Preferences dictating gender roles

[Jadefeather7]

Hi

I was hoping one of you wonderful mumsnetters could help me.

Currently in a discussion with someone who thinks preferences should dictate gender roles eg if there’s a study shows women overwhelmingly like men who are breadwinners, women should be housewives kind of thing. I want to give an example of why preferences shouldn’t determine gender roles by giving an example of a preference which we accept as one that we don’t want to promote. Can anyone think of anything? Would be so grateful!

@aztecnik

Theres a reason why some occupations are dominated by males and others dominated by females. I think nature and not nurture. Think about how many men want to work in early childcare settings and how many women want to work on a construction site.

Men are object focused and women are people focused. On average.

If you're taking that as your average you would obviously also need to consider the standard deviation to get a feeling for how tight an assumption that is likely to be. What is the standard deviation in your calculations or the study you're basing this on?

Apple31419 - I find that fascinating too. As an Indian woman I was surprised to see how much effort is put into encouraging British women into STEM areas (and after all that, apparently the numbers are still low) when it is fairly common for Indian women to get into these fields without a second thought and zero publicly funded encouragement.

I think it's the result of lots of factors as you mention. In countries with high inequality and little to no government safety net in terms of benefits, there is immense cultural significance placed on education, as it's one of the few avenues to get into secure and well paid jobs, especially if you want to emigrate somewhere else.

When I started high school, I had to choose a 'stream' that would apparently set me on my future career path. We all had to choose from Science, Commerce or Arts.
The vast majority went for Science. Lots of parental pressure involved as well because it's viewed as prestigious. (Everyone wants to eventually boast that their son or daughter is a doctor or something.)
If you're not cut out for the high grades needed for Science, but you're still clever, you went into Commerce. It's not as prestigious, but if you eventually got into senior management roles or qualified as a charted accountant that was acceptable to parents as well.
Going into Arts was considered disappointing to parents. There's a perception that if you're not smart enough to qualify for Science or Commerce, you end up in Arts. I guess because the kind of jobs in these fields tend not to pay well or be stable unless you are really lucky and have outstanding flair/talent and end up a really famous fashion designer or make it big in the film industry.

So yes, I think the economic pressures in poorer countries lead women to make different career choices compared to wealthy countries where women have more choice and freedom to work in whatever field they like and still have (overall) a relatively good standard of living.

Although it's important to remember that lots of people in India still follow their dreams and might not get into STEM fields, however, they will be less likely to be able to emigrate as non-STEM qualifications are not in demand by wealthier countries. So there's international economic influences as well. If you want to eventually move elsewhere for a better life, then you're better off going into a STEM field as that's what US, UK etc are looking for - more immigrants in these areas to fill the gaps.

I guess I should be paid to move to the Bahamas or somewhere nice where gender roles are somewhat different to the uk and being a female physicist is the norm not the exception

My nationality identity is clearly different from the one assumed in law

Anyway - I can't imagine any conceivable reason why personal preference , in conjunction with individual aptitudes and interests could be seen to be inferior to imposing roles based on some sort of average preference, regardless of aptitudes.

Also, if population preferences are deemed by these people to be relevant, they will have to do a survey on whether the population wants their choices to be dictated in this sort of manner, won't they? Oh, and last time I looked at statistics the majority in the U.K. didn't consider themselves religious so we'd better be doing away with that too hadn't we?

I meant to add - if you've not already read it, I'd recommend you read Cordelia Fine's 'Delusions of Gender', OP.

@Jadefeather7

So it’s not so much that they are drawing conclusions from observations eg all their friends like housewives so that must be universally true, it’s that they have studies in which large numbers of men and women were interviewed about sexual preferences and based on the findings from those studios they think we should have traditional gender roles because men and women have preferences for them.

Think of something the majority of the public enjoy but he doesn't - Great British Bake Off or Strictly or something. Ask him whether, since the majority like it, it should be the only option and the stuff he enjoys just not available. Then point out that restricting all women and men to certain roles because the majority at a particular moment in time expressed a preference is just as daft.

Why on earth would anyone think that what jobs people do should be dictated by sexual preference? It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

So I should choose my career based on whether a man would consider me attractive for doing it, rather than because it's a job I'd be good at?! That's a spectacularly stupud concept.

Someone needs to read up on little social history too - the fact that women were lawfully excluded from many occupations for years: medicine, law, finance, many professional sports, university education etc - which led to male domination in these areas - is seemingly utterly irrelevant??!!!

The fact that many women were forced to give up their jobs once married - again - utterly irrelevant to them becoming housewives??!!

Here’s the book: www.amazon.co.uk/What-Women-Want-What-Men-Want-ebook/dp/B001EQ62H4/ref=nodl_?tag=mumsnetforu03-21

Which apparently is based on this: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_Reports

Just start treating people like people with dignity, and respect

Only ever treat people as a group when it's totally necessary to do so. It is necessary at times to distinguish Male from female. Getting correct health care, watching out for negative stereotyping,

Are gender roles necessary ? Not in the slightest. So stop assigning gender roles based on sex. Treat people as individuals because treatment based on sex is not necessary.

@aztecnik

*But if we are hard-wired for our gender roles, wouldn't every culture have the same gender roles?

