It's as simple as this: respect ability. When anyone does something better than you, shut up and learn. I was taught by a female professor about computer tech. She was an amazing teacher. But I will not respect you because of your gender. What can you do that is of worth to myself or society? At the end of the day, that is what is important.
@@lockandloadlikehell I disagree. I am sure you like to be respected, as does everyone else. I am not saying let everyone walk all over you and not to have boundaries, as that would not showing respect for oneself.
I worked for 27 years for a large, multinational corporation. Before they hired me, a clerk, someone who had no authority to hire or fire, gave me a written test that included math, science, logic, electronics, and miscellaneous stem information. I passed the test, and the clerk gave me an appointment to return to speak to a manager. He explained that managers were not allowed to see candidates before they had reviewed the results of the test. It was a way of protecting the manager from his own bias, sort of in the same way as in the video when the committee evaluated candidates for chief of police without knowing the names of the candidates. Seems like a good idea, even for CEOs.
LMAO at all the comments... It seems that just about everyone missed the entire point of the talk. What is being said here is that there is inherent bias in all of our thought patterns and decision making in regards to gender. Even women unconsciously judge themselves and other women based on subtle patterns and messages picked up from language, behavior, and media within our culture. Men do the same to themselves, and that is not fair. Our realities are not made up of infallible facts--we are fed many untruths, even when the people who are serving them to us earnestly believe that they are true. Basically, not everything we think is true, and it is important for us to recognize that there are subconscious biases that affect the way we think and decision-make in order for us to consider things in an objective way.
Anslee Smith LOL. Yeah, we are so, so oppressed! Keep teeling this to yourself. I don't judge myself, I know I can do everything I want. Ideologists like you just can't accept the fact that men and women are biologically different. Science shows very clear that there are inborn differences between men and women in physiology, hormone balance, and brain microstructure that causes significantly different behavior and physical characteristics between sexes. Gender studies and social constructionism are based mainly on ideology. Everytime when the 'nurture' folks are asked for the basis of their ideas, they cannot produce anything.
Yes but that was not her point her point was that the most importent difference between the sexes that our brain has stored should now be ignored if you say strong ofc im gonna think of a male thats because mens are phisicly stronger if u say emotions i will think women just look at the number of men in jail and the number of women to understand that men are less emotional The reality is instinct and hormons influence behavior and thats what makes women and men so different
I was born in Soviet Union, where women "were equal to men" they were "Men in skirts" and they were expected to work just as hard as men; hauling iron ore, chopping wood, tilling ground, inhaling deadly chimicals in labs, you name it women did it. Any and all jobs were EQUAL & no one cared if they were pregnant, breastfeeding or on your period. Soviet women became sick, barren and angry at the world... and the government covered up all the stats... the population dwindled (and is still droping)... and then, soviet empire unraveled and fell apart - thank God! Now I'm going to go hugg my husband for working like a man, so I can be a mom to our kids at home!
She was talking about the brain and how it works with the subconscious, and how the brain associates things and uses that association to help us to form an opinion about reality. Watch it again and listen.
+Justwantahover but she really didn't. She didn't say why and how it works. She just said we have subconscious biases, which is a no brainer. Talking about why we have it and how our brain structure makes us have it is neuroscience. Saying "we have brains therefor we think X" is NOT in anyway neuroscience. It's just common fucking sense.
@@ianturner3613 It's a key part of meritocracy, and has been for a long time. Some Canadian Christian who stirs up controversy for book money wasn't the first to propose the idea lol
The designers of the "implicit association test" themselves admitted that it cannot be used to draw any meaningful conclusions due to its flaws and ambiguity.
cs -- I applaud you and wish you the best, but you are anecdotal and statistical outliers. I, personally, do not like some of the realities presented in this talk, but I do accept them. I, as much as possible, will try to help change the disparities that arise because of parental/societal skewed expectations/encouragements, but I also acknowledge the biological gender disparities, and trying to go against them is definitely swimming upstream, at least in the short term relative to actual evolutionary changes. We probably want to keep some of them for the long term.
David Voss - It means you agree with me. People should have free choice to develop & find work of their interest. I do not see any more support for boys in STEM, in USA. All is about girls & women. Generally, there is just support for women and there are more & more women in college than men. Women only, no male only conferences & events. I do not care what genders or race my colleagues are, as long as they know what they do & there is good atmosphere to strive at work. I see lately young women who struggle in STEM jobs, who were pushed there for sake of equal outcome.
The 'neuroscience' brought up here is a very basic outline at best. There is nothing of substance here, just another feminist pushing her agenda. Which, on the subject of bias, I find quite ironic.
On average, men have five inches in height and more than 25 pounds more skeletal muscle than women. It's hardly surprising then that our unconscious association for 'strong' would be the male rather than the female figure, and for 'fragile' the reverse, or that, in order to advance 'gender equality' we've had to adjust the standards for physical strength in some professions to get even a small proportion of women into them. Wouldn't it be better to simply acknowledge that, in a job that rewards physical strength, there will most likely be more men than women? There will be women who are physically strong enough, just not as many. Big-five personality testing has the mean for women at the 60th percentile for agreeableness, but for men at the 40th percentile. Why should we expect equal numbers of male and female lawyers (who benefit from disagreeableness) or therapists (the reverse)? There will still be women lawyers (speaking from experience, there ARE women who score in the bottom 10th percentile on agreeableness, believe me!) and male therapists, just not, perhaps, equal numbers. That doesn't rule women out of any career, but it gets us away from this obsession with equality of outcome as the measure of whether we have succeeded in making the career open to women, as it should be, or whether, instead, we are afflicted with the mysterious disease of "implicit bias." Bias is making a judgment about an individual, without adequate data. We actually all have adequate data to make judgments about "normal"* men and "normal" women. The latter are weaker. Fact. But any one woman may well be much stronger than any one man. That's where the need for data comes in. But that's not what these "implicit bias" tests measure, and the science behind them is mostly bogus. *I am using the word "normal" here to refer to the population at or near the mean on a standard distribution curve, not to imply anything pejorative about those who fall outside that range, either above or below.
Exactly. Thanks for writing this. I don't know why people can't accept reality. It's not bad to be a woman! I personally like it! And I don't need to be a muscle man, or be as physically strong, to be equal as a human. We don't need to put men down to be strong in our own ways as women. Why don't we just appreciate one another? I personally think it's important to value others in our society who have strengths we don't, and vice versa.
Men have more pressure to earn money, therefore take said studies and said jobs. I LOVE history...but damned, it's not exactly reliable, go into teaching? No thanks. Money not good enough. So I became an accountant. My sister loves children, therefore studied to work with disadvantaged children. We need people like my sister, but I'm sure I'll be earning a lot more because I didn't follow my passion, I followed what I could tolerate and make money with.
Bias is a very natural thing we need to get adjusted to the nature and the environment and survive at last We have to understand human being. We cannot ignore the outcome from biological progress. Why do we have to remove all the difference to make the world equity just to achieve the implementation of ideology. We need to focus on the harmony not on the equity. Even though we have to pursue the human right investing our resources for mechanical gender equality is not the top priority. Almost 50 vs 50 in every fields is not possible.We don't have to make such an unatural effort to achieve 50:50. Those who are uncomfortable for differences in gender is going to make unatural effort endlessly until they get 50:50 in the fields where they are only highly valued.
Wow it's almost like she studied this to prove her point rather than to understand it. We use this bias system unconsciously to decide the best potential of outcome for any given situation with too many unknown variables. It's instinctual. As much as we need to ignore bias against known information, like the resume test, and why we shouldn't be afraid to embrace it. We know factually the differences between the male and female brain, we know how that effects the male and female body, and we now know stereotypically what to assume from a candidate we otherwise know nothing about. We shouldn't be worried so much about the "what" that were trying to fix, but rather understand the "why" it is that way.
@jen berter it was actually not bad economically till feminism and women's suffrage came about. Patriarchal societies are still the most viable, but we don't live in a patriarchal society what we see are remnants of that with a matriarchal spin
So to summarise: This person came into gender science with a bias, did some research, ''looked at the data'', and arrived at the normal conclusion on gender which is that there is a natural unconsious bias, and discovered herself that woman are just as biased towards men as men are to woman. And the proposed solution is to do what normal individuals were already doing anyway. ''To commit yourself to becoming a good observer of your enviroment' That's some interesting neuroscience right there.. *Standing ovation.
I agree on one point: the “repeating pattern” that obscures human perception. One repeating pattern is the myth of female oppression and male privilege. Do you really think females suck in computer science because of Star Trek posters and lack of coffee cups? Do you really think males are most certainly not effected by environmental factors but females surely are? It seems to me like you present yourself in a position of “moral high ground” and taking all the advantages for females (like yourself) and do not give a damn about males (except when supporting females). That's a very egoistic position.
When you grow up with privilege, you often can't see it. If somebody tries to take it away (e.g. insisting that you take responsibility for your own mistakes or pay for your own food) it can feel like oppression.
@MrHotPinkBanana - It is a reference to feminists response to men who say "hey, men are oppressed too!" Their number one response is "patriarchy hurts men too" but a close second is "men don't see their own privilege and when it is challenged it can feel like oppression." This may be, true but in my experience it is even more true of women. Many men understand that they are granted privileges by society IN RETURN FOR THEIR SELFLESS PRODUCTIVITY, whereas women take their privileges for granted and seem to consider them laws of nature. I never hear feminists complaining how few women there are in mining or how we need more women going out and repairing power lines in the middle of ice storms. I never hear them complaining that we need more male kindergarten teachers or nurses either. I can't remember how many stories I've heard of women who go out on a date and don't even bring any kind of money with them expecting, no, assuming that everything will be paid for. So you better not regret liking my comment. (but if you do you can always take it back)
@@GordieGii _"I can't remember how many stories I've heard of women who go out on a date and don't even bring any kind of money with them expecting, no, assuming that everything will be paid for."_ I would if I was a woman. If he's not willing to pay for dinner, he's just freeloading.
Take a good hard look at the Scandinavian countries. The more egalitarian a society becomes, the bigger the differences in interest, career paths and distribution among jobs between the genders become.
Actually, career tendencies and differencies between men and women are increased the less gender bias is. It is shown clearly bt numerous studies of the Scandinavian universities. Men, in genefal, are biologically orientated towards objetcs. Women, towards people. I am saying this being a white anthropologist. But ey, im doing my best.
Hey you!! The structures out there aren't self design but naturally expressions of gender characteristics. And THAT'S WHY there's a relationship between the two. Isn't gender bias, is gender identifiers.
Unconscious bias has been de bunked by a quality group of scientists it has little evidence to support it and the training and testing indicate different result each time with the same people. It is barely science at all The test this women is talking about was poor result wise. They also commented about the money being wasted on training to remove the bias that we don't even no we have..
