That is one interesting social experiment.
To state the obvious.
Misogynistic men only trust other men with their money.
It’s wrong but they have every right, because it’s their money.
The Chinese rent white men for their privilege.
Studies have shown competence is assumed where it is undeserved.
Blame stock images IDK.
Such men consistently over-estimate their competence.
Surely it’s the arrogance effect? In the modern world we call this vice a virtue.
“a natural tendency to overrate their past performance on maths tasks by 30 per cent”
It’s terrifying how many men rate themselves as good at maths and then I have to explain 12yo level shit.
This finding is old. There are also far more compulsive liars in the male group, which somewhat explains it. In their minimizing terms, this is bluffing, like lying on a CV (illegal).
These people are the reason we blind exams. These people.
Like Is she flirting? studies all over again. Men don’t really do meta-cognition, by comparison.
This is why we have all the psychometrics. Either you can do it or GTFO.
The masculine traits are the capitalist ones: taking risks, being rude or arrogant, stepping on others, ruthless ambition, Crusaderism, many that are probably antisocial if not tempered by other stuff.
“A meta-analysis of 45 studies of leadership styles showed that women tend to exhibit many of the character traits associated with effective leadership — such as effective communication, a tendency to empower subordinates, and creative problem solving — and are more likely to adopt effective leadership styles than men.”
They’re selecting the cocky guy who relies on underlings to do his work for him. No wonder so many companies are tanking. Everyone, male or female, hates them. They’re drains, they parasite off the productive. A minority in every group or company do the bulk of the work, remember.
The problem is seeing masculinity as successful without anything to back it up on the project.
We need to upgrade our primal brain that says this man is leading us into battle.
Another part of the problem is seeing everything as gendered.
So there’s no Scientists trying to make the world a better place. Yay!
There’s male scientists trying to make the world a better place.
OK, everyone else go home and fuck the cure for cancer?
Like, what do you hope to achieve here? Rah-rahing your pompoms for part of the group?
Why do they have to do that? Ruin everything?
Supposedly, accounting for this bias statistically (with mathematical models and quotas) makes companies more efficient and meritocratic.
“Quotas can work to weed out incompetent men.”
Everyone should be overjoyed by that.
Less stupid people with power, who cares if they have a banana or fig down there?
You’d have to be really insecure to identify strongly with someone who shares a single pair of chromosomes.
HBR has noted incompetent men being promoted on the basis of bravado is an issue for companies.
Bravado and popularity over actual performance metrics.
“The new study’s authors reasoned that men especially might devalue the evidence because it threatens the legitimacy of their status in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields. Men might also be critical because of prior beliefs that gender bias is not a problem in STEM.”
But they’re proving any bias by believing that female competence is a fairytale.
Those women take exactly the same exams.
Oh, it hurts their ego? Broflakes.
“Men rated the research quality of the abstract less favorably than did women in both samples. This gender gap was especially large for STEM faculty, potentially suggesting that evidence of bias might threaten men in STEM seeking to retain their status.”
“When reading these results, a male scientist might think, “oh my gosh…if we’re going to fix this equality issue, that almost necessarily means that there’s going to be fewer opportunities for men,” said Ian Handley, lead author of the new PNAS paper and associate professor of psychology at Montana State. Handley suggested that discounting evidence more likely reflects a subtle, unconscious process than overt sexism.”
Read Freud, there’s no subtle.
They just lie about it.
The depressing thing is that STEM helps everyone and there’s literally a shortage of talent.
We can’t afford to lose any talent.
People who took it for the money though, can fuck right off.
“This mixed literature tempers the paper’s claims about strong gender bias. But obviously, the paper’s central goal was not to systematically review literature on gender bias, but rather to present studies of reactions to evidence of bias.”
“Based on the best current data, remaining challenges include sexual harassment, bias in teaching evaluations and science mentoring, and gender stereotypes about innate genius and creativity.”
That last one is part of the Genius Famine.
Women can’t be the ‘crazy’ sex and also suddenly the less creative one when studies show they’re linked.
“The new PNAS study shows that men, on average, are less likely to believe this evidence of gender bias where it exists. And that’s a concern, considering men are the current majority of STEM professors. But it’s also a concern if the evidence of gender bias is overhyped. Overhyped claims could make these fields unattractive to women or even make people less likely to believe evidence of bias when it does exist.”
Be honest in science, the musical.