Do liberals actually believe that there are no innate behavioral differences between men and women?

[Visbek]

Are the new wave liberals' attempts to declare that men and women have no differences, purely held for political justification of current stances?

As noted, there is no single "liberal" stance.

That said: The biological evidence is pretty clear that in most cases, the behavioral differences between men and women are rather small. Daphna Joel demolishes that nonsense pretty thoroughly in her book Gender Mosaic.

The only exception I can think of is in criminal behavior. For example, in the US, men are arrested for 75% of crimes; of that, nearly 90% of homicide arrests are men, and 99% of rape arrests are by men. But even that is biased by social norms, as police are less likely to arrest women who are engaged in criminal acts, or men are even less likely than women to report or demand prosecution for rape. Men, in turn, are basically trained from day 1 to act more violently and aggressively.

We're also talking about a pretty small subset of Americans. For example, there are 11,000 homicide arrests per year. That is 0.003% of the population. Even if that number is off by an order of magnitude, that's not necessarily going to reflect the population as a whole.

It's also a shrinking subset of Americans, by the way. Crime rates were cut in half between 1991 and 2015. There's no way the cause of that dramatic drop in crime was due to any sort of inherent biological factors. We know that social forces can dramatically reduce crime, so why is it unthinkable that the comparative rate of men and women committing crimes has social influences as well?

Anyway. Historical evidence also makes it very clear that societal expectations and norms have a significant impact on behavior. E.g. in Medieval Europe, it was assumed that women were sexually aggressive, and it's evident this had myriad impacts on everyone's behavior -- in the same way that assumptions that "men are sexually aggressors" today influences everyone's behavior.

In fact, Europeans and Americans spent centuries claiming that women were inherently inferior to men, in whatever way was seen as inferior at the time. It's pretty clear that anyone claiming this has a biological basis is just indulging in the same rampant misogyny as in the past.

There has been study after study showing the differences in the brains of men and women and yet, many liberals seem to think none of this matters.

Most of those studies are either BS, or vastly exaggerate the differences in ways that don't actually explain the alleged behavioral differences. In many cases, the researchers are trying to jam a poll finding into a pre-determined conclusion.

For example, international research shows that women are slightly more likely than men to exhibit neurotic behavior. But the difference is a) quite small, and b) only an aggregate -- meaning there are many men who are more neurotic than many women.

In turn, these alleged differences do not explain why girls perform better than boys in STEM fields, but don't wind up in STEM careers. In contrast, there's an abundance of evidence that women are driven out of STEM fields by discrimination, sexism, misogyny, and so forth.

Are the innate differences between men and women?

Yes. But the importance of those differences is vastly exaggerated by sexism and misogyny.

Should these differences help inform society and political policy?

The minor, exaggerated, fabricated, sexist beliefs should not be the basis of public policy. Fighting against them, in contrast, should inform policy.

Aren't you glad you asked?

 

[MAGAnificent]

Are the new wave liberals' attempts to declare that men and women have no differences, purely held for political justification of current stances?

Or do they actually believe this?

Put another way, are liberals' demands that mens' behavior is purely due to environmental factors only held for political purposes?

Do liberals actually believe men and women would behave the same if only society treated them the same way?

There has been study after study showing the differences in the brains of men and women and yet, many liberals seem to think none of this matters.

What do you all think?

Are the innate differences between men and women?

Should these differences help inform society and political policy?

Basically, they are just trolling for votes in the LGBTQ community.

 

[Bodecea]

Are the new wave liberals' attempts to declare that men and women have no differences, purely held for political justification of current stances?

Or do they actually believe this?

Put another way, are liberals' demands that mens' behavior is purely due to environmental factors only held for political purposes?

Do liberals actually believe men and women would behave the same if only society treated them the same way?

There has been study after study showing the differences in the brains of men and women and yet, many liberals seem to think none of this matters.

What do you all think?

Are the innate differences between men and women?

Should these differences help inform society and political policy?

Nurture.

 

[Bodecea]

Basically, they are just trolling for votes in the LGBTQ community.

 

[PoliticalDJ101]

I know of absolutely zero liberals, or anyone for that matter, who believe 'that there are no innate behavioral differences between men and women'.

There are some on this forum

 

[PoliticalDJ101]

Nurture.

Are you right or left leaning?

 

[PoliticalDJ101]

As noted, there is no single "liberal" stance.

That said: The biological evidence is pretty clear that in most cases, the behavioral differences between men and women are rather small. Daphna Joel demolishes that nonsense pretty thoroughly in her book Gender Mosaic.

At least you don't deny their existence like many. Any there are numerous differences by the way. The differences are small when compared to differences between let's say a chimpanzee's and a human's behavior, yes. Also, we are mostly similar to our opposite sex humans simply by the mere fact that we are both human. However, the few differences we do have, are important. That's what folks like you try to ignore.