This video does not seem to answer any questions for me. For three generations myself and my sisters have for the largest part have been victimized by control freak women, who had been unrestrained by their husbands. These girls had a paticularistic empathy for each other, but no larger sense of justice or duty. Feeling substituted for probative evidence. Universal morality was a foreign concept to them. You could explain it to them but the explanation was made impervious toward them by their avidity and prejudices. So a retarded borderline woman gained enough favor among her coven to cheat her sister of her trust fund. And we got stuck in a marriage with a father who was very mentally ill. All this was in service to a handicapped woman who impersonated my mother at the bank. My own bias is not to automatically favor the woman as the superior in morality.
Let men take responsibility over their women and child. They don't need no talks. They need to raise up and claim their own. WOMAN AND CHILDREN! .. no queremos cobardía en éste alburio. A true man stands on his own. He listens and answers accordingly.
I stopped in the middle of this video when she suggested the "Implicit Association Test" and went and took a "Implicit Association Test" through Harvard and found it to be very frustrating. It had 7 stages and each staged almost seemed rigged. The answers you're able to select from are seemingly designed to force the outcomes. For instance- A few of the stages asked questions like "Which category does this word fall under? Category being: Family/Women or Men/Career" and then gives you words like Family, Business, Success, Marriage but it forces you to select these categories under a fixed association that you cannot change. Obviously, I'm going to associate the word Career with Career/Men and Business with Career (of which Men have been assigned to by the test, not by me). Just the same, I'm going to associate Marriage with Family/Women because FAMILY is the topic and you've attached women to that answer. By lumping in Women with Family, you're forcing me to categorize these by gender - not because of a bias, but because you've ONLY given me that choice. The test seems dangerously malicious. I stopped listening to this women speak after that
@@noterenjaeger read my comment and then explain to me how my the results could possibly have been different , regardless of “knowing what the test was for”. In what world would anyone associate the word “business” with “family” when the other choice is “career”? No world, is the answer. By choosing “career” and attaching “man” with “career” , there’s no option to make a different choice. The test is moronic and embarrassing. I would be completely willing to take another test if there was one that wasn’t so skewed and misleading or poorly designed as the Harvard version that I took
It's measuring how quickly you found the answer. So if you consistently recognize the answer more quickly when the option is "men/career" than when the option is "women/career," that reveals your implicit association.
It's annoying. Men and women should respect each other. They have different roles in society. One is not better than the other. It's just different. I'm tired of being the punished rose. My thorn made me sharp. Pissed off rose.
2015. It's 2022 and a loooooooooooot of people still discuss if misogyny is even real. :'D Cause guess what, asking women and believing them and their retelling of their own experiences are still not valid and trusted options. Ocassionally males have a closer look and start speaking about it to male peers and guess what, they then learn what it's like to get tons of confirmation of the problem by other (mostly but not exclusively) males rushing in to shout around rudely. I'm at a point where I cannot unsee how most issues we have originate in misogyny. I thought there were different causes and capitalism and all that, but the more I look, the more I notice the system doesn't matter. The deprecation and disregard wreck them all and misogynistic concepts turn up no matter if you dig at the chore of racism, ableism, .... pick your sorrow! A very sensitive balance has wrecked and seperated the attributes of archaic feminine and masculine between people, when all people are both, yin and yang and both are actually equall to each other! And once the balance is off and tilts further and further over generations, it becomes more and more difficult to reinstall the balance. Generations of "working field build from males for males and equaling 'norm' " cannot be fixed by quickly applying some feminism. It's rooted deeply. The perception of norms has started to shift. But it's a marathon and those benefitting from the scewed system (seemigly, they do not get that they, too, are paying the price) thrash, scream, scratch and bite in refusal to move from the entitled spot of "why does she get to have a second cookie????" when she's only asking for the other half of what has always been her cookie but he somehow got used to the idea that that should be shared, too.
Where was the neuroscience? She must have missed the first thing they tell you in your research statistic classes, personal observation and experience are not valid science but rather pseudo-science.
I wouldn't call it pseudoscience but rather not complete science. You form your hypothesis first then do experiments and then start the results and repeat the process again with different people. Viewing and hypothesizing things are important but they aren't the final step.
Can I just say that she heavily leans into the idea that women are being discriminated against without actually presenting any evidence of this while also saying that people have an unconscious bias against women which is actually untrue though my biggest gripe is that she says that women aren’t equally payed or represented in the science field in which your pay is decided by your findings and reputation she also says that this happens in other fields which occurs because women choose to go into different fields and many of those that don’t are usually worse than their male counterparts but not always well either way I’m gonna end my ramblings but for those who read this far have a nice day
As soon as I found an inaccuracy in her speech, it made everything else she said potentially wrong as well. All the so called facts she stated, may also be untrue. So I stopped watching, as it then appeared to be simply just another woman who's unhappy with what she sees in the world, rather than someone who really examined the situation.
Now I would like to see this cross referenced with the bias of those who believe in identity politics vs those who do not, and then compared to the bias of those who prefer ketchup over mustard.
Why wouldn't a male chef be hired over a female (who might land up being pregnant and being a stay-at-home mum for the next few years?) Why shouldn't men who are willing to work in the risky STEM fields be worthy of more pay? I don't see many women jumping at the opportunity to do the very risky and heavy lifting jobs, like mining or landscaping, underwater welding, plumbing, construction work etc. I'm not saying women who work in those scientific or tech roles shouldn't get a fair pay, but they certainly shouldn't be expected to be 'an equal' to men because their biology and physiology is very different.
Women in STEM are never called geeks in the harsh way that both men and women call male STEM students and professionals geeks, virgins, etc. Let women imagine how they are rejected in dating by field of study, even when a higher pay job is secured
I just took the Implicit Association Test on race here implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/selectatest.html and I have a beef about it. The problem with all these theories about the causes of racism is that it leaves out one crucial element. Namely, behavior. If any person behaves arrogantly, selfishly, with greed, jealousy, envy, or any other adverse behavior, they don't behave this way because of their race or even sexual orientation, they behave this way because they are human. As to WHY they behave this way, the right kind of psychology has a lot to offer us. And if we had the courage to look in the mirror and see the many ways our respective character defects affects us and others, we would be shocked and realize that racism is not the problem- in never was. It's our unwillingness to deal with our dark side and the only way to address it is with a good psychotherapists. and we should not think our character defects thru the lens of pathology, rather, in realizing that which is holding us all back. It is bringing the evolution of humanity to a snail's pace. We need to save ourselves from ourselves.
That test is bullshit, they start by making you put negative labels under black people's faces and good terms under white people and reverse it, and the point is that your brain gets confuzzled and they are like 'ahhaaaaa, you're a racist' but that's not how it works, if they started the other way around they would get the same results, it's a brain trick not an academical research material.
Consider this general concept: Suppose you gathered a random sample of USA whites, but randomly excluded some with higher IQ, so that you ended up with 10,000 whites with an average IQ of 85 (same average as for USA blacks). If you then studied those whites, you would find that they had similar problems as US blacks. More drug use, more single mothers, more problems at school, more problems getting good employment, more nutrition problems etc. etc. Conclusion: Groups like BLM have been convinced (by feminist activists in academia) that white people are oppressing them and they think that's why whites do better. They call it racism. In fact, it is simply an effect of average IQ and skin colour is irrelevant. So *knowledge about average IQ is important because that knowledge will expose the false propaganda of SJWs exaggerations about oppression and racism*.
She missed the other side. As a man in a cna job im often smiled at like its ok you are just a man. Even though emails went out that couldve saved a patients toes from infection. Or just suggesting ways to do betterive been overlooked or ignored and when i spoke up i didnt recive a raise. I did get stellar review but nothing else. Its fact psychologically that both men and women view women as object not subjectively. So this ted talk is out dated and dosent really get to the gender inequality as a whole. But life will never be equal.
Or it's simply just , respect eachother and their individuality ! (There are no neuroscience here in this video ) . Evolutionary men and women will differ in some places but what we forget it that we are also similar in many ways . There are things nature has given us through evolution ,you cannot change them in a decade or even in next thousands years. So rather than saying that men are bad or women are bad , let's view things subjectively . Her talk alone sounds bias (ngl). Bias will stay with us always ,just like a woman can never fully understand a man ,a man cannot fully understand woman ,so can't we accept the difference and cherish the similarities . If it was that men and women didn't complement eachother , we would have been extinct long ago !
It's unethical to eliminate the pay gap; not between genders, but between skill and dedication levels. More men are willing to sacrifice everything to be a CEO. Many others are not, and more so women than men. It's just natural selection.
Lol shows a male line in a tech convention. Little did she tell you there might be 2 urinals and 3 toilets for men but the women have 2 different entrances and prob have around 20 toilets. At a convention that is primarily male. If that isnt gender inequality i dont know what is. Oh and her points, there is no point to telling her how her stats are wrong because she wont listen to them anyway.
@fabian michelsson 🤣 I bet I would laugh at you too if I met you in real life. The thing is, even if I'd met you, you'd never say that to my face, since you rather hide behind the UA-cam comment section.
I just went and did her test. It is sooo diishonest! It begins by training you to associate "male" and "career" on one hand and "female" and "family" on the other. Then makes you associate the other way around. Of course everyone is confused on the second run. The only bias tested is that of the test makers. (who have explicitly made the test for a world audience, but don't know the world does not define itself the way americans do, separated among "latinos" and "non-latinos" or "conservatives" and "liberals" etc) This is really bad science.
Often the way these tests work is that on one condition it begins with the ‘male’ and ‘career’ association, and on another condition it begins with the inverse of this association. Then after thousands of people have completed it they can see if there is still a difference that hasn’t been explained by the initial association. Not sure if that is how her test works though, but if it’s a university experiment it likely would be.
Tests are often localised by the way. In science people nowadays are aware that tests must be adjusted to local cultural definitions. The cannot be literally translated. They must be transferred to "what would show a bias in this cluture?" and "what would show there's no bias in this culture. Just like in history, if I transferred a test of women = pink, male = blue to Europe a frew hundrds of years ago, then it would have to get translated to males = pink, etc. cause back then pink was associated with males XD
I am shocked how people waste their lives studying this and someone actually employs and pays them... (probably with our tax money, which is even more dissapointing) We are NOT EQUAL, we have equal rights which I agree with, but we are NOT THE SAME. We have natural differences. Stop shaming men.
You're 51% of the population and occupy only 5% of the very top positions because you don't work as hard. You're coddled and you whine about the things you don't get. Whereas men are much more likely to assess the situation, take some responsibility create an action plan and get their butts in motion. That's how you get to the top. These positions aren't handed out on "everybody gets a trophy" day. You're entitlement is showing, and it's more gaudy than the other lady's belly piercing.
The question being asked is the wrong question. We shouldn't be looking into why there are so few woman at the top but why are there so many men that desire and are willing to do what is needed to be at the top. Very possibly a mental disorder that overwhelmingly affects men. This is discussed by Jordan Peterson
Don't get why this has that many downvotes. In my opinion that's quite a nice talk, although I didn't find the neuroscience aspect in it. However, I support the overall message; we all as a society have to work on solving inequalities for women and men.
These talks have one flaw: they do not address alleged biological bases from which the gender bias may arise. Until these talks can explain why the biological differences between the genders do not matter, these talks would continue to fail to be compelling.
