I quoted “gender equality paradox” for a reason. It is a real thing, not some concept I conceived of–It has a Wikipedia entry, for fuck’s sake. I’ll quote the first paragraph, but please stop being so intellectually lazy and actually look up the whole thing yourself, instead of wallowing in your haughty condescension:
The gender-equality paradox is the finding that various gender differences in personality and occupational choice are larger in more gender equal countries. Larger differences are found in Big Five personality traits, Dark Triad traits, self-esteem, depression, personal values, occupational and educational choices. This phenomenon is seemingly paradoxical because one would expect the differences to be reduced as countries become more gender egalitarian.[1] Such a paradox has been discussed by numerous studies ranging from science, mathematics, reading, personality traits, basic human values and vocational interests.
You have no facts to speak of
No facts you’re willing to admit exist, despite being both present and easily-accessible, you mean. You can’t will them out of existence, no matter how much you wish you could.
and it is clear you think sexism is status quo
No, what’s clear is that you assume any sex disparity is caused by sexism, the sociological version of the creationist’s ‘god of the gaps’ argument, where God is similarly conveniently spackled into any crevice not already filled.
Listen, citing a theory on Wikipedia which was disproven by the statistics I shared is not proof of anything. Your thought pattern is eerily similar to the justifications used against suffrage and women’s right to vote.
The paradox is not a paradox at all. Cultural indoctrination explains why this happens. It is clear that you are using this theory to justify sexism in your mind. This is the only lazy thinking that is happening here.
I will reiterate you have no facts only an easily disproven theory. A theory that cites pseudo-science like personality types. While entertaining it is no different than other asinine postulations like astrology.
I won’t even entertain how stupid you get with the gods of gap nonsense. You have no foundation in understanding sexism which is painfully obvious. I would highly suggest reading up on sexism so you can have a real discussion about this in the future.
It’s not a “theory”, it was what the research found. It just doesn’t confirm your biases, so you strain your wrist with how hard you desperately try to handwave it out of existence. Ironically another similarity to the young earth creationist playbook: “evolution is just a theory”, lol.
pseudo-science like personality types
no different than other asinine postulations like astrology
LMAO, better let Nature know you know better what real science is. What a hack journal, right?
Incredible.
Facts:
Scandinavia is more egalitarian than the US re sex. In other words, less sexism overall.
To mention just two examples, the skew of men over women in engineering, and the skew of women over men in nursing, are both STEEPER in Scandinavia than in the US.
Explain how, if sexism is the reason for the skew in the first place, it can be that less sexism widens the gap. Be specific.
You don’t even know it is a theory… I am dumbfounded.
“The construction industry continues to be predominately male with structures and norms that impede women from pursuing careers within the industry. As mentioned above, the SCB (2019) report showed that the construction industry in Sweden consists of only 11 per cent women.”
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, approximately 14% of construction workers [are] female.
Oh, look at that, it’s exactly what I just said: the country with MORE gender equality overall, Sweden, has the LARGER gender skew. Construction is MORE male-dominated in Sweden than in the US.
So, once more:
Explain how, if sexism is the reason for the gap in the first place, it can be that less sexism leads to a wider gap (which you just unwittingly proved is the case). Be specific.
Sweden is still a sexist society that is not attempting to deal with that issue just like the US. Although their laws are way better, culturally they still have a long way to go. Please see Norway for a country actually trying to dismantle sexism.
So once more you don’t know what the fuck you are talking about. Hell, you probably can’t even define sexism.
"* Although Sweden is considered progressive, some argue that subtle forms of sexism can still exist in workplaces or social interactions, like gender stereotypes about appearance or leadership roles.
Representation in certain fields:
While overall gender equality is high, some industries might still show imbalances in gender representation, particularly in leadership positions."
Nobody said there was zero sexism in Sweden. I’m talking in relative terms. All that’s needed to make my point is for Sweden to be less sexist than the US. And it is–in fact, it’s top 4 in the world on gender equality indexes.
The fact, again, is that countries that are more egalitarian re sex have been found to exhibit, as was just evidenced, steeper sex skews in the workforce, than less egalitarian countries.
