotypically 'male' work, hobbies, clothes etc. And vice versa; it works both ways.

But am I really supposed to believe that my biological reality, coded into every gene and evolved over eons is completely irrelevant?

No-one has said this afaict. Sex is an extremely important aspect of life and affects how society is ordered. We have (I think?) all agreed that pretty much anything that disproportionately affects women - for whatever reason, whether 'innate' or via socialisation, or biology, or practicalities - is a feminist issue.

This thread has been pretty good at being an 'honest' and good-faith discussion. Would be great if we could keep it that way and take on board what people are actually saying.

So: it's been suggested that empathy is inherent to women, and systematising to men. Are there any other traits people feel strongly are linked to sex (other than clearly biological factors and aggression)?

Random thought - could it be suggested that empathy is kind of a flipside of aggression? So if you don't care about hurting feelings you might come across as aggressive (I don't mean actual violence here) and if you avoid confrontation you might come across as more empathetic? And obviously the caveat that women seem more aggressive than men when they dare to be straight-talking/bossy/etc, because they are compared to a stereotype of an empathetic norm.

Personally, I don't know where I'd put myself on any empathy scale - I can probably put myself in someone's situation quite well, but I don't always automatically do it where others do. I feel utterly flummoxed sometimes by unclear social cues and overthink them - considering almost too many options - so don't know how I come across in real life!

I've been on MN for a few years and one of the most popular subjects of threads is - well, actually it's 'I'm insulted because I've had an evening-only wedding invite'.

But a close second is 'I am really struggling with my life caring for a baby, I think I've made a huge mistake, I am not cut out for this'. Now obviously, it's not a fair sample, people who are loving it are probably not posting about how they're so happy to have achieved their dream role. But once you're a parent, unlike most other roles, you can't try it for a bit and say 'nah, actually, not for me after all'. You've got to do the best you can. So dissatisfaction is unlikely to be particularly visible/ measurable.

Or maybe it's because there is now a whole generation of women who have grown up in an era of legislative equality who really believed they could have it all. And then they had a baby.

And Scandinavia is no Nirvana. See below.

www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20190831-the-paradox-of-working-in-the-worlds-most-equal-countries

If women do have a biological imperative towards spending more time raising their children when young

i don’t think it’s confined to women. All people want to spend time with people they love. In countries where men are given the opportunity to spend time raising their kids, many of them do step up and do so and I’m sure they and their children are enriched by it. We have gay male couples adopting children and single dads raising children. This is a good thing and men can absolutely be wonderful carers. By labelling child rearing as the domain of women, we let men get away with not doing their share but we also ensure that men don’t get the opportunity to build strong relationships with their children and get involved with their care.

I was noting on a different thread that there seems to have been an influx of gender traditionalism/tradwife stuff on here and someone said where’s the proof. Well here is some (and there are many other threads too). OP’s view: women are inherently suited to caring and child rearing and become deeply unhappy when financial independence is offered to them. OP, you know that in countries that have much more equality between the sexes, like Scandinavian ones, women largely go out to work and there are very few SAHMs? The dads there also step up a bit more than some of the jokes over here that can’t look after their own kids for more than five minutes. It’s also been shown that not working generally doesn’t make women particularly happy (maybe some are happy not to be economically active but many aren’t). Seriously, feminism has been fighting against this whole “women are natural carers” bullshit and it’s implications for decades and now someone comes along on a feminism board and promotes it. Smh.

I thought there was general consensus on this thread that there were aggregate differences at a population level, specific to the society, but where the majority of both populations inhabit the same space. Of course whether they are biologically determined or heavily socialised is hard to be definitive about.

And of course I doubt anyone here is denying that there are physical differences between women and men.

Sorry maybe I missed it but the only difference I could see acknowledged on this thread so far was in relation to male aggression.

Sorry, who has been advocating that there are no differences at all between the sexes?

This discussion. This. If the debates around gender ideology have revealed anything it is that we have spend so long advocating that there is no difference at all between the sexes that we have effectively neutered womanhood. In failing to recognise that women have different biological drivers we are ignoring the lived reality of many. Yes we live in a world built by the patriarchy. Yes we are still socialised along restrictive gendered lines. But am I really supposed to believe that my biological reality, coded into every gene and evolved over eons is completely irrelevant? To borrow a phrase, I believe 'sex matters'.