There is no neuroscience in this presentation. "Neuroscience (or neurobiology) is the scientific study of the nervous system.[1] It is a multidisciplinary branch of biology,[2] that deals with the anatomy, biochemistry, molecular biology, and physiology of neurons and neural circuits."
I studied Engineering and after working for several years went on to study for a masters degree. There were 16 of us on the course - all men. I'm sure the Univerity would have loved to have accepted some women but there was a lack of applicants. When we went to our degree ceremony, the group before us had studied for diplomas for library studies - virtually all women. The men/engineers were heading towards jobs earning twice the national average while the women/librarians were heading for jobs earning half the national average. Why did the women make such bad choices and the men such good choices? Well, perhaps they were deciding what was best for themselves as individuals and ignoring what was best for their intersectional groupings. Were they making good or bad choices? - No, the choices were best for themselves. Barron-Cohen showed that one week old baby girls look longer at faces than moving objects while one week old boys do the opposite. The effect correlates with testoterone levels in the womb producing overlapping distributions of interest in people/things such that most women are predominantly interested in people while most men are interested in things. Of course, because it is a distribution and not a binary, this means that some women are, never-the-less, predominantly interested in things and they often go on to study Engineering - good luck to them! The women engineers bring a different perspective which is valued by the Engineering community as it is very welcoming of diversity of thought, unlike feminism. Engineering and Science accept that diveristy of thought makes us as a group smarter because we can debate a subject and the truth then emerges as the bad ideas get knocked down. Feminism does not believe in debate but orthodoxy so that bad ideas are never challenged and the result is the nonesense in this video. According to the talk, all differences in outcome between men and women are down to bias or wrong-think because men and women are actually identical. Wrong! Smell the politics and notice the lack of rationality.
Women are discouraged from birth to interact with objects, math and leadership while boys are encouraged to do these things. The main reason women tend to choose a type of occupation is because they’ve been groomed into thinking that way. Nature vs nurture. There isn’t that big a difference between men and women cognitively speaking. Cultural studies also show this result.
by printing pictures of boys or boys-associated images/colors in toys about building, trains, videogames, firefighting and others that encourage any number of professions, and on the other hand girls have little kitchens, babies, trophy wife barbies and braid makers. since birth we are surrounded with associations of what our gender is supposed to do or be
Building construction, steam engineering, electricians, plumbers, HVAC, marine engineering, auto mehcanics, etc etc etc. Woman are more than welcome in these common vocations, and a "few" do, yet they overwhelmingly choose not to take up these careers. Why? Because women "generally" don't have the mindset or desire to "choose" these careers. They make different life choices than men, and no one is forcing them too. Women think differently than men, so get over yourself. It's called biology.
I found Janet's talk heavily biased. She focused only on professions dominated by men. Interesting that she didn't mention 9 of 10 teachers are female in K-12 with a study showing that they grade boys 30% lower than girls for equal work.
Stephen Mueller idk how you can get a lower score for the same work unless you are saying shes awarding more points per question , soley based on gender
On average men have more muscle mass. Men produce more testosterone and have an amplified response to testosterone, which leads to stronger muscles and denser and stronger bones. They also, on average, have a larger cardiac and respiratory capacity. I don't think that men are better than women, but associating the word "strong" more easily with men isn't bias, it's anatomical and physiological science.
If people associate "tall" with men and "short" with women, does it mean bias, or does it mean men are mostly taller them women? The IAT doesn't prove prejudice, it may just show an accurate association with natural differences between groups. And of course one should always judge the individual - like noticing a tall woman is tall, rather than assuming she's short because women are shorter. Same with leadership, strength, fragility, etc.
Society expect from tall women to bend and from short men to walk on tiptoe, that's the problem, not that the average woman is shorter than the average man, to stay in this example.
@@anitafrieda It does? Even if that's true, there's a simple solution: ignore "society". It's not hard. I do it constantly. Women are pre-wired by nature to be more agreeable and neurotic. Blame nature, in that case, not society, since you're looking for someone to blame for your perceived inadequacies.
Thank You Janet Crawford ... even if you did not exactly use "neuroscience" ... OR you did not make the neuroscience aspect clear??? Anyway, in the field of psychology I have read many studies that look at many forms of Bias ... and what you say here does indeed reflect the general findings of Bias (we all have effects of bias (not Just gender bias) due to how we take in ... store and use ... the information we are exposed to (be that from first or second hand experience or read etc ...) ... It was interesting for me to read the comments here and find tons of gender bias ... and they seem to have no clue. Those of us who do understand need to speak up at every opportunity available (and especially the males who understand because help is needed from males, for those males, who do not yet understand (they will see what males say as more valid) ... sad but true. Love & Peace to All
Tbh she didn't state that evolutionary ,men are more attracted to material things and women to more emotional things . So as star wars is more material i.e. with space ships and all , it's more naturally appealing to men than women .
If there was a consensus that people are racial bias that would include every race not just one individual race. I think maybe people should start trying to focus on things that unit us together and things we all have in common instead of pushing this false claim that “diversity” is our strength. How is it possible that what makes us different from each other is our strength? Our unity on the basic principles of believing in living in a free society is what makes us all unit together that then allows us all to appreciate our differences and respect them.
the gender pay gap is very well understood; it's largely a matter of different choices and priorities for men and women. have a look on youtube. it's debunked all over the gaff. this tripe has got to stop. you're driving a wedge between the sexes. that's good to no one, you are dishonest and biased.
If you are arguing with someone who claims that gender is a 'social construct,' note this; you may be arguing from a philosophical or biological viewpoint, but they are arguing from an ideological viewpoint. The social constructionist's viewpoint is embedded in ideology.
Humans are _always_ affected by the other humans around them, either men or women. And if a girl is raised and being told by society she can't do xyz, she will believe it and will have it much harder later in life to break this believe. If you tell a lie often enough, people will believe this lie.
You can be strong and being pushed as a child in a certain direction. Babies don't come to earth being strong already. And not all women are strong. Funny thing: there are women who are strong, there are women who are weak. Not all women are the same. Do _you_ believe, all women are the same? And even the strong ones have it harder because of social pressure.
ok, i'll tell you when i see bias: i see a ridicuolously privileged woman, who went to friggin berkeley, tell men how they should treat other women who went to berkeley. and as for men taking advice from women, it has a lot to do with attitude. people are less likely to take advice from someone who struts around acting like the world owes them something, than someone who is humble. here's a bias for ya: boys score on average 30% lower when the female teacher know they are boys, than in blind tests.
Jacqueline McCook I couldn't easily (via Google) find any such stat but I did find an interesting article written by someone from MIT. Boys Lag Behind: How Teachers’ Gender Biases Affect Student Achievement Camille Terrier SEII Discussion Paper #2016.07 November 2016 It is a working paper it looks like and so not peer reviewed as far as I can guess. Might be that one of the cited articles mentions what he is talking about? Or maybe not.
I see somebody that allowed a personal bias to colour their understanding of an interesting and fair TED talk. Janet Crawford was not lecturing men, and several times acknowledged that gender bias affects men too, both in making men who don't conform to traditional gender roles feel somehow less, and also in condescending to them by giving them praise for normal activities that every person should do. I see somebody wanting to push their own personal agenda and who has created a persona for somebody that has very little to do with reality, or even what's presented here because they feel threatened or like somebody is blaming them.
how does going to college make her a privileged woman? i don't get it, if she was a man would she be less privileged and just average? You can go to a very pro woman place and still be hit on and harassed. It sound to me like you are trying to nit pick because the topic upsets you for some reason.
It's hard to take this seriously when I have never heard people that fight for equality in jobs show interest in leveling the gender gap in mining and construction working or any jobs they don't like the look of. It's always higher paid or higher education jobs that are chased. People only care about issues when it benefits them which is another form of bias that should be discussed more.
Women used to mine coal in England. When the miners' wives found out that it's hot in the mines and everybody worked topless, they petitioned the government to make it illegal for women to work in mines because "it wasn't appropriate work for women."
I agree... academic work is far different to work that requires heavy lifting, and work that imposes certain risks or danger. However, I do think that certainly in the fields of medicine and some sciences, women should be entitled to equal pay. HOwever men who work in mining or construction should definitely get bigger paychecks
@@alessiotisi774 agree with all you said. Sometimes I wonder would the framing "Everyone must get the same pay for the same job. No exceptions" or something like that get a better reception as it is not instantly creating a separation of the population(which isn't even always applicable to situations) for people to attempt to take sides on. Interested to hear your opinion
I wish the speaker would have gone into a little more depth on the study with the two rooms: the stereotypically nerdy one and the neutral one. Men's interests apparently were unaffected by the environment, but the women's were. Is this bias? Is it something inherent in how men and women see things due to biology differences? There was some deeper insight that could have been gleamed from that but she didn't mention it. One could infer that the problem women run into in science and technology fields is environmental, not due to how they are treated - basically "I'd enjoy lab stuff more if there wasn't all that lab stuff in the lab..."
"in this case, fortune magazine told us necessary that melissa mayer is the real deal because as a blonde attractive young woman we might assume she wasn't". this. or, maybe, she was hired to turn a company around and she only just managed to sell the company to be dismembered and give a profit to stock holders. having acquired yahoo stocks around the time she was hired, and having sold the remainder of the company with a good profit some years later, i would personally vouch for the second: many a times it looked like i had thrown the money down the flush. and, rest assured, the doubts and the hard looks at the company actions weren't aired because mayer was a "blonde attractive young woman". i had fca, too, and i can assure you things were *much* harder for marchionne in a more or less similar situation, who was anything but blonde, attractive, or female. so, who's gender biased here? note: fca was much more worse off than yahoo. i did acquire it when marchionne had already worked some serious miracles into the company. and yet, the disbelief continued on and on and on, pretty much until the day he died.
@Nikki E. specifically, then: if we all carry implicit gender bias, then it's ok to have then, no? perfectly normal. why is this person bias wrong, while that other is ok? and if one substituted biased men in power with women, would there be any progress? no, because women would be just as biased. it's a self defeating proposition, it doesn't serve gender equality, and, sorry, i believe it's false, unless one passes for "bias" even the most remote preference. in addition, research has shown that the fact that an *attractive* woman can become CEO is indeed something remarkable. the gender bias normally had in the workplace makes attractive women advantaged compared to unattractive women when it comes to hiring them for lower positions, but actually puts them at a disadvantage when they need to be promoted to position of real power, such as one as CEO of a big company. as for the "young" part, i'll tell you a secret: they point that stuff out even when it's a young man. so, even when there is a bias, it is strong, and it is pointed out, however obliquely, this speaker fails to appreciate it, because everything MUST be normal. if you care, i will dig up all the scientific references from my nonverbal communication days, but i suspect that you do not care. this is just another internet discussion in which you came with your ideas and nothing will make you change your mind. in addition, despite not knowing anything about me, you prefer to dismiss my rather long and articulate original reply with a couple of lines, also containing an insult directed to me and whoever disagrees with you. gender biased, you too?
@CEOofFRESH1 the more deserving ones should get the first priority . This filtering also nurtures the real talent and can lead to amazing results . Survival of the fittest .
