Reply to Re: Let's talk terrorism
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
I was talking about the physical brain, actually because the physical brain is where everything is stored. It's greatly complex and we still don't fully understand it, but it's certainly not a "rather disgusting mass".
Only a zombie could find a brain aesthetically pleasing. It's an important disgusting mass, though, to be sure. Men's brains are bigger, for one thing, and this study clearly highlights structural biases between the sexes. You're right in that one couldn't reliably tell an individual's sex based on those scans, however.
That's just structural, which isn't the whole story. Chemicals such as testosterone also have well-documented effects on behaviour, and men produce a lot more of that than women.
Again, you're asserting your belief as fact something that we haven't been able to scientifically study as I posted about earlier.
You cannot assert that it is natural when it has not been scientifically established as natural. We have established that discrimination *has* and *does still* take place.
I'm not trying to assert these as scientific facts - just what I personally believe/think is likely to be true. The science isn't there yet to pick our brains in detail, or reliably tell which behaviours stem from nature and which are purely environmental. But we know full well that biology affects our brains, the assumption that the differences must be 99% environmental has no base.
But anyway, environmental differences while growing up (which I think we all agree can be significant) aren't comparable to the kind of bad discrimination like an employer refusing to hire a woman. Women do better than men in many areas of life. It's just differences, and regardless of what percentage is natural or environmental, affect the occupations men & women go to in their lives. That's why stats such as the amount of women in parliament are poor evidence of women being treated unfairly.
Only a zombie could find a brain aesthetically pleasing. It's an important disgusting mass, though, to be sure. Men's brains are bigger, for one thing, and this study clearly highlights structural biases between the sexes. You're right in that one couldn't reliably tell an individual's sex based on those scans, however.
That's just structural, which isn't the whole story. Chemicals such as testosterone also have well-documented effects on behaviour, and men produce a lot more of that than women.
Again, you're asserting your belief as fact something that we haven't been able to scientifically study as I posted about earlier.
You cannot assert that it is natural when it has not been scientifically established as natural. We have established that discrimination *has* and *does still* take place.
I'm not trying to assert these as scientific facts - just what I personally believe/think is likely to be true. The science isn't there yet to pick our brains in detail, or reliably tell which behaviours stem from nature and which are purely environmental. But we know full well that biology affects our brains, the assumption that the differences must be 99% environmental has no base.
But anyway, environmental differences while growing up (which I think we all agree can be significant) aren't comparable to the kind of bad discrimination like an employer refusing to hire a woman. Women do better than men in many areas of life. It's just differences, and regardless of what percentage is natural or environmental, affect the occupations men & women go to in their lives. That's why stats such as the amount of women in parliament are poor evidence of women being treated unfairly.