The only exception I can think of is in criminal behavior. For example, in the US, men are arrested for 75% of crimes; of that, nearly 90% of homicide arrests are men, and 99% of rape arrests are by men. But even that is biased by social norms, as police are less likely to arrest women who are engaged in criminal acts, or men are even less likely than women to report or demand prosecution for rape. Men, in turn, are basically trained from day 1 to act more violently and aggressively.

Typical that you would only want to admit negative differences of it puts the men in a negative light. Classic

We're also talking about a pretty small subset of Americans. For example, there are 11,000 homicide arrests per year. That is 0.003% of the population. Even if that number is off by an order of magnitude, that's not necessarily going to reflect the population as a whole.

It's also a shrinking subset of Americans, by the way. Crime rates were cut in half between 1991 and 2015. There's no way the cause of that dramatic drop in crime was due to any sort of inherent biological factors. We know that social forces can dramatically reduce crime, so why is it unthinkable that the comparative rate of men and women committing crimes has social influences as well?

Absolutely social policies like defunding the police while simultaneously decriminalizing shop lifting (be use criminals won't be prosecuted and their previous crimes will no longer be considered crimes), printing more free money, improving education, providing more jobs, and so on, are going to decrease crime rates. No one is arguing against that.

Anyway. Historical evidence also makes it very clear that societal expectations and norms have a significant impact on behavior. E.g. in Medieval Europe, it was assumed that women were sexually aggressive, and it's evident this had myriad impacts on everyone's behavior -- in the same way that assumptions that "men are sexually aggressors" today influences everyone's behavior.

Absolutely society can have an impact on behavior

Most of those studies are either BS, or vastly exaggerate the differences in ways that don't actually explain the alleged behavioral differences. In many cases, the researchers are trying to jam a poll finding into a pre-determined conclusion.

Not true. But the left has been trying to disallow any new research that goes against their views in recent years

For example, international research shows that women are slightly more likely than men to exhibit neurotic behavior. But the difference is a) quite small, and b) only an aggregate -- meaning there are many men who are more neurotic than many women.

Yes this is true, women are generally more neurotic than men

In turn, these alleged differences do not explain why girls perform better than boys in STEM fields, but don't wind up in STEM careers. In contrast, there's an abundance of evidence that women are driven out of STEM fields by discrimination, sexism, misogyny, and so forth.

Actually it's because women are more interested in people and men are more interested in things. It's all about differences in interest. How are these concepts regarding sex differences so difficult to grasp?

Yes. But the importance of those differences is vastly exaggerated by sexism and misogyny.

Not really. It's just viewed that way whenever folks share facts, because it hurts feelings.

The minor, exaggerated, fabricated, sexist beliefs should not be the basis of public policy. Fighting against them, in contrast, should inform policy.

Again facts are sexist, they don't know how to be

 

[choiceone]

Because those exceptions are a result of errors in the biological process. They don't help move the species forward through reproduction. Life evolves forward through reproduction.

Persons are not of value because they help move the species forward through reproduction. They are of value for their qualities and acts as persons.

 

[PoliticalDJ101]

Persons are not of value because they help move the species forward through reproduction. They are of value for their qualities and acts as persons.

I don't disagree, so what's you're point?

 

[Hamish Howl]

So OP is basically dithering about on the idea that people should be forced to accept certain roles in life.

Yawn.

 

[BrotherFease]

You don't think there are differences between biological men and women?

Do you lean more liberal or more conservative do you think?

I am asking you which liberals believes there's no biological differences between men and women.

My badge makes it very clear. I am a "moderate". I am a registered Republican, if that means anything to you.

 

[PoliticalDJ101]

I am asking you which liberals believes there's no biological differences between men and women.

I don't remember their names, but I suppose I assumed they were liberals due to the idiocy of liberals these days

My badge makes it very clear. I am a "moderate". I am a registered Republican, if that means anything to you.

I don't know what you mean by badge? You're picture?

 

[NolanVoyd]

P

idiocy of liberals these days

But you guys support Trump.......the most idiotic and unpatriotic thing an American can do.

 

[PoliticalDJ101]

P

But you guys support Trump.......the most idiotic and unpatriotic thing an American can do.

Ok, so I used to think Trump was evil until I realized that the media were manipulating what he was saying. Do you have any evidence that he's bad? It became clear to me that he isn't the best public speaker, but wasn't quite the evil person the media has made him out to be.

 

[BrotherFease]

I don't remember their names, but I suppose I assumed they were liberals due to the idiocy of liberals these days

Why did you ask such a question then? You claim that liberals deny that there's biological differences between men and women. I ask you to list such liberals, but you decided to punt. This is why I ask the question. I need to know their actual argument is.

I don't know what you mean by badge? You're picture?