Absolutely, and i'm sick of it. This "me, too" shite makes us (women) all sound like little, quivering butterflies. This is becoming a cottage industry-the victimization of ____(fill in the blank). Oh, and i agree with the person who noted her obvious bias against the young woman based on, guess what, her looks.
@@janetwhite7786 _"Oh, and i agree with the person who noted her obvious bias against the young woman based on, guess what, her looks."_ I think that was the whole point no? Don't you understand this was deliberate? The idea is that we all have these biases, regardless of our politics.
Maybe gender biases exists because men and women are actually different? Yes some of the biases may be negative but should we really strive to eliminate them by dismantling gender roles and concurrently dispensing with basic biological mechanism by which we've evolved to function?
If I understand you correctly, EerieEcho, you're questioning whether we should bother at attempting to eliminate negative biases within ourselves and society. And in your run on sentence application of a shred of logic championing the argument for a status quo state of being, you're apprehensive that further societal equalization and growth would jeopardize the many stride our ancestors accomplished during the vast history of evolution. Am I getting that right?
@@ca2712 _"you're questioning whether we should bother at attempting to eliminate negative biases within ourselves and society"_ It's not always clear if these biases are negative.
If these things truly were innate, you wouldn't be so threatened by someone questioning them. They'd continue to exist regardless. But gender roles are indeed flimsy social constructs that are harmful when pushed on everyone. How can you dudes not grasp that putting all humans into two categories and destinies is a bad thing?
"Neuroscience is a relatively young, exciting, and fundamentally interdisciplinary field devoted to the study of the nervous systems. Problems range from investigation of the evolution of nervous system in basal vertebrates to the application of neuroscience to education and law. Neuroscientists also seek to develop neurologically plausible models of human thinking, affect and behavior.Neuroscience creates a context for scholarly conversation about the nature of mind, brain, and behavior." - University of Notre Dame This video shows that clearly. Gender deals with human behaviors with regards social expectations. In my opinion, we can solve this boring gender issue. How? it is all about love man (the hippies got it hhaha). In more practical terms, it is respecting others to be who they are, and what they want to do with their own lives. (a virtue that is rapidly diminishing in our societies). The problem is fear. It is fear of anything out of the norm, fear of change, fear of diversities, fear of differences, fear of losing our identity, fear of growing power (other than one's own), fear of loss of authority to women? (last one was a hunch) I would like people to accept and respect me for my choices as i do respect them for being them. Those that don't, should watch out hahaha. I will leave you with some wise words: You know that term "the world is not fair or nothing is fair in this world?" Well, MAKE IT FAIR THEN, (that's not my answer, that's the grumbling of my six year old brother when i tell him he can't have what other kids have). Learn from our young, they see no limits.
@William Burr "responsibilities come with limitations" your word salad. 1. You gave a list of responsibilities. And continued with that quote. That's the focus of the comment
@William Burr okay, here is some logic, your limitations in how you raise your kids do not automatically make it my limits in how I raise my kids. Does that compute?
When they couldn't make women more, not even as powerful as men despite all efforts they shifted the focus on making men as weak, preferably weaker than women, by posing a compassionate pro-men stance that "O men, please understand, that it's ok and there's no dishonour or shame if you are weak, or even weaker than a woman".
I know somewhere else unconscious bias comes up, by this presenter. It's quiet, easily overlooked, and pre defended against in the stages of the presentation, but it's there. Motes and beams?
If women’s live can be destroyed by classroom decorations, what does that say about their strength? I would say you should drop this non sense and let real women speak for themselves. Stop hurting strong women.
I agree with all your points and really enjoyed this presentation. Unconscious bias is such a influence on our everyday behaviour and interaction i wish it was discussed more.
All I hear in the media is how much sexism exists out in the workforce and in the world. However, in my 25 years of life I have YET to directly encounter it. Now, if it is SO prevalent in our society (as the media puts it) how have I not experienced it yet?
Me too and I'm 38! The only 2 men who lectured me on how oppressed I am as a woman, were the only men who treated me with sexism/in a very creepy way. Like one lied, said he was going the same direction as me, followed me home and started screaming when I wouldn't let him walk me to my door. After an hour of telling me how awful society is for women, patriarchy etc...hmm. Nope, there are just a few psychos out there. It's not all of men who are like that and we need to stop stereotyping men.
Having worked in a tech industry for a decade and seen/suffered everything from "being invisible" to sexist comments yes it exists. Having to deal with the harassment in uni colleges yes it exists. You have been very lucky, and I grateful for that.
"When we associate masculinity with money, and muscles, and domination, and agression, we dishonor legions of good men who do not embody these characteristics". Men are selected by women on these very characteristics. It's not about being "good" or "bad", it's all about getting "laid". Then it's about helping our offspring against others' offspring. It's natural selection.
To men it's all about getting "laid" and planting as many seeds as possible. Women are generally the ones more concerned about the success of their offspring (biologically speaking). The success of offspring is not only determined by good genes (looking at masculinity), but also in securing enough resources. The muscular and dominant men are not bringing in all the resources anymore. Resources in this day and age is money and while trade/skilled/labor jobs are still highly paid jobs, many men are making more money from jobs that aren't associated with aggression, domination and traditional masculinity.
@@kristaanderson8055 But women still choose to breed with aggressive douchebags. That's why we still have so many of them (their offsprings) in the population.
Come on women build buildings, bridges with us. Come on women lets mine coal together. Come on women why are you not fishing in full ocean or work on the height. Why you are taking safe and easy jobs instead better payed so you don't have to complain that in shop selling things you can't earn us much us man??
@@Victoria-jo8up When a neuroscientist choose to talk about the imaginary pay gap myth as a fact, she has left the realm of science and wandered into fairy land. Can't expect people to take any study she mentions to be serious after that.
No neuroscience, but some misrepresented psychology. For example, the UW study she described determined that room decorations affected the choices women made, and she stated that this was an example of sexism. This was an example of free choice, this was an example of self direction. I bet we can paint the room and change men's attitudes also, that isn't sexism, that is behaviorism. To be fair, if the title were changed, and if she began with the premise she asserts at the end (ie that women are self-imposing bias on each other [as she did when she was surprised the bare midriff woman was studying a finance book], and if she avoided the pointing-at-men and men-need-to-help-women more points, then she would have a reasonable presentation. She buried the lead.
Wow! A year..... The men need to help is harkening back to the Racial Injustices in the past (yes....all in the past....) and calling for Good People to stand together. You know it's wrong; Let's make it right!
It's as simple as this: respect ability. When anyone does something better than you, shut up and learn. I was taught by a female professor about computer tech. She was an amazing teacher. But I will not respect you because of your gender. What can you do that is of worth to myself or society? At the end of the day, that is what is important.
Why can we not respect all human beings on this earth?
@@blueskiesneyes
Because not every human being deserves respect.
Your comment smacks of excessive agreeableness.
@@lockandloadlikehell I disagree. I am sure you like to be respected, as does everyone else. I am not saying let everyone walk all over you and not to have boundaries, as that would not showing respect for oneself.
@@blueskiesneyes
Fair enough.
Not once did she ever say respect someone because of their gender alone....narrow mindedness can be cured through psychiatric intervention.
I worked for 27 years for a large, multinational corporation. Before they hired me, a clerk, someone who had no authority to hire or fire, gave me a written test that included math, science, logic, electronics, and miscellaneous stem information. I passed the test, and the clerk gave me an appointment to return to speak to a manager. He explained that managers were not allowed to see candidates before they had reviewed the results of the test. It was a way of protecting the manager from his own bias, sort of in the same way as in the video when the committee evaluated candidates for chief of police without knowing the names of the candidates. Seems like a good idea, even for CEOs.
LMAO at all the comments...
It seems that just about everyone missed the entire point of the talk. What is being said here is that there is inherent bias in all of our thought patterns and decision making in regards to gender. Even women unconsciously judge themselves and other women based on subtle patterns and messages picked up from language, behavior, and media within our culture. Men do the same to themselves, and that is not fair.
Our realities are not made up of infallible facts--we are fed many untruths, even when the people who are serving them to us earnestly believe that they are true. Basically, not everything we think is true, and it is important for us to recognize that there are subconscious biases that affect the way we think and decision-make in order for us to consider things in an objective way.
what is being said is - Women can't handle stuff alone so men have to help them. Witch is in of it self gender bias
Anslee Smith LOL. Yeah, we are so, so oppressed! Keep teeling this to yourself. I don't judge myself, I know I can do everything I want. Ideologists like you just can't accept the fact that men and women are biologically different. Science shows very clear that there are inborn differences between men and women in physiology, hormone balance, and brain microstructure that causes significantly different behavior and physical characteristics between sexes. Gender studies and social constructionism are based mainly on ideology. Everytime when the 'nurture' folks are asked for the basis of their ideas, they cannot produce anything.
Elizabeth H. intelligent lady not driven by media brainwashing,.. i want a girl like you in my life...
Yes but that was not her point her point was that the most importent difference between the sexes that our brain has stored should now be ignored if you say strong ofc im gonna think of a male thats because mens are phisicly stronger if u say emotions i will think women just look at the number of men in jail and the number of women to understand that men are less emotional The reality is instinct and hormons influence behavior and thats what makes women and men so different
Anslee Smith THANK YOU
I was born in Soviet Union, where women "were equal to men" they were "Men in skirts" and they were expected to work just as hard as men; hauling iron ore, chopping wood, tilling ground, inhaling deadly chimicals in labs, you name it women did it. Any and all jobs were EQUAL & no one cared if they were pregnant, breastfeeding or on your period. Soviet women became sick, barren and angry at the world... and the government covered up all the stats... the population dwindled (and is still droping)... and then, soviet empire unraveled and fell apart - thank God! Now I'm going to go hugg my husband for working like a man, so I can be a mom to our kids at home!
How was that neuroscience??
She was talking about the brain and how it works with the subconscious, and how the brain associates things and uses that association to help us to form an opinion about reality. Watch it again and listen.
+Justwantahover but she really didn't. She didn't say why and how it works. She just said we have subconscious biases, which is a no brainer. Talking about why we have it and how our brain structure makes us have it is neuroscience. Saying "we have brains therefor we think X" is NOT in anyway neuroscience. It's just common fucking sense.
+Bio-Sexual Interface yes, and also the discriptions said "evolutionary biology", i didn't hear her say anything about evolution.
+Kevin Uchiha Is evolution true?
+Kevin Uchiha So you are saying it's not neuroscience, it's just here opinion?
equity is a very dangerous concept, what we need is equality of opportunity and a hierarchy of competence, not a hierarchy of oppresion
DSifin i see someone has been watching good old jordan peterson
@@ianturner3613 It's a key part of meritocracy, and has been for a long time. Some Canadian Christian who stirs up controversy for book money wasn't the first to propose the idea lol
@@ALLIRIX hmmm, so why didn't you write a book?
@@endthefed1448 I'm not sure how that question is relevant. I'm a supporter of Jordan Peterson and respect his work.
The designers of the "implicit association test" themselves admitted that it cannot be used to draw any meaningful conclusions due to its flaws and ambiguity.
