Physical Vs psychological difference between the sexes

[Bumpitybumper]

So Mumsnet seems a very gender critical place when it comes to physical sex based differences. The majority don't support men competing in the female category in sporting competitions or men being allowed in single sex wards or changing rooms. The reason being men and women are so fundamentally biologically different that an ideology can't just erase these difference.

However I have noticed that the majority do not support the assertion that male and females may be psychologically different and as a class have different inclinations, behaviour and desires. Many reject the idea that girls may be drawn to different toys, subjects or types of play than boys. They reject the idea that women may naturally have predisposition as a class towards certain occupations and hobbies. They simply cannot accept that women have different desires when it comes to having children and also raising them and the role they play in providing care.

I feel like the insistence that men and women want the same things and behave in the same way is because traditional feminine occupations and interests have been so undermined, undervalued and used to repress us in a patriarchal society. Rather than explore the idea of what women have a natural biological propensity towards and seeking equal value for these things, it is easier to suggest our feminine preferences are all a result of socialisation and conditioning and actually our underlying psychology is the same as men's. This seems very dangerous to me and almost playing into the patriarchy's hands.

Am I alone is seeing this distinction in how physical and psychological differences between the sexes are viewed?

So we're agreed. The pay gap exists because men still occupy the majority of senior management positions. The substantive reason for this is the different work practises pursued by men and women.

I think a lot of people would agree with this, but it would almost certainly result in significant disparities between men and women in the workplace, as groups, in terms of ultimate salary earned and representation in senior positions.

This is a problem in a lot of sectors when you compare pay. I remember many years ago when the city I was living in decided to analyze whether they were paying women less, so they put all of their different types of positions into groups to compare. They ended up putting the workers who emptied trash bins and such (mostly men working FT) into the same band and crossing guards around schools (mainly women working PT.) It really wasn't a great comparison, but for whatever reason they say those positions, along with a few others, as being similar. I suppose because they were basically unskilled.

This is a problem in a lot of sectors when you compare pay. I remember many years ago when the city I was living in decided to analyze whether they were paying women less, so they put all of their different types of positions into groups to compare. They ended up putting the workers who emptied trash bins and such (mostly men working FT) into the same band and crossing guards around schools (mainly women working PT.) It really wasn't a great comparison, but for whatever reason they say those positions, along with a few others, as being similar. I suppose because they were basically unskilled.

Sometimes the reverse is true. For instance, hotel cleaners and hotel janitors do pretty much the same work but janitors are paid more and that job is coded male.

There is a lot of economic research on the reasons for the gender pay gap both in general and in specific occupations. The gist is that both non-discriminatory and unexplained (possibly discriminatory) causes affect it. And sometimes it's difficult to classify a reason into one of those categories.

Take promotions, for example. Women might apply less often, but then there have also been examples where women were clearly shunted away from the pipeline to promotions. So it can be more complex than any one simple explanation.

Modern Wisdom | #492 - Louise Perry - The Sexual Revolution Has Failed Everyone on Podbean, check it out! www.podbean.com/ea/dir-khfag-142b629c

This is an interesting podcast with Louise Perry about her book.

I found what she had to say about prostitution and why it so traumatises women really interesting. As they have a suppress a deep instinct for rejecting sex with men who present as poor partners. Women have a higher disgust response to sex which has to be suppressed to be a prostitute.

Also her thoughts about how we lack the language around sex having a meaningful emotional or spiritual element and so are only left with the limited language of 'consent' when we try to describe why some sexual encounters really upset or disturb women even though nothing illegal occurred.

And how our view of sex as just a recreational activity in which women have no more emotional investment than men has allowed the sex work is just work narrative, and hook up cultures where women feel used but don't have a way to express this.

I found it worth a listen.

MalagaNights · Today 20:53
Thank you, I look forward to listening to it.