This roundly refutes the assumption that sexism is the primary cause of the skew’s existence. If it was, reducing sexism would narrow the gap, not widen it.
I realize this fact doesn’t confirm your biases, but it is the fact of the matter nonetheless.
Culturally Sweden may be more or less sexist than the US. As you demonstrated apparently when it comes to the construction field the US is less sexist than Sweden.
I have already provided evidence in the form of Norway that disputes your pet theory. So it is clear it is not universal and certainly not the law you think it is.
You really don’t understand sexism or the cultural indoctrination that causes it. You conflate progressive laws with sexism itself which, I have already said, is nonsensical. Having progressive laws does not suddenly end sexism.
I realize that you have probably never confronted your bias and recognized you are a sexist human being like I have.
Culturally Sweden may be more or less sexist than the US.
Nah, the research has been done, the data is in. There is no “may”.
But why don’t we push my argument as far as it can go and look at the country rated literally #1 in the world for gender equality, Iceland? It’s had that distinction for well over a decade, so it’s no flash in the pan you can accuse of being cherry-picked.
Well, it turns out that according to Iceland’s most recent national census, the percentage of women in construction in the most gender equal country on the planet is SIX.
I have already provided evidence in the form of Norway that disputes your pet theory.
You cherry picked a country that has had national gender quotas since 2003–what, think I wouldn’t notice your sneaky little maneuver? You’re not going to get good information about what men and women freely choose to do for a living in a country that literally directly manipulates the sex ratio in the workforce.
You conflate progressive laws with sexism itself
No, you’re the one who does that, because you’re the one that assumes that the gap is in and of itself evidence of sexism. In reality, the evidence clearly shows that with less sexism, which translates to men and women being more empowered to make their own free choice about what they want to do for a living, men and women’s average differences in preference of career manifests more strongly.
Your insistence that there is zero difference of preference between the sexes, and that therefore anything but a 50/50 ratio in an industry is indicative of sexism, is complete bunk.
Men and women are not identical, no matter how much of a tantrum you throw. In the country consistently regarded as being the most gender equal, construction is dramatically more male-dominated than in the average country.
Having progressive laws does not suddenly end sexism.
No one said it did. But you’re arguing that progressive laws INCREASE sexism! lmao
Your goofball ‘logic’ would place Iceland among the LEAST gender equal countries, closer to Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia than the US! Do you really not understand how you are literally arguing that up is down?
I quoted “gender equality paradox” for a reason. It is a real thing, not some concept I conceived of–It has a Wikipedia entry, for fuck’s sake. I’ll quote the first paragraph, but please stop being so intellectually lazy and actually look up the whole thing yourself, instead of wallowing in your haughty condescension:
No facts you’re willing to admit exist, despite being both present and easily-accessible, you mean. You can’t will them out of existence, no matter how much you wish you could.
No, what’s clear is that you assume any sex disparity is caused by sexism, the sociological version of the creationist’s ‘god of the gaps’ argument, where God is similarly conveniently spackled into any crevice not already filled.
Listen, citing a theory on Wikipedia which was disproven by the statistics I shared is not proof of anything. Your thought pattern is eerily similar to the justifications used against suffrage and women’s right to vote.
The paradox is not a paradox at all. Cultural indoctrination explains why this happens. It is clear that you are using this theory to justify sexism in your mind. This is the only lazy thinking that is happening here.
I will reiterate you have no facts only an easily disproven theory. A theory that cites pseudo-science like personality types. While entertaining it is no different than other asinine postulations like astrology.
I won’t even entertain how stupid you get with the gods of gap nonsense. You have no foundation in understanding sexism which is painfully obvious. I would highly suggest reading up on sexism so you can have a real discussion about this in the future.
https://eige.europa.eu/publications-resources/toolkits-guides/sexism-at-work-handbook/part-1-understand/where-does-sexism-come?language_content_entity=en
https://www.bu.edu/antiracism-center/files/2022/06/Sexism.pdf
https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-oppression/
It’s not a “theory”, it was what the research found. It just doesn’t confirm your biases, so you strain your wrist with how hard you desperately try to handwave it out of existence. Ironically another similarity to the young earth creationist playbook: “evolution is just a theory”, lol.