And wouldn't I be good at housework and childcare?*

Women are better at social cues, men have better spatial ability (object rotation). So they've proved empirically for decades.

Theres even stuff on sexuality and these kinds of behaviour and how it's all predetermined before birth. E.g., lesbians more masculine, gay men more feminine. Stereotypes come from somewhere don't they?

Gay men more feminine? Are you not aware of leather men and bears? Have you ever actually met a lesbian? You almost certainly have met lesbians, you just mistook them for straight women because they look like straight women.

If you think in stereotypes, stereotypes are all you see.

That book blurb doesn't seem to have anything about 'women becoming housewives', or 'sexual preferences' in the way that term is normally meant.

It sounds as though it's about differences in what men and women may typically want from sexual relationships which is an entirely different matter.

It's also based on a very small survey, in statistical terms.

Just noticed you say it's based on the Kinsey reports... surely that's not right? Those are from about 70 years ago, ffs!

Well, lots of people are paedophiles and would like to have sex with children, as well as, or instead of, living with an adult partner. They view this as part of their adult male entitlement to have and live whomever and however they want. That 'male entitlement' perspective is a very gendered one. Should their preference form the basis for social organisation?

Oh right. Your friend's 'knowledge' is based on reading one book.

That's not knowledge. He's plainly not an educated person. He has no research or critical thinking skills.

Ignore all 'I just read one book / saw one documentary, so plainly this is how the world really is' burbling in future, from him and anyone.

The book itself is over 20 years old, and clearly 'social science', not science science.

Also, never take notice of anyone who starts from a position of belief and looks only for evidence that supports that prior belief. That is not research, or education, or understanding.

When, if, he's looked into the subject he claims to be interested in, he could tell you about what he's found out. What the different current positions are, types of research undertaken, state of play in relevant academic fields.

Basically, tell him to do his own bloody homework!

@ErrolTheDragon So I think in the book/survey it was said that women showed a preference for strong men who can provide therefore based on that sexual preference he has concluded that men should be breadwinners and that leaves women with the home making role. There’s obviously social conditioning and there are plenty of women who don’t care for a man who provides. I guess that’s all I can really say to discredit his position.

Social science is not science science..I need to look into that angle. I do think the validity of the “evidence” he has brought to the table is questionable but I don’t know where to begin with that as I’m not a scientist. Thank you so much for the pointer on social sciences though.

Look into evolutionary biology and psychology. In early human society women and children were probably forced to rely on men for food, shelter and protection and that's persisted.

You don't need to begin, or do the work in the middle, or draw together conclusions at the end. This is not your project is it. It's his. Let him do the work.

He'll tell you you're wrong whatever, his mind's plainly made up and impervious to evidence, so why waste your time?

Why do you care so much, what someone so intellectually and educationally challenged, thinks? Surely a 'that's nice dear' and moving on to another subject, would suffice?

But if you're really claiming that sexual preference should determine social roles... well, there are going to be quite a few people living in stables and kennels, aren't there.

In early human society women and children were probably forced to rely on men for food, shelter and protection and that's persisted.

Ehhh I don’t think the current evidence supports this.

Yes, basically all premodern societies have gender roles but it’s not homemaker and provider like the 1950s stereotype. Both men and women were absolutely essential to providing nutrition and safety to their family, it’s just the tasks they were trained in were different (and variable across cultures). There was far too much work in any premodern society for half the populace to not work. Instead, tasks were divided Because of basic division of labor economics. It’s much easier to become expert in half of the things instead of all of them.

Older anthropology was (unsurprisingly) extremely focused on men’s domains because the researchers were almost all men. They assumed women were “cooking and rearing babies or whatever”. Once female anthropologists got in the game and studied what women were actually doing, it became clear that in most cultures women provided on average half the nutrition to the village. Rather than hunting (usually) they just do/did it more often by fishing, gathering or processing otherwise inedible foraged foods.

Also note that all cultures have included people who crosses gender role barriers and ended up expert in cross gender work role. Societies police these with violence sometimes in others they assign you a third gender (usually “non-man”), or just accept you as an outlier. Which option would your friend prefer of those 3?

I enjoyed the book “the secret of our success” for some actually well researched evolutionary social science.

I think I'd be asking him to show the link between people doing things and liking them! Most of us pay our taxes, but that's generally because the consequences of not doing so are unpleasant. Ask him whether he's ever got up and tackled a job he really, really didn't want to do. And follow up by asking whether that proves he enjoyed it. 🤷🏼‍♀️

Good grief, think about all those little girls carrying water instead of going to school!

it was said that women showed a preference for strong men who can provide therefore based on that sexual preference he has concluded that men should be breadwinners and that leaves women with the home making role.

Even if the first part re 'strong men' (whatever that may mean) was true nowadays, it wouldn't remotely follow that men should be the sole 'breadwinner' and women must be left with the 'home making' role. I don't see it would imply much more than that women tend not to like 'cocklodgers' much.

Whether its nature or nurture, fact is males are better at object rotation and navigation compared to women.

Nothing to do with the fact that boys get Lego, vehicle and STEM related toys whereas girls gets dolls and bracelet making?

OP, another great read on this topic is Angela Saini’s book ‘Inferior’, it goes through and debunks the scientific arguments given for women’s inferiority.