ORIGINAL: cAPSLOCK


I agree that stereotypes can be needlessly limiting. But your second statemnt is simply false. Especially concerning groups, which this topic is addressing. But it is often false even in the case of individuals. For example: I am a road biker. I am pretty fast, but I do not have the potential to win a race against Lance Armstrong. It is not because I have not been dedicated to the sport. I used to ride ~170 miles a week. But my body type, VO2 MAX, muscle composition, among other things I cannot control limit me.






It could be argued that there are differences in the male and female soul as well, but that is a much less quantifiable line of thought.

Still, I think it is easily quantifiable that within the scope of biology there is a difference between brain chemestry across the sexes. This may have something to do with the work men and women choose to do.



cAPS

ORIGINAL: Susan G

Hi Hans-

I didn`t say that there is a "positive" or justifying interpretation, I was just wondering if her interpretation could be biased by her former experiences. I was not there, so I just politely asked if there are possible other reasons. The way she described it 2:1 is no relevant number to treat her conclusion (that she was disregarded because she is a woman) as a fact like you do

I don't think it had anything to do with my former job experience. I started on 09.15, and was presented with a spot at a table, and a bunch of unopened boxes. No problem, I put it all together... Days went by, no supervision; no problem, I read the documentation (written and online) and made some suggestions... Started answering calls... no problem. I figured they just expected people to jump in...

Then 2 new guys were hired. They had help with setting up their PCs (even their chairs, fer cryin' out loud); they've listened in on support calls, and had at least 3 hours of individual training on the software. One also sat for 2 days next to the manager, bending his ear.

So now these guys have "bonded"; they're best of friends, and I'm still the new kid on the block! Whatever -- I do my job to the best of my ability, that's all I can do. Individually, the guys are very nice, but put them in a group, and you can almost smell the testosterone!

-Susan

ORIGINAL: gnie

Women have a rhythmic advantage. They are intrinsically connected to cycles.
Women should be better at communicating. In ancient times, while the men were out being silent on the hunt, they tended to agriculture and talked amongst themselves to keep animals away. This social capacity probably makes them more harmonious too.
Maybe the diligent observation skills of hunting gives men an advantage in aural and spatial perception.
Being aggressive, men were able to advance in all the arts, musical, culinary, whatever. That was a societal thing, and no reflection on capability. Women just weren't afforded the opportunity.

Just some random thoughts.

ORIGINAL: Susan G

So now these guys have "bonded"; they're best of friends, and I'm still the new kid on the block! Whatever -- I do my job to the best of my ability, that's all I can do. Individually, the guys are very nice, but put them in a group, and you can almost smell the testosterone!

ORIGINAL: Susan G

Hi Hugh-

I'm sorry, but this sounds sexist to me. Maybe they are bung holes, maybe they were raised as sexists themselves. Maybe it's your personality, maybe it's theirs. But the testosterone has nothing to do with it.

That's okay; I don't know how many posts you've read of mine. Read the whole thread, then post back, if you want to. I doubt you'll find anything in this thread or anything I've posted that sounds "sexist".

-Susan