I have an inherent bias against anyone who uses 'deliciously' in reference to anything other than food.
Can you imagine coming home and listening to this?
@@lockandloadlikehell You will never go home and have a woman like her waiting for you, sweetheart.
@@florzinnha Thankfully.
@@Chebab-Chebab you wish
@@florzinnha Not at all.
Are women more x than men (or vice versa).
If you answered yes, then you are biased.
But you may also be correct...
this comment is art XD
Many thumbs uppies
Chromosomes.
Although I agree with the sentiment, there's physiology at the very least. Being different, or more or less x, doesn't mean better or worse though.
@@leahx1701 and your emotional
It's funny that the people who complain there are no female engineers or business leaders never went into those fields themselves...
I did. My mother did. My sisters did. My daughter did. We do not agree with this talk.
Best.
cs -- I applaud you and wish you the best, but you are anecdotal and statistical outliers. I, personally, do not like some of the realities presented in this talk, but I do accept them. I, as much as possible, will try to help change the disparities that arise because of parental/societal skewed expectations/encouragements, but I also acknowledge the biological gender disparities, and trying to go against them is definitely swimming upstream, at least in the short term relative to actual evolutionary changes. We probably want to keep some of them for the long term.
David Voss - It means you agree with me. People should have free choice to develop & find work of their interest. I do not see any more support for boys in STEM, in USA. All is about girls & women. Generally, there is just support for women and there are more & more women in college than men. Women only, no male only conferences & events.
I do not care what genders or race my colleagues are, as long as they know what they do & there is good atmosphere to strive at work. I see lately young women who struggle in STEM jobs, who were pushed there for sake of equal outcome.
But however they're here watching this video....
The 'neuroscience' brought up here is a very basic outline at best. There is nothing of substance here, just another feminist pushing her agenda. Which, on the subject of bias, I find quite ironic.
On average, men have five inches in height and more than 25 pounds more skeletal muscle than women. It's hardly surprising then that our unconscious association for 'strong' would be the male rather than the female figure, and for 'fragile' the reverse, or that, in order to advance 'gender equality' we've had to adjust the standards for physical strength in some professions to get even a small proportion of women into them.
Wouldn't it be better to simply acknowledge that, in a job that rewards physical strength, there will most likely be more men than women? There will be women who are physically strong enough, just not as many. Big-five personality testing has the mean for women at the 60th percentile for agreeableness, but for men at the 40th percentile. Why should we expect equal numbers of male and female lawyers (who benefit from disagreeableness) or therapists (the reverse)? There will still be women lawyers (speaking from experience, there ARE women who score in the bottom 10th percentile on agreeableness, believe me!) and male therapists, just not, perhaps, equal numbers.
That doesn't rule women out of any career, but it gets us away from this obsession with equality of outcome as the measure of whether we have succeeded in making the career open to women, as it should be, or whether, instead, we are afflicted with the mysterious disease of "implicit bias."
Bias is making a judgment about an individual, without adequate data. We actually all have adequate data to make judgments about "normal"* men and "normal" women. The latter are weaker. Fact. But any one woman may well be much stronger than any one man. That's where the need for data comes in. But that's not what these "implicit bias" tests measure, and the science behind them is mostly bogus.
*I am using the word "normal" here to refer to the population at or near the mean on a standard distribution curve, not to imply anything pejorative about those who fall outside that range, either above or below.
Exactly. Thanks for writing this. I don't know why people can't accept reality. It's not bad to be a woman! I personally like it! And I don't need to be a muscle man, or be as physically strong, to be equal as a human. We don't need to put men down to be strong in our own ways as women. Why don't we just appreciate one another? I personally think it's important to value others in our society who have strengths we don't, and vice versa.
@@JulieMelillo how about woman can do whatever they want as long as they are not Harming anyone why bash someone for having ambitions and capability
11:07 we are creators and consumers of the environments that drive by us.
Men have more pressure to earn money, therefore take said studies and said jobs.
I LOVE history...but damned, it's not exactly reliable, go into teaching? No thanks. Money not good enough.
So I became an accountant.
My sister loves children, therefore studied to work with disadvantaged children.
We need people like my sister, but I'm sure I'll be earning a lot more because I didn't follow my passion, I followed what I could tolerate and make money with.
Men do not have more pressure to make money.
More men have just as much pressure as women to make money.
Get it right.
Bias is a very natural thing we need to get adjusted to the nature and the environment and survive at last We have to understand human being. We cannot ignore the outcome from biological progress. Why do we have to remove all the difference to make the world equity just to achieve the implementation of ideology. We need to focus on the harmony not on the equity. Even though we have to pursue the human right investing our resources for mechanical gender equality is not the top priority. Almost 50 vs 50 in every fields is not possible.We don't have to make such an unatural effort to achieve 50:50. Those who are uncomfortable for differences in gender is going to make unatural effort endlessly until they get 50:50 in the fields where they are only highly valued.
Wow it's almost like she studied this to prove her point rather than to understand it. We use this bias system unconsciously to decide the best potential of outcome for any given situation with too many unknown variables. It's instinctual. As much as we need to ignore bias against known information, like the resume test, and why we shouldn't be afraid to embrace it. We know factually the differences between the male and female brain, we know how that effects the male and female body, and we now know stereotypically what to assume from a candidate we otherwise know nothing about. We shouldn't be worried so much about the "what" that were trying to fix, but rather understand the "why" it is that way.
Women complain about problems , men solve the problems..
Yup by telling women they are princess they don't need to work
@jen berter it was actually not bad economically till feminism and women's suffrage came about. Patriarchal societies are still the most viable, but we don't live in a patriarchal society what we see are remnants of that with a matriarchal spin
she right
Wasn’t she biases when assuming that Forbes was biases by informing that Marissa Mayer is a “real deal”?
No go back and listen to what she says , very slowly if that helps maybe do it more than once , it just might sink in ...
So to summarise: This person came into gender science with a bias, did some research, ''looked at the data'', and arrived at the normal conclusion on gender which is that there is a natural unconsious bias, and discovered herself that woman are just as biased towards men as men are to woman. And the proposed solution is to do what normal individuals were already doing anyway.
''To commit yourself to becoming a good observer of your enviroment'
That's some interesting neuroscience right there..
*Standing ovation.
_"and discovered herself that woman are just as biased towards men as men are to woman."_
Actually, she doesn't talk about bias against men.
I agree on one point: the “repeating pattern” that obscures human perception.
One repeating pattern is the myth of female oppression and male privilege.
Do you really think females suck in computer science because of Star Trek posters and lack of coffee cups?
Do you really think males are most certainly not effected by environmental factors but females surely are?
It seems to me like you present yourself in a position of “moral high ground” and taking all the advantages for females (like yourself) and do not give a damn about males (except when supporting females).
That's a very egoistic position.
Könnt ich nicht besser sagen.
When you grow up with privilege, you often can't see it. If somebody tries to take it away (e.g. insisting that you take responsibility for your own mistakes or pay for your own food) it can feel like oppression.
@MrHotPinkBanana - It is a reference to feminists response to men who say "hey, men are oppressed too!" Their number one response is "patriarchy hurts men too" but a close second is "men don't see their own privilege and when it is challenged it can feel like oppression." This may be, true but in my experience it is even more true of women. Many men understand that they are granted privileges by society IN RETURN FOR THEIR SELFLESS PRODUCTIVITY, whereas women take their privileges for granted and seem to consider them laws of nature. I never hear feminists complaining how few women there are in mining or how we need more women going out and repairing power lines in the middle of ice storms. I never hear them complaining that we need more male kindergarten teachers or nurses either.
I can't remember how many stories I've heard of women who go out on a date and don't even bring any kind of money with them expecting, no, assuming that everything will be paid for.
So you better not regret liking my comment. (but if you do you can always take it back)
@@GordieGii
_"I can't remember how many stories I've heard of women who go out on a date and don't even bring any kind of money with them expecting, no, assuming that everything will be paid for."_
I would if I was a woman. If he's not willing to pay for dinner, he's just freeloading.
@@BlunderCity That's an interesting use of the word "freeloading." What exactly is he getting for free if he pays for himself?
Take a good hard look at the Scandinavian countries. The more egalitarian a society becomes, the bigger the differences in interest, career paths and distribution among jobs between the genders become.
So women should just sit at home and breed for you
Watched Dr. Peterson videos didn't you?
I too am a big fan...
Actually, career tendencies and differencies between men and women are increased the less gender bias is.
It is shown clearly bt numerous studies of the Scandinavian universities.
Men, in genefal, are biologically orientated towards objetcs. Women, towards people.
I am saying this being a white anthropologist. But ey, im doing my best.
Hey you!! The structures out there aren't self design but naturally expressions of gender characteristics. And THAT'S WHY there's a relationship between the two. Isn't gender bias, is gender identifiers.
Please point to the reputable study that unconscious bias training has a positive effect on a workforce.
Unconscious bias has been de bunked by a quality group of scientists it has little evidence to support it and the training and testing indicate different result each time with the same people. It is barely science at all The test this women is talking about was poor result wise. They also commented about the money being wasted on training to remove the bias that we don't even no we have..
This video does not seem to answer any questions for me. For three generations myself and my sisters have for the largest part have been victimized by control freak women, who had been unrestrained by their husbands. These girls had a paticularistic empathy for each other, but no larger sense of justice or duty. Feeling substituted for probative evidence. Universal morality was a foreign concept to them. You could explain it to them but the explanation was made impervious toward them by their avidity and prejudices. So a retarded borderline woman gained enough favor among her coven to cheat her sister of her trust fund. And we got stuck in a marriage with a father who was very mentally ill. All this was in service to a handicapped woman who impersonated my mother at the bank. My own bias is not to automatically favor the woman as the superior in morality.
Let men take responsibility over their women and child. They don't need no talks. They need to raise up and claim their own. WOMAN AND CHILDREN! .. no queremos cobardía en éste alburio. A true man stands on his own. He listens and answers accordingly.
I don't know what the definition of a man really is, what I do know is the definition of a male
there are a lot of men in this comment section and it shows
Yeah there's a lot of men on UA-cam
Less opinion, more facts. It would be nice if someone a little more qualified spoke about such issues.
Like a man? LOL
I stopped in the middle of this video when she suggested the "Implicit Association Test" and went and took a "Implicit Association Test" through Harvard and found it to be very frustrating. It had 7 stages and each staged almost seemed rigged. The answers you're able to select from are seemingly designed to force the outcomes. For instance- A few of the stages asked questions like "Which category does this word fall under? Category being: Family/Women or Men/Career" and then gives you words like Family, Business, Success, Marriage but it forces you to select these categories under a fixed association that you cannot change. Obviously, I'm going to associate the word Career with Career/Men and Business with Career (of which Men have been assigned to by the test, not by me). Just the same, I'm going to associate Marriage with Family/Women because FAMILY is the topic and you've attached women to that answer. By lumping in Women with Family, you're forcing me to categorize these by gender - not because of a bias, but because you've ONLY given me that choice. The test seems dangerously malicious. I stopped listening to this women speak after that
I feel like the results would be different if you had no idea what the test was for.
