•  

    pokaż komentarz

    Różnice między płciami widać już u niemowlaków. Nie można więc twierdzić, że to kwestia innego wychowania dziewczynek i chłopców. Ma to związek z poziomem testosteronu.

    Prof. Simon Baron-Cohen prowadzi badania nad autyzmem (jest szefem Autism Research Centre). W jednym z badań mierzył testosteron, kiedy dziecko jest jeszcze w macicy. Potem czekał na narodziny i przyglądał się jego zachowaniu. Odkrył, że im wyższy poziom testosteronu dziecka przed narodzeniem, tym wolniej rozwijają się zdolności językowe, tym bardziej unikają kontaktu wzrokowego, ale mają także dużo większe zainteresowanie systemami, rozumieniem tego, jak rzeczy działają.

    Poniżej kilka cytatów z jego publikacji The Essential Difference: The Truth About The Male And Female Brain

    Baby girls, as young as 12 months old, respond more empathically to the distress of other people, showing greater concern through more sad looks, sympathetic vocalizations and comforting. This echoes what you find in adulthood: more women report frequently sharing the emotional distress of their friends. Women also show more comforting than men do. When asked to judge when someone might have said something potentially hurtful – a faux pas – girls score higher from at least 7 years old. Women are also more sensitive to facial expressions. They are better at decoding non-verbal communication, picking up subtle nuances from tone of voice or facial expression, or judging a person’s character.

    How early are such sex differences in empathy evident? Certainly, by 12 months of age, girls make more eye contact than boys. But a study from Cambridge University shows that at birth, girls look longer at a face, and boys look longer at a suspended mechanical mobile. Furthermore, the Cambridge team found that how much eye contact children make is in part determined by a biological factor, prenatal testosterone. This has been demonstrated by measuring this hormone in amniotic fluid.

    Boys, from toddlerhood onwards, are more interested in cars, trucks, planes, guns and swords, building blocks, constructional toys, and mechanical toys - systems. They seem to love putting things together, to build toy towers or towns or vehicles. Boys also enjoy playing with toys that have clear functions – buttons to press, things that will light up, or devices that will cause another object to move

    The same sort of pattern is seen in the adult work place. Some occupations are almost entirely male: Metal-working, weapon-making, crafting musical instruments, or the construction industries, such as boat-building. The focus of these occupations is on constructing systems. Professions such as maths, physics, and engineering, which require high systemizing, are also largely male-chosen disciplines.

    •  

      pokaż komentarz

      @Piekarz123: Jest też inny objaw tego jak od najmłodszych lat mózg funkcjonuje wg płci. Chodzi o prostą zabawę chłopców jaką jest niszczenie zabawek. Ba, nawet jak dostaną lalki żeby ich "ukształtować" to często kończy się to rozczłonkowaniem takiej zabawki, i wtedy podnoszą niektórzy lament że wyrośnie z niego jakiś zwyrol. Otóż nie. Niszczenie zabawek to ta część mózgu małych chłopców kształtująca analityczne czy inżynieryjne predyspozycje. Jest to moment pierwszego zainteresowania jak coś jest zbudowane, jak działa. Dziewczynki w tym czasie wolą zabawy bardziej emocjonalne jak zabawa w dom, co łatwo wyrazić zabawą lalkami.

      A potem po latach okazuje się że mężczyźni dominują w zawodach analitycznych, precyzyjnych czy technicznych, a kobiety w zawodach bardziej nastawionych na emocjonalny kontakt z drugim człowiekiem. Przypadek? Absolutnie nie. Zwyczajnie rozwój jaki zaczyna się już od najmłodszych lat.

  •  

    pokaż komentarz

    Daje Bordo temu kto w logiczny sposób wyjasni dlaczego kobiety ida wczesnioej na emeryturę skoro faceci ciezej pracują i przez to wcześniej umierają? Chyba pora aby rzeczywiscie dyskryminowana płeć podniosła swój głos...

    •  

      pokaż komentarz

      @ADMlNserwisu: To proste; PIS za pomocą tej ustawy kupił głosy kobiet , do tego ZUS liczy średnia przeżywalność w Polsce tak że uśrednia wiek dożywalności polaków i polek, więc mężczyźni żyjący na emeryturze oo wiele krócej dopłacają do emerytur kobiet. Problemem nie jest tylko to że kobiety głosują na PIS, ale to że robią to również mężczyźni ,mimo że są przez niesprawiedliwe naliczanie emerytur okradani. Wynika z tego że faceci głosujący na PIS to debile, bo nikt kto ma równo pod sufitem nie będzie głosował na partię która wprowadza prawo emerytalne które mu zabiera kasę i daje innym.