Look to the left of you. It's say my user name and political ideology on it. That's my badge.

 

[NolanVoyd]

Ok, so I used to think Trump was evil until I realized that the media were manipulating what he was saying.

listen to him in him in his own words.

Do you have any evidence that he's bad?

lol.

It became clear to me that he isn't the best public speaker, but wasn't quite the evil person the media has made him out to be.

He is the single worst president this great nation has ever had. By miles. Historians agree.

The first president in all of American History that didn't oversee a peaceful transfer of power.

He attempted a coup for Christ's sake

These are just facts.

History will not be kind to you people.

Most of you will probably deny to your grandkids that you ever supported him.

 

[BrotherFease]

listen to him in him in his own words.


lol.

He is the single worst president this great nation has ever had. By miles. Historians agree.

The first president in all of American History that didn't oversee a peaceful transfer of power.

He attempted a coup for Christ's sake

These are just facts.

History will not be kind to you people.

Most of you will probably deny to your grandkids that you ever supported him.

The thread is about these so-called liberals who think there's no biological differences between men and women. A point OP cannot back up.

 

[NolanVoyd]

The thread is about these so-called liberals who think there's no biological differences between men and women. A point OP cannot back up.

I know.

I was responding to a specific post by a specific poster. Did you miss that?

 

[PoliticalDJ101]

Why did you ask such a question then? You claim that liberals deny that there's biological differences between men and women. I ask you to list such liberals, but you decided to punt. This is why I ask the question. I need to know their actual argument is.

I've been in arguments with several folks that appeared liberal who at one point or another tried to claim there are no differences between men and women. Roguenuke I think was one. Hamish Howl might be another. Ginger Ale might be another. I think there were more too. It's been a bit of a whirlwind.

Look to the left of you. It's say my user name and political ideology on it. That's my badge.

Maybe I'm just blind (see image)

 

[BrotherFease]

I know.

I was responding to a specific post by a specific poster. Did you miss that?

I did not miss that. I just think you're going to push the conversation into a different direction.

 

[NolanVoyd]

I did not miss that. I just think you're going to push the conversation into a different direction.

Ok.

 

[BrotherFease]

I've been in arguments with several folks that appeared liberal who at one point or another tried to claim there are no differences between men and women. Roguenuke I think was one. Hamish Howl might be another. Ginger Ale might be another. I think there were more too. It's been a bit of a whirlwind.

Maybe I'm just blind (see image)
View attachment 67505063

My badge says "political leanings: Moderate". Look to the left of this message.

None of the people who you mention argue that there's no biological differences.

 

[PoliticalDJ101]

listen to him in him in his own words.

I listened to the short clips the news usually does of him and then I was told that actually the media doesn't show the whole clip on purpose so that you can't understand the context of what he's saying. I went back and watched whole videos on YouTube and saw what they meant. It was clear that he is usually self obsessed and a braggart in his speeches, which is shameful, but it's also so far seemed pretty clear that he is.mjsunderstood, he wants the country to be better, he believes in his policies, that many of his policies were much better than Biden and so on.

lol.

He is the single worst president this great nation has ever had. By miles. Historians agree.

I sometimes feel Biden is giving him a run for his money on that level.

The first president in all of American History that didn't oversee a peaceful transfer of power.

He attempted a coup for Christ's sake

That's questionable. I watched those videos too. He was certainly calling for protests. He never actually told them to do anything. What was shamefully to me was that he waited so long to call them off.

 

[PoliticalDJ101]

My badge says "political leanings: Moderate". Look to the left of this message.

None of the people who you mention argue that there's no biological differences.

They certainly appeared to at first in some arguments. Granted, when I cornered then with facts, they changed the subject, backed off or just said "well there are exceptions".

I don't know how to look to the left of a message I guess. It might be because I'm on a phone

 

[NolanVoyd]

I listened to the short clips the news usually does of him and then I was told that actually the media doesn't show the whole clip on purpose so that you can't understand the context of what he's saying.

Listen to his entire speaches at his rallies and his entire interviews.

I went back and watched whole videos on YouTube and saw what they meant. It was clear that he is usually self obsessed and a braggart in his speeches, which is shameful, but it's also so far seemed pretty clear that he is.mjsunderstood, he wants the country to be better, he believes in his policies, that many of his policies were much better than Biden and so on.

I sometimes feel Biden is giving him a run for his money on that level.

That's questionable.

No it's a fact.

I watched those videos too. He was certainly calling for protests. He never actually told them to do anything. What was shamefully to me was that he waited so long to call them off.

That doesn't matter. The coup plot was much more then his speech at the elipse......it was his actions, the fake electors crimes, his phone calls, his lack of action when it was happening. Etc.

The evidence is overwhelming. Undeniable.

They have him dead to rights.