@@noterenjaeger read my comment and then explain to me how my the results could possibly have been different , regardless of “knowing what the test was for”. In what world would anyone associate the word “business” with “family” when the other choice is “career”? No world, is the answer. By choosing “career” and attaching “man” with “career” , there’s no option to make a different choice. The test is moronic and embarrassing. I would be completely willing to take another test if there was one that wasn’t so skewed and misleading or poorly designed as the Harvard version that I took
It's measuring how quickly you found the answer. So if you consistently recognize the answer more quickly when the option is "men/career" than when the option is "women/career," that reveals your implicit association.
@@noterenjaeger more illogical female reasoning
It's annoying. Men and women should respect each other. They have different roles in society. One is not better than the other. It's just different. I'm tired of being the punished rose. My thorn made me sharp. Pissed off rose.
You are the smartest one here. Seriously.
@@tedgrego1584 I promise you I'm not.
2015. It's 2022 and a loooooooooooot of people still discuss if misogyny is even real. :'D Cause guess what, asking women and believing them and their retelling of their own experiences are still not valid and trusted options. Ocassionally males have a closer look and start speaking about it to male peers and guess what, they then learn what it's like to get tons of confirmation of the problem by other (mostly but not exclusively) males rushing in to shout around rudely.
I'm at a point where I cannot unsee how most issues we have originate in misogyny. I thought there were different causes and capitalism and all that, but the more I look, the more I notice the system doesn't matter. The deprecation and disregard wreck them all and misogynistic concepts turn up no matter if you dig at the chore of racism, ableism, .... pick your sorrow!
A very sensitive balance has wrecked and seperated the attributes of archaic feminine and masculine between people, when all people are both, yin and yang and both are actually equall to each other! And once the balance is off and tilts further and further over generations, it becomes more and more difficult to reinstall the balance. Generations of "working field build from males for males and equaling 'norm' " cannot be fixed by quickly applying some feminism. It's rooted deeply. The perception of norms has started to shift. But it's a marathon and those benefitting from the scewed system (seemigly, they do not get that they, too, are paying the price) thrash, scream, scratch and bite in refusal to move from the entitled spot of "why does she get to have a second cookie????" when she's only asking for the other half of what has always been her cookie but he somehow got used to the idea that that should be shared, too.
There is no pay gap its about lifestyle choices
geoff brett and why do we make different choices?
I cannot see it.
Where was the neuroscience? She must have missed the first thing they tell you in your research statistic classes, personal observation and experience are not valid science but rather pseudo-science.
I wouldn't call it pseudoscience but rather not complete science. You form your hypothesis first then do experiments and then start the results and repeat the process again with different people. Viewing and hypothesizing things are important but they aren't the final step.
Can I just say that she heavily leans into the idea that women are being discriminated against without actually presenting any evidence of this while also saying that people have an unconscious bias against women which is actually untrue though my biggest gripe is that she says that women aren’t equally payed or represented in the science field in which your pay is decided by your findings and reputation she also says that this happens in other fields which occurs because women choose to go into different fields and many of those that don’t are usually worse than their male counterparts but not always well either way I’m gonna end my ramblings but for those who read this far have a nice day
As soon as I found an inaccuracy in her speech, it made everything else she said potentially wrong as well. All the so called facts she stated, may also be untrue. So I stopped watching, as it then appeared to be simply just another woman who's unhappy with what she sees in the world, rather than someone who really examined the situation.
Now I would like to see this cross referenced with the bias of those who believe in identity politics vs those who do not, and then compared to the bias of those who prefer ketchup over mustard.
All politics are identity politics my friend. Its a misnomer to believe its only on the left.
And where is the promised Neuroscience???????????????????
Why wouldn't a male chef be hired over a female (who might land up being pregnant and being a stay-at-home mum for the next few years?) Why shouldn't men who are willing to work in the risky STEM fields be worthy of more pay? I don't see many women jumping at the opportunity to do the very risky and heavy lifting jobs, like mining or landscaping, underwater welding, plumbing, construction work etc. I'm not saying women who work in those scientific or tech roles shouldn't get a fair pay, but they certainly shouldn't be expected to be 'an equal' to men because their biology and physiology is very different.
Men and women evolved separately and are different so there would be biases but where's your proof? Facts.
richard ouvrier we haven’t “evolved” differently, we’re still the same species.
Also saying something is a fact doesn’t make it so. Show sources mate
Women in STEM are never called geeks in the harsh way that both men and women call male STEM students and professionals geeks, virgins, etc. Let women imagine how they are rejected in dating by field of study, even when a higher pay job is secured
I just took the Implicit Association Test on race here implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/selectatest.html and I have a beef about it. The problem with all these theories about the causes of racism is that it leaves out one crucial element. Namely, behavior. If any person behaves arrogantly, selfishly, with greed, jealousy, envy, or any other adverse behavior, they don't behave this way because of their race or even sexual orientation, they behave this way because they are human. As to WHY they behave this way, the right kind of psychology has a lot to offer us. And if we had the courage to look in the mirror and see the many ways our respective character defects affects us and others, we would be shocked and realize that racism is not the problem- in never was. It's our unwillingness to deal with our dark side and the only way to address it is with a good psychotherapists. and we should not think our character defects thru the lens of pathology, rather, in realizing that which is holding us all back. It is bringing the evolution of humanity to a snail's pace. We need to save ourselves from ourselves.
That test is bullshit, they start by making you put negative labels under black people's faces and good terms under white people and reverse it, and the point is that your brain gets confuzzled and they are like 'ahhaaaaa, you're a racist' but that's not how it works, if they started the other way around they would get the same results, it's a brain trick not an academical research material.
Consider this general concept:
Suppose you gathered a random sample of USA whites, but randomly excluded some with higher IQ, so that you ended up with 10,000 whites with an average IQ of 85 (same average as for USA blacks). If you then studied those whites, you would find that they had similar problems as US blacks. More drug use, more single mothers, more problems at school, more problems getting good employment, more nutrition problems etc. etc.
Conclusion: Groups like BLM have been convinced (by feminist activists in academia) that white people are oppressing them and they think that's why whites do better. They call it racism. In fact, it is simply an effect of average IQ and skin colour is irrelevant. So *knowledge about average IQ is important because that knowledge will expose the false propaganda of SJWs exaggerations about oppression and racism*.
Its not really neuroscience but it is psychology
She missed the other side. As a man in a cna job im often smiled at like its ok you are just a man. Even though emails went out that couldve saved a patients toes from infection. Or just suggesting ways to do betterive been overlooked or ignored and when i spoke up i didnt recive a raise. I did get stellar review but nothing else. Its fact psychologically that both men and women view women as object not subjectively. So this ted talk is out dated and dosent really get to the gender inequality as a whole. But life will never be equal.
Or it's simply just , respect eachother and their individuality ! (There are no neuroscience here in this video ) . Evolutionary men and women will differ in some places but what we forget it that we are also similar in many ways . There are things nature has given us through evolution ,you cannot change them in a decade or even in next thousands years. So rather than saying that men are bad or women are bad , let's view things subjectively . Her talk alone sounds bias (ngl). Bias will stay with us always ,just like a woman can never fully understand a man ,a man cannot fully understand woman ,so can't we accept the difference and cherish the similarities . If it was that men and women didn't complement eachother , we would have been extinct long ago !
日本語字幕で視聴。
論拠に乏しい主観ばかりだ。
映画の15%しか女性が主役でないのは女が主役の映画を観たがる人が少ないからであってそれ以上の理由は無いし、「指導者」を男に「かよわい」を女に結びつけるのは現実社会の男女がそうであるからで、事実に基づいた判断を偏見とは言えない。
「かよわい」という単語で男性が想起される様な社会を男女平等と呼ぶのならそんな社会は恐らく実現しないだろう。
Well that isn't biased at all...
It's unethical to eliminate the pay gap; not between genders, but between skill and dedication levels. More men are willing to sacrifice everything to be a CEO. Many others are not, and more so women than men. It's just natural selection.
Lol shows a male line in a tech convention. Little did she tell you there might be 2 urinals and 3 toilets for men but the women have 2 different entrances and prob have around 20 toilets. At a convention that is primarily male. If that isnt gender inequality i dont know what is.
Oh and her points, there is no point to telling her how her stats are wrong because she wont listen to them anyway.
🤣😂 as a woman, this makes me laugh. I guess you guys don't go out very much.
@fabian michelsson 🤣 I bet I would laugh at you too if I met you in real life.
The thing is, even if I'd met you, you'd never say that to my face, since you rather hide behind the UA-cam comment section.
The Implicit Association Test is as substantiated as anything you can name. Might be time to check your own implicit bias, guys...
I just went and did her test. It is sooo diishonest! It begins by training you to associate "male" and "career" on one hand and "female" and "family" on the other. Then makes you associate the other way around. Of course everyone is confused on the second run.
The only bias tested is that of the test makers.
(who have explicitly made the test for a world audience, but don't know the world does not define itself the way americans do, separated among "latinos" and "non-latinos" or "conservatives" and "liberals" etc)
This is really bad science.
Often the way these tests work is that on one condition it begins with the ‘male’ and ‘career’ association, and on another condition it begins with the inverse of this association. Then after thousands of people have completed it they can see if there is still a difference that hasn’t been explained by the initial association. Not sure if that is how her test works though, but if it’s a university experiment it likely would be.
Tests are often localised by the way. In science people nowadays are aware that tests must be adjusted to local cultural definitions. The cannot be literally translated. They must be transferred to "what would show a bias in this cluture?" and "what would show there's no bias in this culture.
Just like in history, if I transferred a test of women = pink, male = blue to Europe a frew hundrds of years ago, then it would have to get translated to males = pink, etc. cause back then pink was associated with males XD
"Interesting title, I wonder what this will get into..."
"So it's not science, nor is it reliable at all. Gotcha."
I am shocked how people waste their lives studying this and someone actually employs and pays them... (probably with our tax money, which is even more dissapointing) We are NOT EQUAL, we have equal rights which I agree with, but we are NOT THE SAME. We have natural differences. Stop shaming men.
The speakers is just too slippery and dishonest by half. She sounds like Justin Trudeau.
You're 51% of the population and occupy only 5% of the very top positions because you don't work as hard. You're coddled and you whine about the things you don't get. Whereas men are much more likely to assess the situation, take some responsibility create an action plan and get their butts in motion. That's how you get to the top. These positions aren't handed out on "everybody gets a trophy" day.
You're entitlement is showing, and it's more gaudy than the other lady's belly piercing.
The question being asked is the wrong question. We shouldn't be looking into why there are so few woman at the top but why are there so many men that desire and are willing to do what is needed to be at the top. Very possibly a mental disorder that overwhelmingly affects men.
This is discussed by Jordan Peterson
Do all women whine about things and are coddled and all men take responsibility?
Don't get why this has that many downvotes. In my opinion that's quite a nice talk, although I didn't find the neuroscience aspect in it. However, I support the overall message; we all as a society have to work on solving inequalities for women and men.
These talks have one flaw: they do not address alleged biological bases from which the gender bias may arise. Until these talks can explain why the biological differences between the genders do not matter, these talks would continue to fail to be compelling.