    •  

      pokaż komentarz

      Daje Bordo temu kto w logiczny sposób wyjasni dlaczego kobiety ida wczesnioej na emeryturę skoro faceci ciezej pracują i przez to wcześniej umierają?

      @ADMlNserwisu: Zapewne dlatego że rodzą dzieci (i często je do tego wychowują) a faceci nie. I żeby nie było, nie jest tak że mi się ta niesprawiedliwość podoba, po prostu podejrzewam że to było pierwotnym zamysłem.

  •  

    pokaż komentarz

    Wyniki badania PISA wśród 15-latków. Chłopcy są nieco lepsi z matematyki, ale za to dziewczęta są znacznie lepsze w czytaniu.

    źródło: https://data.oecd.org/pisa/mathematics-performance-pisa.htm#indicator-chart https://data.oecd.org/pisa/reading-performance-pisa.htm#indicator-chart

    źródło: wykop.pl

    •  

      pokaż komentarz

      @Piekarz123: Bo czytanie to bardziej sprawa społeczna - więc oczywiste.

    •  

      pokaż komentarz

      @Piekarz123: w temacie PISA warto dodać, że test z matematyki jest podzielony na część bardziej kreatywną, wymagającą wyprowadzania dowodów, i część wymagającą zwykłego rozwiązywania zadań przećwiczonych w szkole. W tej pierwszej chłopcy mają jeszcze większą przewagę. Podobnie jest w przedmiotach przyrodniczych.

      PISA reveals that girls tend to do better when they
      are required to work on mathematical or scientific
      problems that are more similar to those
      that are routinely encountered in school.
      But when required to “think like scientists”,
      girls underperform considerably compared to boys.
      For example, girls tend to underachieve
      compared to boys when they are asked
      to formulate situations mathematically.
      On average across OECD countries,
      boys outperform girls in this skill
      by around 16 PISA score points –
      the equivalent of nearly five months
      of school. Boys also outperform
      girls – by 15 score points – in the
      ability to apply their knowledge
      of science to a given situation,
      to describe or interpret phenomena
      scientifically and predict changes.

    •  

      pokaż komentarz

      @Piekarz123: "Gender
      I confess that I prefer being taught by a woman. Perhaps
      this is because it is easier to chat with women. I have long
      been intrigued by the question of why women talk more
      than men.
      In connection with this fact, let me theorize a bit about
      the problem of women’s language vs. men’s language.
      They say that women are more loose-tongued. I read in
      books on archeology that women’s skeletons are characterized
      as much by their more delicate, more finely chiseled
      jaws as by their broader hip bones. It is a fact that generally
      women everywhere speak faster than men do. (According to
      Mario Pei, the average American male utters 150 syllables
      per minute, while the average American female utters 175.)
      Countless jokes, clichés, and comedy routines have been
      based on the fact that women talk more. This “verbal inflation”
      is expressed in different ways in different languages,
      based on a woman’s age and social status.
      For example, a little girl “prattles.” By the time she gets
      to school, she “chatters” or “jabbers”; when she grows up she
      “babbles.” A lady “chats,” a female colleague “yakety-yaks”
      or perhaps “blabs,” a neighbor “gabbles,” a bride “twitters,”
      a wife “blathers,” a mother-in-law “cackles.” A girl-buddy is
      reprimanded and told to cut the “chinfest.” And so on.
      Let me interject here, in connection with tongues, what
      I think accounts for the cliche Ein Mann ist ein Wort; eine
      Frau ist ein Wörterbuch (A man is a word; a woman is a dictionary).
      Prehistoric man’s meals came from killing prehistoric
      buffalo. Owing to the stronger male physique, it was natural
      that men would go to market while women stayed at home.
      Not to mention the fact that pregnancy and nursing pretty
      much filled a woman’s life and she would not survive her
      fertile years by much. This was slow to change; even at the
      turn of the 20th century, the average life expectancy of a
      woman was only 50 years.
      Today we are aware that the brain is compartmentalized:
      there exists a particular division of labor between the
      two hemispheres. The right brain governs motion while the
      left brain plays the decisive role in governing speech and
      verbal activity.
      It is no wonder that in women the right brain has regressed—if
      not in volume, at least in function—because
      women move less. At the same time, the left brain, responsible
      for verbalization/vocalization, has grown in importance.
      Seventy-five percent of all interpreters, worldwide,
      are women.
      The ideogrammatic part of the Japanese character set reflects
      the meanings of words. The “hieroglyph” for “man” is
      “人” because a man walks on two legs and feet and emerges
      from the animal kingdom with a straight torso. The symbol
      for “woman,” by contrast, is “女”—a woman sits and
      doesn’t walk.
      As a result of the decreased need and opportunity for
      moving about, women’s capacity for spatial orientation has
      regressed. In keeping with this, the radius of their sphere of
      interest has also gotten shorter. It has narrowed to their immediate
      environment: people. Let us think of a camera: one
      narrows its aperture when focusing on nearby objects rather
      than faraway landscapes.
      As a result of this shortening of perspective, women follow
      personal relationships more closely, recognize their patterns
      more readily, and talk about them more frequently.
      Women have a closer relationship to words. It is therefore
      logical that the number of women authors is on the
      rise. It is also interesting to note that their importance is
      increasing, especially in the field of fiction. Although emotions
      are well expressed by poetry, this genre requires more
      pithy, concise forms. With all due apologies to our excellent
      Hungarian women poets, women’s greater affinity with
      words can gain a more auspicious manifestation in the more
      loquacious genre of prose. I am proud to cite Endre Bajomi
      Lázár’s report of the 1982 French book market: the ratio of
      women to men authors was 4:2.