I think many psychological 'differences' are socially orchestrated. When DS1 was small he was obsessed with fairy princesses. He wore a fairy princess dress with wings, he chose fairy princess comics and had a fairy princess doll that went everywhere with him. Other (small) boys used to laugh at him a lot. I had parents take me aside at a church playgroup and tell me off, for 'encouraging' him to 'be gay' [grin.]

If parents behave like this and steer their children away from their instinctively broad curiosity and interest, the effect on the child's psychology will be notable

What feminine things are women being pushed away from (and how?) And what are women being pushed to instead?

I don't think anyone has advocated pushing women towards or away from traditionally feminine things? I think like anything, try it and see if it suits you.
I think it's really bizarre to think most/all women would benefit from either.

If there is evidence this area of medicine is relatively underfunded and researched then it is fair to say women are disproportionately impacted by this and therefore equality would look like these conditions being treated comparably to other conditions.

Absolutely, and as I've already said, medical conditions and aggression is where I think there are notable sex differences.

If women do have a biological imperative towards spending more time raising their children when young

I think it's important not to conflate "women" with "mothers" (not saying you were, but treating the larger group as though they have the traits of the subset is unlikely to be beneficial).

Obviously lots of people DO think a woman's main role is, or should be, "mother". I would want to actively move away from that assumption.

Women differ. I was keen to get back to work (when babies were two weeks, not even 2 months) but I accept most women aren't like that. Also I was the higher wage earner (although we both work full time). I might well have taken longer had I had even 6 weeks at 90% pay (in those days I did not even have that). My daughters are lawyers who are married with children and work so I am seeing the next generation managing careers and families well too but I would never interfere in their decisions or those of my sons as to who stays at home if anyone does and who does what around the house. I have a way of living that works for me and plenty of other people are different - live and let live, I say. i want to live in a UK where we can all be very different from each other if we choose and are left relatively free to make our own choices.

I don't think you can really generalise but I do agree most mumsnetters thankfully support the rights of women and do not want discrimination on the basis of sex and to protect women's only spaces and also want to ensure our daughters can do "male" careers like engineering etc if they like. We have seen huge strides in the last few decades. Eg my daughters are lawyers and when I became one men out numbered women. Now it is vice versa. It was about 100 years ago when the complete ban in England on women being solicitors was lifted. Before then the Victorians used to think our brains too feeble to cope with the intellectual rigour etc etc.

I do a lot of perhaps "male" things like DIY, work under sinks at home, car stuff but that is because plenty of us women are pretty good at that (albeit I accept many are happy to leave it to their husband)

If childcare was free at point of use you'd find out how many families would prefer to have 2 parents working.

If there was no 'gender wage gap' you would find out whether some families would prefer the man to be doing more of the childcare rather than it being the person who was previously earning less (usually the woman due to being on average younger/less established in career, or being in lower paid work).

If society expected men to be more flexible in work when their kids were younger you might find that everyone stopped be discriminated against for wanting the flexibility.

I've got a trans friend. Used to be Kelly, is now Kristofer. Married to a lovely woman (bio woman), if you didn't know you'd never even be suspicious. An amazing person, went through full surgical "sex change" and absolutely supports female rights to single sex spaces. Maybe because he spent 21 years using them and has experienced hiding in the toilets to avoid a clingy man who won't accept no for an answer.

Anyway, he and I chatted a lot about his transition and part of the reason for him insisting that woman's single sex spaces should be protected is the effect testosterone had on him. He's been on it for well over a decade now and he said that in early days, all of a sudden it was like a switch was flipped in terms of strength, aggression, and sex drive. He said he found himself attracted to people he'd known for years in a sexual way, tried chatting them up? went absolutely sex mad, made a twat of himself by overreacting to things, felt the urge to punch things in anger etc until his body got used to the dose and he was able to sort of retrain himself on how to behave when he had this raging thing inside. He said he honestly believes some men are just like he was as standard. From watching how some behave, he said he recognises that from his early months on testosterone and that it's probably because they've got massive male privilege and have never found it necessary to moderate their behaviour. Because they don't care how women feel, they've never had to.

So in the UK, with statutory maternity pay and leave, and 15 or 30 hrs of subsidised childcare from age 3, is that as public policy designed to push women back to work as soon as possible? Are feminists in the UK pushing to reduce or remove this support to get women pushed back into the workplace?