LMAO, better let Nature know you know better what real science is. What a hack journal, right?
Incredible.
Facts:
Explain how, if sexism is the reason for the skew in the first place, it can be that less sexism widens the gap. Be specific.
You don’t even know it is a theory… I am dumbfounded.
“The construction industry continues to be predominately male with structures and norms that impede women from pursuing careers within the industry. As mentioned above, the SCB (2019) report showed that the construction industry in Sweden consists of only 11 per cent women.”
You are so full of shit it is not even funny.
I think we are done pretending you know anything.
lol…do you sink in mercury?
Meanwhile, in the US:
Oh, look at that, it’s exactly what I just said: the country with MORE gender equality overall, Sweden, has the LARGER gender skew. Construction is MORE male-dominated in Sweden than in the US.
So, once more:
Explain how, if sexism is the reason for the gap in the first place, it can be that less sexism leads to a wider gap (which you just unwittingly proved is the case). Be specific.
Sweden is still a sexist society that is not attempting to deal with that issue just like the US. Although their laws are way better, culturally they still have a long way to go. Please see Norway for a country actually trying to dismantle sexism.
So once more you don’t know what the fuck you are talking about. Hell, you probably can’t even define sexism.
"* Although Sweden is considered progressive, some argue that subtle forms of sexism can still exist in workplaces or social interactions, like gender stereotypes about appearance or leadership roles.
Representation in certain fields:
While overall gender equality is high, some industries might still show imbalances in gender representation, particularly in leadership positions."
Nobody said there was zero sexism in Sweden. I’m talking in relative terms. All that’s needed to make my point is for Sweden to be less sexist than the US. And it is–in fact, it’s top 4 in the world on gender equality indexes.
The fact, again, is that countries that are more egalitarian re sex have been found to exhibit, as was just evidenced, steeper sex skews in the workforce, than less egalitarian countries.
This roundly refutes the assumption that sexism is the primary cause of the skew’s existence. If it was, reducing sexism would narrow the gap, not widen it.
I realize this fact doesn’t confirm your biases, but it is the fact of the matter nonetheless.
Culturally Sweden may be more or less sexist than the US. As you demonstrated apparently when it comes to the construction field the US is less sexist than Sweden.
I have already provided evidence in the form of Norway that disputes your pet theory. So it is clear it is not universal and certainly not the law you think it is.
You really don’t understand sexism or the cultural indoctrination that causes it. You conflate progressive laws with sexism itself which, I have already said, is nonsensical. Having progressive laws does not suddenly end sexism.
I realize that you have probably never confronted your bias and recognized you are a sexist human being like I have.
Nah, the research has been done, the data is in. There is no “may”.
But why don’t we push my argument as far as it can go and look at the country rated literally #1 in the world for gender equality, Iceland? It’s had that distinction for well over a decade, so it’s no flash in the pan you can accuse of being cherry-picked.
Well, it turns out that according to Iceland’s most recent national census, the percentage of women in construction in the most gender equal country on the planet is SIX.
You cherry picked a country that has had national gender quotas since 2003–what, think I wouldn’t notice your sneaky little maneuver? You’re not going to get good information about what men and women freely choose to do for a living in a country that literally directly manipulates the sex ratio in the workforce.
No, you’re the one who does that, because you’re the one that assumes that the gap is in and of itself evidence of sexism. In reality, the evidence clearly shows that with less sexism, which translates to men and women being more empowered to make their own free choice about what they want to do for a living, men and women’s average differences in preference of career manifests more strongly.
Your insistence that there is zero difference of preference between the sexes, and that therefore anything but a 50/50 ratio in an industry is indicative of sexism, is complete bunk.
Men and women are not identical, no matter how much of a tantrum you throw. In the country consistently regarded as being the most gender equal, construction is dramatically more male-dominated than in the average country.
No one said it did. But you’re arguing that progressive laws INCREASE sexism! lmao
Your goofball ‘logic’ would place Iceland among the LEAST gender equal countries, closer to Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia than the US! Do you really not understand how you are literally arguing that up is down?