Agreed. The problem is much deeper than “just don’t be so sexist”. These things stem from waaaaaay down
agreed
The issue _isn't_ the biological differences at all.
It's about *_how those differences are valued._*
We can get to work right away on that issue.
If they look at it and incorporate it, their narrative would fall. So long live this flaw.
There is no neuroscience in this presentation.
"Neuroscience (or neurobiology) is the scientific study of the nervous system.[1] It is a multidisciplinary branch of biology,[2] that deals with the anatomy, biochemistry, molecular biology, and physiology of neurons and neural circuits."
I studied Engineering and after working for several years went on to study for a masters degree. There were 16 of us on the course - all men. I'm sure the Univerity would have loved to have accepted some women but there was a lack of applicants. When we went to our degree ceremony, the group before us had studied for diplomas for library studies - virtually all women. The men/engineers were heading towards jobs earning twice the national average while the women/librarians were heading for jobs earning half the national average.
Why did the women make such bad choices and the men such good choices? Well, perhaps they were deciding what was best for themselves as individuals and ignoring what was best for their intersectional groupings. Were they making good or bad choices? - No, the choices were best for themselves.
Barron-Cohen showed that one week old baby girls look longer at faces than moving objects while one week old boys do the opposite. The effect correlates with testoterone levels in the womb producing overlapping distributions of interest in people/things such that most women are predominantly interested in people while most men are interested in things. Of course, because it is a distribution and not a binary, this means that some women are, never-the-less, predominantly interested in things and they often go on to study Engineering - good luck to them!
The women engineers bring a different perspective which is valued by the Engineering community as it is very welcoming of diversity of thought, unlike feminism. Engineering and Science accept that diveristy of thought makes us as a group smarter because we can debate a subject and the truth then emerges as the bad ideas get knocked down. Feminism does not believe in debate but orthodoxy so that bad ideas are never challenged and the result is the nonesense in this video.
According to the talk, all differences in outcome between men and women are down to bias or wrong-think because men and women are actually identical. Wrong! Smell the politics and notice the lack of rationality.
Well said!
Stuart: I'll have to block you as you are making entirely too much sense.
Excellent response Stuart. These are facts that I've seen before and can be backed up. Bravo.
Women are discouraged from birth to interact with objects, math and leadership while boys are encouraged to do these things.
The main reason women tend to choose a type of occupation is because they’ve been groomed into thinking that way.
Nature vs nurture.
There isn’t that big a difference between men and women cognitively speaking. Cultural studies also show this result.
by printing pictures of boys or boys-associated images/colors in toys about building, trains, videogames, firefighting and others that encourage any number of professions, and on the other hand girls have little kitchens, babies, trophy wife barbies and braid makers. since birth we are surrounded with associations of what our gender is supposed to do or be
12 mins of nothing
I don't see women in the coal mines either.
Building construction, steam engineering, electricians, plumbers, HVAC, marine engineering, auto mehcanics, etc etc etc. Woman are more than welcome in these common vocations, and a "few" do, yet they overwhelmingly choose not to take up these careers. Why? Because women "generally" don't have the mindset or desire to "choose" these careers. They make different life choices than men, and no one is forcing them too. Women think differently than men, so get over yourself. It's called biology.
In Australia, women are 40% of the mining workforce.
Well, good for them.
Christine Nicolson liar. It's %13.
In Sweden there are a huge number of female employees in the mines. Thank you.
This is a really fantastic explanation of bias in general - maybe one of the simplest and clearest I've heard!
I found Janet's talk heavily biased. She focused only on professions dominated by men. Interesting that she didn't mention 9 of 10 teachers are female in K-12 with a study showing that they grade boys 30% lower than girls for equal work.
Link to the study please?
Asia L, fire up Google, don't be lazy. You'll find it.
Hmm.. Couldn’t find it!
Boys Lag Behind: How Teachers' Gender Biases Affect Student Achievement
You're welcome.
Stephen Mueller idk how you can get a lower score for the same work unless you are saying shes awarding more points per question , soley based on gender
On average men have more muscle mass. Men produce more testosterone and have an amplified response to testosterone, which leads to stronger muscles and denser and stronger bones. They also, on average, have a larger cardiac and respiratory capacity. I don't think that men are better than women, but associating the word "strong" more easily with men isn't bias, it's anatomical and physiological science.
But then again, strength is not just physical
@@Iyanjebu strength: the quality or state of being physically strong.
Then where does emotional and mental strength belong.
@@swathysreer4422both of those men are stronger. Men are leaders for a reason.
Men are stronger on all fronts
If people associate "tall" with men and "short" with women, does it mean bias, or does it mean men are mostly taller them women? The IAT doesn't prove prejudice, it may just show an accurate association with natural differences between groups.
And of course one should always judge the individual - like noticing a tall woman is tall, rather than assuming she's short because women are shorter. Same with leadership, strength, fragility, etc.
Society expect from tall women to bend and from short men to walk on tiptoe, that's the problem, not that the average woman is shorter than the average man, to stay in this example.
@@anitafrieda
It does?
Even if that's true, there's a simple solution: ignore "society".
It's not hard. I do it constantly.
Women are pre-wired by nature to be more agreeable and neurotic.
Blame nature, in that case, not society, since you're looking for someone to blame for your perceived inadequacies.
@Jan Postema : It was a parable!
@@florzinnha
Did you have your 5th daily breakdown and cry yet today?
😭😂
Your argument might be sound but it doesn't suit their narrative. So you are wrong.
Thank You Janet Crawford ... even if you did not exactly use "neuroscience" ... OR you did not make the neuroscience aspect clear??? Anyway, in the field of psychology I have read many studies that look at many forms of Bias ... and what you say here does indeed reflect the general findings of Bias (we all have effects of bias (not Just gender bias) due to how we take in ... store and use ... the information we are exposed to (be that from first or second hand experience or read etc ...) ... It was interesting for me to read the comments here and find tons of gender bias ... and they seem to have no clue. Those of us who do understand need to speak up at every opportunity available (and especially the males who understand because help is needed from males, for those males, who do not yet understand (they will see what males say as more valid) ... sad but true. Love & Peace to All
She’s so right... men and women are different. How could I have not seen this before.
What is she on about
So what you're saying is women have unconscious bias against Star Wars.
Sorry its just boring to me
...Is THAT why I love star trek so much more?
Tbh she didn't state that evolutionary ,men are more attracted to material things and women to more emotional things . So as star wars is more material i.e. with space ships and all , it's more naturally appealing to men than women .
If we can already prove gender bias, why is it so hard for the world to accept racial bias?
If there was a consensus that people are racial bias that would include every race not just one individual race. I think maybe people should start trying to focus on things that unit us together and things we all have in common instead of pushing this false claim that “diversity” is our strength. How is it possible that what makes us different from each other is our strength? Our unity on the basic principles of believing in living in a free society is what makes us all unit together that then allows us all to appreciate our differences and respect them.
Of course there's a gender bias for VERY good reasons
Did reality stop existing
Femaies and males are anything but equal in capacity and capabilities
Agreed Affirmative action is a horrific racial bias
This video is very interesting.
the gender pay gap is very well understood; it's largely a matter of different choices and priorities for men and women. have a look on youtube. it's debunked all over the gaff. this tripe has got to stop. you're driving a wedge between the sexes. that's good to no one, you are dishonest and biased.
If you are arguing with someone who claims that gender is a 'social construct,' note this; you may be arguing from a philosophical or biological viewpoint, but they are arguing from an ideological viewpoint. The social constructionist's viewpoint is embedded in ideology.
Take a look at workforce participation then...in the U.S. and the world.
Girls are being pushed into the low-wage jobs. Boys are pushed into technics. Ask any girl who loves science how often she heard she's unfeminine.
Humans are _always_ affected by the other humans around them, either men or women. And if a girl is raised and being told by society she can't do xyz, she will believe it and will have it much harder later in life to break this believe. If you tell a lie often enough, people will believe this lie.
You can be strong and being pushed as a child in a certain direction. Babies don't come to earth being strong already. And not all women are strong. Funny thing: there are women who are strong, there are women who are weak. Not all women are the same. Do _you_ believe, all women are the same? And even the strong ones have it harder because of social pressure.
I'm still waiting for the science bit . . . .
You and the 15 likes must have not been paying attention. She named off a few scientific studies throughout this presentation.
A few studies does not make it a scientific theory though.
her whole talk was on sociological biases...... do u even know what science encompasses
Neuroscience? Where?
in her head, i guess
lise eliot
ok, i'll tell you when i see bias: i see a ridicuolously privileged woman, who went to friggin berkeley, tell men how they should treat other women who went to berkeley. and as for men taking advice from women, it has a lot to do with attitude.
people are less likely to take advice from someone who struts around acting like the world owes them something, than someone who is humble.
here's a bias for ya: boys score on average 30% lower when the female teacher know they are boys, than in blind tests.
Could you post the citation of this study? I'd be interested in reading it, and I'm sure others would be too. Thanks!
Jacqueline McCook I couldn't easily (via Google) find any such stat but I did find an interesting article written by someone from MIT.
Boys Lag Behind: How Teachers’ Gender Biases Affect Student Achievement
Camille Terrier
SEII Discussion Paper #2016.07
November 2016
It is a working paper it looks like and so not peer reviewed as far as I can guess. Might be that one of the cited articles mentions what he is talking about? Or maybe not.
I see somebody that allowed a personal bias to colour their understanding of an interesting and fair TED talk. Janet Crawford was not lecturing men, and several times acknowledged that gender bias affects men too, both in making men who don't conform to traditional gender roles feel somehow less, and also in condescending to them by giving them praise for normal activities that every person should do.
I see somebody wanting to push their own personal agenda and who has created a persona for somebody that has very little to do with reality, or even what's presented here because they feel threatened or like somebody is blaming them.
how does going to college make her a privileged woman? i don't get it, if she was a man would she be less privileged and just average?
You can go to a very pro woman place and still be hit on and harassed. It sound to me like you are trying to nit pick because the topic upsets you for some reason.
It's hard to take this seriously when I have never heard people that fight for equality in jobs show interest in leveling the gender gap in mining and construction working or any jobs they don't like the look of. It's always higher paid or higher education jobs that are chased. People only care about issues when it benefits them which is another form of bias that should be discussed more.
*Many* women have fought for rights to work in fields such as mining and suffered major consequences. Do we not learn true history in our schools?
Women used to mine coal in England. When the miners' wives found out that it's hot in the mines and everybody worked topless, they petitioned the government to make it illegal for women to work in mines because "it wasn't appropriate work for women."