    •  

      pokaż komentarz

      @Piekarz123: As to why it was only in the 20th century that women
      began to dominate fiction writing even though they had
      obviously talked more much before then, it is easy to explain.
      Writing was regarded as an unbecoming profession
      for a refined lady of rank, even in Jane Austen’s time. Austen
      always kept a muslin scarf handy and whenever someone approached,
      she casually tossed it over her manuscript.
      Women not only talk more than men but they also
      speak differently. It would not be in keeping with the spirit
      of my book to enumerate here all the experiences eminent
      researchers have acquired working in well-known languages
      (such as French or Russian) as well as in lesser-known ones
      (Darkhat, Chukchi, or Koasati). I would just say here that,
      in general, women’s speech tends to sound more protracted,
      more drawn-out. One of the reasons for this is the doubling
      of vowels. This style of double emphasis invests words with
      a strong emotional content.
      On the other hand, more direct speech tends to be
      delivered by men. British and American commercials often
      feature men. Out of their mouths, imperative statements
      such as “Eat this!… Do this!… Buy this!” sound more unequivocal,
      more absolute.
      Members of the social elite have always regarded emphatic,
      drawn-out speech with disdain and held it to be unmanly,
      effeminate. Aiming at a reserved, refined demeanor,
      they have tended toward compact sounds. Apparently, this
      is how the French word beau (beautiful, handsome) has
      come to be pronounced to sound approximately like “baw”
      in order to be regarded as nicely uttered.
      Another feature of feminine language is the shift of all
      consonants towards sibilants /ſ, s, z/ that gives a slightly affected
      tone to speech. I think these phonetic changes play
      the same role as fashion: to emphasize femininity. The male
      voice is deeper, due to men’s anatomical makeup. Today’s
      unisex fashions may not stress gender differences, but I have
      noticed that young, short-haired girls in their uniforms of
      jeans and T-shirts instinctively start to twitter at a higher
      pitch when a guy appears on the horizon.
      Another characteristic of female speech patterns is shifting
      open vowels /a, o, u/ towards more closed vowels. This
      alternation of open and closed vowels has given rise to doublets.
      I do not know what law these obey when they show
      shifts in the same direction (from more closed to more open)
      across languages: zigzag,92 teeny-tiny,93 knickknack, bric-abrac,
      fiddle-faddle, mishmash, pitter-patter, Tingeltangel,94
      clopin-clopant,95 cahin-caha,96 tittle-tattle, and so on.
      Feminine speech is characterized by a heightened emotional
      emphasis at the syntactic level as well. There are more
      adjectives, and superlatives are more frequently employed.
      Filler expressions, such as “well,” “of course,” “still,” “yet,”
      “only,” “also,” “on the contrary,” or “I tell you” get greater
      play. I cannot recommend learning these so-called diluting
      agents too highly to students of any language."

      Kató Lomb

    •  

      pokaż komentarz

      Komentarz usunięty przez autora

  •  

    pokaż komentarz

    Tak to widzę...

    źródło: comment_mGFg4isr6UAFQaY3N0fsXHnZQPF830X6 w400.jpg

  •  

    pokaż komentarz

    I wracamy do tego samego pytania:

    źródło: youtube.com