Women earning more than men - has it come to Singapore?

[x9200]

It's been building for a long time, and it's going to continue that way until men move out of their gender roles.

Until a human engineering revolution on biochemistry levels is around, nothing like this is going to happen.

[Strong Eagle]

It's been building for a long time, and it's going to continue that way until men move out of their gender roles.

Until a human engineering revolution on biochemistry levels is around, nothing like this is going to happen.

You mistake sex based roles for gender assigned roles. Big difference. A very simple example: The male of the species has the full range of human emotion as does the female. Culture, however, in many macho cultures, particularly the USA, dictates that the man should just "suck it up". Displays of emotion, perhaps with the exception of anger, are unmanly. Real emotional connection is "sissified".

Try talking to a group of US male teenagers. What they have been inculcated with as a result of relentless advertising and sports figures, to name but two influences, is nothing short of amazing, and certainly not the qualities of a complete man.

[PNGMK]

I'm not articulating this very well but I found an article that does a better job...

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7655 ... tml?pg=all

[x9200]

SE, you need to visit again a kindergarten and observe 2yo children playing. Unless you claim they are already culturally conditioned and biased at this age.
We should be all equal in our rights and not forcibly made the same. We are not the same and never will be unless the condition I mentioned. It's pure biochemistry. We receive different chemical treatment starting from the womb and continuing for most of our lives. This shapes and controls our emotional responses. The emotional range, as you mentioned is probably similar, but the triger-release-standby characteristics is surely very different. And if we are different we have different preferences, also regarding the jobs.

Yes, there is a strong part based on cultural preconditioning but I guess this is the part nobody disputes here. Macho, patriarchal dominance etc. This should be controlled despite of the hormones, but go beyond this popular and rather basic frame and you will see that it has its limits. These gender assigned and sex based roles are pretty mixed up and really hard to make a clear cut.

[Hannieroo]

The whole point of feminism is that women should have the same choices and options as men. To stay at home with children or not. To have an education. To be paid the same wage for the same job.

Feminism is not saying men and women are the same. It's saying we are equal, worth as much. The fact some men and women find that difficult doesn't mean it's not how it should be. I know a fair few stay at home dad's where both are very happy.

[Wd40]

But I'm not inculcating a male gender role into my son... that's just how he is - and he will be competing against hundreds of sharp little female minds in his PSLE. The system is unfair to him - it has become biased against the slower developing male brain.

The problem is with the Singapore education system. I have mentioned this in another thread. Some kids take time for their brains to mature and these kids often thrive at the later stages of their education. PSLE is the not the stage to put pressure on these people. Take your children away to a more humane education system.

[Strong Eagle]

SE, you need to visit again a kindergarten and observe 2yo children playing. Unless you claim they are already culturally conditioned and biased at this age.
We should be all equal in our rights and not forcibly made the same. We are not the same and never will be unless the condition I mentioned. It's pure biochemistry. We receive different chemical treatment starting from the womb and continuing for most of our lives. This shapes and controls our emotional responses. The emotional range, as you mentioned is probably similar, but the triger-release-standby characteristics is surely very different. And if we are different we have different preferences, also regarding the jobs.

Yes, there is a strong part based on cultural preconditioning but I guess this is the part nobody disputes here. Macho, patriarchal dominance etc. This should be controlled despite of the hormones, but go beyond this popular and rather basic frame and you will see that it has its limits. These gender assigned and sex based roles are pretty mixed up and really hard to make a clear cut.

Again, you miss the point. Do you want someone like Bobby Knight, whose idea of "tough love" is to scream and yell, hang boxes of tampons on the lockers of players who didn't perform to his expectations and call them "pussies" teaching young men what it means to live a man's life in this world?

I sure don't... a worse role model could not be found. You think Robin Thicke, a 36 year old married man, dry humping Miley Cyrus on stage while singing a song whose lyrics suggest that forced sex is maybe OK is the kind of role model you want young men to imitate and follow?

I sure don't. I want men to be taught ways of living that supports them as men in a world where respect, love, integrity, accountability, and authenticity trump the kind of crap that passes for education these days... they don't need to be "made the same".

[kookaburrah]

SE, you need to visit again a kindergarten and observe 2yo children playing. Unless you claim they are already culturally conditioned and biased at this age.

They are. To an enormous extent. From the moment parents know the sex of a child, assumptions are made, and cultural pressures are applied, based on a perceived notion that "boys like one thing, and girls like another".

