A meta-study of 46 other studies is not anecdotes. Meta-studies are considered the best way to get a true analysis of something.
“Meta-analysis is a research process used to systematically synthesize or merge the findings of single, independent studies, using statistical methods to calculate an overall or ‘absolute’ effect.2 Meta-analysis does not simply pool data from smaller studies to achieve a larger sample size. Analysts use well recognized, systematic methods to account for differences in sample size, variability (heterogeneity) in study approach and findings (treatment effects) and test how sensitive their results are to their own systematic review protocol (study selection and statistical analysis).”
“The history of sex-difference research is rife with innumeracy, misinterpretation, publication bias, weak statistical power, inadequate controls and worse.”
As per the Wall Street Journal article (and myriad other data), I already linked you, your assessment about 5 programmers is just wrong. You saying it doesn’t actually make it true.
As seems to be the pattern, I’ve provided science, data, research, journalism from reputable sources, etc., and you’ve provided your pathetic personal opinion supported by absolutely nothing other than the fact that chimps have physical differences. First off, we aren’t chimps. Secondly, I’ve already stipulated to physical differences.
In the Na society that I’ve already spoken about, the women are out farming, so it’s the men who mostly care for the animals and quite often the children. They aren’t even caring for their own offspring, because children don’t live in the same house as their fathers — the concept of fatherhood is irrelevant to them. They are caring for the children of their sisters, cousins, nieces, etc.
“Boys think nothing of looking after their baby sisters, or taking their toddler brothers by the hand everywhere. I was once made to wait before talking business with an elderly Mosuo man until he had bathed his family’s twin baby girls and changed their nappies.”
Women in ancient Egypt weren’t in the marketplaces conducting business and legal transactions while the men stayed home and did the weaving because they had no other way to survive. Throughout time and around the world, women were integral parts of the economy and held equal power in society. It was only with the onset of patriarchy that this changed. Patriarchy is a social system that’s less than 10K years old. That’s about 3% of human history.
The Trope of The Farmer’s Daughter
How gender inequality was cemented by plowed agriculture
medium.com
“In 2013, a group of Harvard and UCLA economists did a unique study that established that the plow has had a great impact on our beliefs about men and women and about female freedom and autonomy. This is not only true in places that currently have plowed agriculture, but is still true in urban centers that once had it. Societies with a connection to plowed agriculture, as distinct from land worked with hoes or sticks, generations later still have markedly lower levels of female participation in politics and the labor force, and they rank high on the embrace of markedly gender-biased attitudes.
Sociologist Rae Blumberg has pointed out that it is only for less than 3% of human history and in this one type of agrarian society, that women have become fundamentally dependent on men. Plowed agriculture turned on its head the prior dynamic of women as competent, self-sufficient primary producers who make their own decisions relatively autonomously.
For hunter-gatherers and in other types of agricultural economies, what women did was a huge contribution to the wellbeing of the family and the society, and they did it outdoors. In both paddy and hoe fields, female labor was vital, and a woman’s social status mirrored her indispensable contributions. Without her, no one would eat.
The authors of the study observed that beliefs from plow-cultures were inherently “sticky” and that even years later were used as a kind of shortcut to not have to evaluate people and situations as individuals. Instead, it’s more expedient to decide that “women are not good at X.”
Far from being a universal and timeless societal dynamic, man as provider and head of a two-parent family is simply an extension of one recent and distinct type of culture made possible by certain conditions.”
I’ll reiterate once again — I’ve got neuroscience, anthropology, archeology, sociology, history, etc., and you’ve got your unsupported opinion. I think we’re done here.