@@tracyburt3621 You Need a therapist
I agree... academic work is far different to work that requires heavy lifting, and work that imposes certain risks or danger. However, I do think that certainly in the fields of medicine and some sciences, women should be entitled to equal pay. HOwever men who work in mining or construction should definitely get bigger paychecks
@@alessiotisi774 agree with all you said. Sometimes I wonder would the framing "Everyone must get the same pay for the same job. No exceptions" or something like that get a better reception as it is not instantly creating a separation of the population(which isn't even always applicable to situations) for people to attempt to take sides on. Interested to hear your opinion
I wish the speaker would have gone into a little more depth on the study with the two rooms: the stereotypically nerdy one and the neutral one. Men's interests apparently were unaffected by the environment, but the women's were. Is this bias? Is it something inherent in how men and women see things due to biology differences? There was some deeper insight that could have been gleamed from that but she didn't mention it. One could infer that the problem women run into in science and technology fields is environmental, not due to how they are treated - basically "I'd enjoy lab stuff more if there wasn't all that lab stuff in the lab..."
Seems like you gleaned it anyway though
Seems like a reach to confirm your bias to me.
Seems like selective inequalities. This is definitely bias.
"in this case, fortune magazine told us necessary that melissa mayer is the real deal because as a blonde attractive young woman we might assume she wasn't".
this. or, maybe, she was hired to turn a company around and she only just managed to sell the company to be dismembered and give a profit to stock holders. having acquired yahoo stocks around the time she was hired, and having sold the remainder of the company with a good profit some years later, i would personally vouch for the second: many a times it looked like i had thrown the money down the flush. and, rest assured, the doubts and the hard looks at the company actions weren't aired because mayer was a "blonde attractive young woman". i had fca, too, and i can assure you things were *much* harder for marchionne in a more or less similar situation, who was anything but blonde, attractive, or female.
so, who's gender biased here?
note: fca was much more worse off than yahoo. i did acquire it when marchionne had already worked some serious miracles into the company. and yet, the disbelief continued on and on and on, pretty much until the day he died.
@Nikki E. you are only a couple of years late...
@Nikki E. specifically, then: if we all carry implicit gender bias, then it's ok to have then, no? perfectly normal. why is this person bias wrong, while that other is ok? and if one substituted biased men in power with women, would there be any progress? no, because women would be just as biased.
it's a self defeating proposition, it doesn't serve gender equality, and, sorry, i believe it's false, unless one passes for "bias" even the most remote preference.
in addition, research has shown that the fact that an *attractive* woman can become CEO is indeed something remarkable. the gender bias normally had in the workplace makes attractive women advantaged compared to unattractive women when it comes to hiring them for lower positions, but actually puts them at a disadvantage when they need to be promoted to position of real power, such as one as CEO of a big company. as for the "young" part, i'll tell you a secret: they point that stuff out even when it's a young man.
so, even when there is a bias, it is strong, and it is pointed out, however obliquely, this speaker fails to appreciate it, because everything MUST be normal.
if you care, i will dig up all the scientific references from my nonverbal communication days, but i suspect that you do not care. this is just another internet discussion in which you came with your ideas and nothing will make you change your mind. in addition, despite not knowing anything about me, you prefer to dismiss my rather long and articulate original reply with a couple of lines, also containing an insult directed to me and whoever disagrees with you.
gender biased, you too?
Remember kids, gender equity, not equality.... it's about outcome, not equal treatment.
i say equity is a much more disastrous thing...cause it compromises competence
@CEOofFRESH1 in today's world everyone is getting education and everyone wants job . But the talented ones are filtered out
@CEOofFRESH1 the more deserving ones should get the first priority . This filtering also nurtures the real talent and can lead to amazing results . Survival of the fittest .
@CEOofFRESH1 I'm talking about filtering for talent , exams like SAT , MCAT,etc . Internships, interview etc
Thats neuroscience?
This is feminisim not neuroscience
Absolutely, and i'm sick of it. This "me, too" shite makes us (women) all sound like little, quivering butterflies. This is becoming a cottage industry-the victimization of ____(fill in the blank). Oh, and i agree with the person who noted her obvious bias against the young woman based on, guess what, her looks.
Actually, implicit bias has been studied extensively and the data show that it's quite real.
But what effect does it have in real life? We don't make decisions just from word association.
@@janetwhite7786
_"Oh, and i agree with the person who noted her obvious bias against the young woman based on, guess what, her looks."_
I think that was the whole point no? Don't you understand this was deliberate? The idea is that we all have these biases, regardless of our politics.
Maybe gender biases exists because men and women are actually different? Yes some of the biases may be negative but should we really strive to eliminate them by dismantling gender roles and concurrently dispensing with basic biological mechanism by which we've evolved to function?
If I understand you correctly, EerieEcho, you're questioning whether we should bother at attempting to eliminate negative biases within ourselves and society. And in your run on sentence application of a shred of logic championing the argument for a status quo state of being, you're apprehensive that further societal equalization and growth would jeopardize the many stride our ancestors accomplished during the vast history of evolution. Am I getting that right?
@@ca2712
_"you're questioning whether we should bother at attempting to eliminate negative biases within ourselves and society"_
It's not always clear if these biases are negative.
If these things truly were innate, you wouldn't be so threatened by someone questioning them. They'd continue to exist regardless. But gender roles are indeed flimsy social constructs that are harmful when pushed on everyone. How can you dudes not grasp that putting all humans into two categories and destinies is a bad thing?
Online words that hurt your feelings are not VIOLENCE.
The two genders are _not_ equal. This is not a bad thing.
"Neuroscience is a relatively young, exciting, and fundamentally interdisciplinary field devoted to the study of the nervous systems. Problems range from investigation of the evolution of nervous system in basal vertebrates to the application of neuroscience to education and law. Neuroscientists also seek to develop neurologically plausible models of human thinking, affect and behavior.Neuroscience creates a context for scholarly conversation about the nature of mind, brain, and behavior." - University of Notre Dame
This video shows that clearly.
Gender deals with human behaviors with regards social expectations.
In my opinion, we can solve this boring gender issue. How? it is all about love man (the hippies got it hhaha).
In more practical terms, it is respecting others to be who they are, and what they want to do with their own lives. (a virtue that is rapidly diminishing in our societies). The problem is fear. It is fear of anything out of the norm, fear of change, fear of diversities, fear of differences, fear of losing our identity, fear of growing power (other than one's own), fear of loss of authority to women? (last one was a hunch)
I would like people to accept and respect me for my choices as i do respect them for being them. Those that don't, should watch out hahaha.
I will leave you with some wise words:
You know that term "the world is not fair or nothing is fair in this world?" Well, MAKE IT FAIR THEN, (that's not my answer, that's the grumbling of my six year old brother when i tell him he can't have what other kids have). Learn from our young, they see no limits.
thank you. you made my day.
@William Burr your limits are not mine, and neither are my limitations yours.
@William Burr "responsibilities come with limitations" your word salad.
1. You gave a list of responsibilities. And continued with that quote.
That's the focus of the comment
@William Burr okay, here is some logic, your limitations in how you raise your kids do not automatically make it my limits in how I raise my kids. Does that compute?
@William Burr you claimed kids had no responsibilities, and adults do. And that sets limits for adults when facing problems. Correct?
When they couldn't make women more, not even as powerful as men despite all efforts they shifted the focus on making men as weak, preferably weaker than women, by posing a compassionate pro-men stance that "O men, please understand, that it's ok and there's no dishonour or shame if you are weak, or even weaker than a woman".
Too little science (which is skewed by design) and too much opinion and misogyny.
I wasnt expecting such attractive men to be CEOs...damn
I know somewhere else unconscious bias comes up, by this presenter. It's quiet, easily overlooked, and pre defended against in the stages of the presentation, but it's there.
Motes and beams?
The pay gap is jistified i eont talk about i cuz i know this video is old but you guys can check if you want
If women’s live can be destroyed by classroom decorations, what does that say about their strength? I would say you should drop this non sense and let real women speak for themselves. Stop hurting strong women.
Nonsense.
WOW
I would have rather listened to the woman reading about angel investing.
I agree with all your points and really enjoyed this presentation. Unconscious bias is such a influence on our everyday behaviour and interaction i wish it was discussed more.
But have you given a thought as to whether those unconscious biases may actually be good for us?
Your unconscious is here for a reason.
All I hear in the media is how much sexism exists out in the workforce and in the world. However, in my 25 years of life I have YET to directly encounter it. Now, if it is SO prevalent in our society (as the media puts it) how have I not experienced it yet?
Me too and I'm 38! The only 2 men who lectured me on how oppressed I am as a woman, were the only men who treated me with sexism/in a very creepy way. Like one lied, said he was going the same direction as me, followed me home and started screaming when I wouldn't let him walk me to my door. After an hour of telling me how awful society is for women, patriarchy etc...hmm. Nope, there are just a few psychos out there. It's not all of men who are like that and we need to stop stereotyping men.
Having worked in a tech industry for a decade and seen/suffered everything from "being invisible" to sexist comments yes it exists. Having to deal with the harassment in uni colleges yes it exists. You have been very lucky, and I grateful for that.
"When we associate masculinity with money, and muscles, and domination, and agression, we dishonor legions of good men who do not embody these characteristics". Men are selected by women on these very characteristics. It's not about being "good" or "bad", it's all about getting "laid". Then it's about helping our offspring against others' offspring. It's natural selection.
To men it's all about getting "laid" and planting as many seeds as possible. Women are generally the ones more concerned about the success of their offspring (biologically speaking). The success of offspring is not only determined by good genes (looking at masculinity), but also in securing enough resources. The muscular and dominant men are not bringing in all the resources anymore. Resources in this day and age is money and while trade/skilled/labor jobs are still highly paid jobs, many men are making more money from jobs that aren't associated with aggression, domination and traditional masculinity.
@@kristaanderson8055 But women still choose to breed with aggressive douchebags. That's why we still have so many of them (their offsprings) in the population.
@@cancelled_user hehehe you got it
This gender equality agender will only ruen the world. Its the more reason why women are surfering.
@@cancelled_user I don't. I avoid those men
Come on women build buildings, bridges with us. Come on women lets mine coal together. Come on women why are you not fishing in full ocean or work on the height. Why you are taking safe and easy jobs instead better payed so you don't have to complain that in shop selling things you can't earn us much us man??
Wow, assuming that women cant enjoy star trek or video games
Two minutes into it and it's already clear there will be no science based discourse but ideology. It's not even worth a try
clearly you don't know what a scientific study is, multiple were mentioned throughout the presentation.
@@Victoria-jo8up When a neuroscientist choose to talk about the imaginary pay gap myth as a fact, she has left the realm of science and wandered into fairy land. Can't expect people to take any study she mentions to be serious after that.
This video should have been titled neuro- myths of gender bias. . there is no science here
No neuroscience, but some misrepresented psychology. For example, the UW study she described determined that room decorations affected the choices women made, and she stated that this was an example of sexism. This was an example of free choice, this was an example of self direction. I bet we can paint the room and change men's attitudes also, that isn't sexism, that is behaviorism. To be fair, if the title were changed, and if she began with the premise she asserts at the end (ie that women are self-imposing bias on each other [as she did when she was surprised the bare midriff woman was studying a finance book], and if she avoided the pointing-at-men and men-need-to-help-women more points, then she would have a reasonable presentation. She buried the lead.
Wow! A year..... The men need to help is harkening back to the Racial Injustices in the past (yes....all in the past....) and calling for Good People to stand together. You know it's wrong; Let's make it right!