Kids in kindergarten are even more subject to this pressure, as educators cannot afford to treat each child individually, and will encourage a measure of culturally biased behaviours.

So boys will play ball and practice dominance behaviours. Girls play with dolls and develop their nurturing tendencies. Boys who bully others are taught to be better leaders. Girls who bully others are reproached for their unladylike behaviour.

In fact, i'd say that this issue would be far less problematic, if most of us had been less coached when we were 2, and just allowed to do as we pleased.

[Hannieroo]

But that is extremes. I have two very well rounded boys and a husband in a very male dominated field and none of them feel any if that is appropriate.

[x9200]

SE, you need to visit again a kindergarten and observe 2yo children playing. Unless you claim they are already culturally conditioned and biased at this age.
We should be all equal in our rights and not forcibly made the same. We are not the same and never will be unless the condition I mentioned. It's pure biochemistry. We receive different chemical treatment starting from the womb and continuing for most of our lives. This shapes and controls our emotional responses. The emotional range, as you mentioned is probably similar, but the triger-release-standby characteristics is surely very different. And if we are different we have different preferences, also regarding the jobs.

Yes, there is a strong part based on cultural preconditioning but I guess this is the part nobody disputes here. Macho, patriarchal dominance etc. This should be controlled despite of the hormones, but go beyond this popular and rather basic frame and you will see that it has its limits. These gender assigned and sex based roles are pretty mixed up and really hard to make a clear cut.

Again, you miss the point. Do you want someone like Bobby Knight, whose idea of "tough love" is to scream and yell, hang boxes of tampons on the lockers of players who didn't perform to his expectations and call them "pussies" teaching young men what it means to live a man's life in this world?

I sure don't... a worse role model could not be found. You think Robin Thicke, a 36 year old married man, dry humping Miley Cyrus on stage while singing a song whose lyrics suggest that forced sex is maybe OK is the kind of role model you want young men to imitate and follow?

I sure don't. I want men to be taught ways of living that supports them as men in a world where respect, love, integrity, accountability, and authenticity trump the kind of crap that passes for education these days... they don't need to be "made the same".

No SE, I did not miss the point. You did. Again you are talking about the macho-sissy things. Yes, I got it and never questioned it. I am just saying it is (as always) a bit more complex than people tend to think it is. You talk about this like there is a full interchangeability in any gender assigned job/social roles. There is not. Period. And this has nothing to do with the cultural macho upbringing.
But ok, lets stick to this basic layer. So how would you change the education system to remove this cultural bias? You said also "these days". Was the education 25-50y ago less biased?

[x9200]

SE, you need to visit again a kindergarten and observe 2yo children playing. Unless you claim they are already culturally conditioned and biased at this age.

They are. To an enormous extent. From the moment parents know the sex of a child, assumptions are made, and cultural pressures are applied, based on a perceived notion that "boys like one thing, and girls like another".

Kids in kindergarten are even more subject to this pressure, as educators cannot afford to treat each child individually, and will encourage a measure of culturally biased behaviours.

So boys will play ball and practice dominance behaviours. Girls play with dolls and develop their nurturing tendencies. Boys who bully others are taught to be better leaders. Girls who bully others are reproached for their unladylike behaviour.

In fact, i'd say that this issue would be far less problematic, if most of us had been less coached when we were 2, and just allowed to do as we pleased.

That young (and younger) boys tend to run around separately. Girls tend to sit together and play. Girls are more social from the infancy age. Boys are less. I don't see too much cultural impact at such young age.

[Hannieroo]

My boys had strollers and baby dolls. Play kitchens. They enjoyed them. I think both sexes enjoy copying what they see around them. But it did become clear that there were some differences when one if them, aged 3, stripped his toy Dyson down and made a gun out of it.

[kookaburrah]

Are you taking about 2yo boys or girls? That young (and younger) boys tend to run around separately. Girls tend to sit together and play. Girls are more social from the infancy age. Boys are less.

That may even be a tendency. But because we have come to expect it, these will be reinforced. Boys who don't run, will be encouraged to, girls will be grouped together and expected to sit. This is not necessarily bad, or wrong. But not only it standardises gender roles, but it promotes a culture that penalises outliers (another topic for another long long thread).

[x9200]

Mine (almost 3) is either exploring or running around if all already explored. Not too social so far. He doesn't have too many dolls becasue he was never interested in them (teddy bears included).

[Hannieroo]

Both of mine are and were very social but you have to factor in other things. Family genetics count too.