In their discussion of the intersections among policy, scientific investigation, gender, and identity, I endorse this observation made by Jonny Anomaly and Brian Boutwell at Quillette:
Two things can be true simultaneously: women and men can differ on average for certain traits, and any given man or woman might possess talents, interests, and abilities that suit them well for certain careers and hobbies, and less so for others.
As Pinker has argued, “it is crucial to distinguish the moral proposition that people should not be discriminated against on account of their sex — which I take to be the core of feminism — and the empirical claim that males and females are biologically indistinguishable… Whatever the facts turn out to be, they should not be taken to compromise the core of feminism.â€
Most importantly for our current discussion, charges of sexism should not be launched against people who have argued for the existence of differences between men and women. And “sexist†should not be a catchall term used to describe any verbal misstep, lewd comment, or even crass joke. Real sexism is far more insidious than that — despite how distasteful we might find any of those behaviors to be. Charges of sexism should be restricted to systematic mistreatment of people based simply on their biological sex, or the gender with which they identify.
Sadly, that’s not much of a guide for policy because of disparate impact and the unbridged gap between gender and identity. Most biological females of childbearing age have a reasonable concern that they might become pregnant. Biological males do not regardless of the gender with which they identify.
Tailoring policies based on the least common denominator will necessarily discriminate in their impact.
There is a similar issue having to do with race. For example, so much of the medical research in the United States has been about people of European descent that policies tailored to conform to that research may implicitly discriminate against people who are not of European descent. Policymakers may not even have the ability to determine when they’re discriminating.
Having babies changes things. I have tried repeatedly to mentor one of our women into a future leadership position. Then, they have that first baby. Sigh. Ok, in the case of the one whose husband has no outside the home job, it was the second baby, who has issues. Granted, my N is not huge, but it is certainly a common enough complaint. We still end up with women in leadership positions throughout our hospital, but I suspect it is even more if the initial pool is larger.
As an aside, if you are in a smallish corporation, we sit just a bit over 100 people, you are acutely aware of what the effects of pregnancy do to your work force. For small specialized groups where it is hard to find replacements or fill ins, it makes me want to be sure I don’t balance too heavily towards females.
Steve
Way off topic, But Chicago, Why do you call your mayor “Godfather”?
Just want to know. Is he big, dangerous man?
I don’t know that we call him that. People in the national press, particularly people who don’t like him, call him that.
I’ve met him. Stood next to him in the elevator. He’s a little shrimp of a guy, foul-mouthed, tough-talking but IMO all hat and no cattle.
Looks GAY GAY GAY to me,
Steve,
I think you’re right, judging by the women I know in the military (to include my wife). We have three kids and despite the fact that I was the at-home parent for most of the time (childcare for the other times), it was tough for her to compete – and have the will to compete – with men who had no such worries. Add in her 8 month bout with postpartum depression following the third child and it really capped her career options. She retires in six months and is glad, ecstatic actually, to GTFO, but I think a cognitively and intellectually equivalent man would be in a different and better position from a career standpoint simply due to the kids, social differences and normal biological differences between the sexes regarding children.
I’m not sure how society or government can “fix” this kind of problem and frankly I’m not really sure if it is a problem. I’m not one that subscribes to the notion that differential outcomes is a sure sign of a systemic or blatant “ism.”
His sunken eyes and other facial features, and hairstyle choice, make him look more Vinnie than Rahm, Gray. And as pointed out, his outsized bravado reveals a short man complex. Some refer to him as “tiny dancer” for his ballet background.