gender

[Hatman 🍁]

Actually, I am more in the middle ground, but leaning towards nurture. I know there are quite a few things that are genetic, biological and inate. But when it comes to basic gender roles, most roles are nurture, rather than nature. 

[Hatman 🍁]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm pretty sure both sexes have the same intelligence quotient range, so I would have to disagree with you there.

Otherwise, I agree with you completely Gabu. Gender roles are shaped by society, with the help of some biologicial differences.

[Hatman 🍁]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm pretty sure both sexes have the same intelligence quotient range, so I would have to disagree with you there.

Oh, there are obviously women who are either really bright or really stupid too.  They're just not as prevalent.  I read an interesting study once that said that the genetic factor behind intelligence is closely linked to the X chromosome in humans.  Since men have only one X chromosome, they are more likely to have an intelligence at one of the extremes than women, who have a second X chromosome to dampen the effects of the first.  The study offered this as an explanation for why the vast majority (thought certainly not all) of the people in history hailed as "extremely brilliant" were men.  It also offered this as an explanation for why the vast majority of those in the group stereotyped as "dumb jocks" are also men.

What about "dumb blondes"? And, while it hasnt happened in the past, because historically women were not supposed to act intelligentaly, we are seeing some very smart women coming out of the wood works. In fact, take high schools for example. Girls are now testing much better then men. And most of the smartest kids in the class were girls.

[Hatman 🍁]

I thought sex was what your genitals were, and gender was what your "nature" was.

[Hatman 🍁]

Well the definition I used is the one I had to put on various tests in both high school and univsersity. I've heard it in my grade 11 sociology class, and in 2 university classes I have had. It must be those liberal teachers feeding me leftist propoganda

[Hatman 🍁]

it's a nature thing mainly.  Yeah, there's some influence from society, but we act how we do because we're born that way.  Going back to the original topic, men naturally don't find "The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants" interesting, now the societal part may come from us being so grossed out by that movie we would rather sevre our balls than watch it, but no male would ever naturally find that movie interesting.

I disagree. If you were to raise a boy similar to the way you raise a girl, I think he would find the move interesting. Especially if he was gay. But perhaps you are right, due to the movie being geared towards an audience, not of women but for people who are sexually attracted to men. I'm sure if you were to raise your son the way you would raise a daughter, he may enjoy this movie if the roles in it were reversed, providing he were straight.

[Hatman 🍁]

Nature. Here's a serious question. If you put two male babies and two female babies on an island ( they don't die), do you think that in 5 years they will be acting differently according to sex and by ten they will find some sort of attraction to the opposite sex. I would think so. It's inherent. A male has XY and a female has XX. They produce different levels of different hormones and 96% of the time, they are attracted to the opposite sex, and I'm sure that in many African tribal societies with no contact with the radical libertarianism and social permissiveness of he West, the number is 100%.

African tribes work to nurture their children too. That's why different societies have different gender roles. If you put 4 people on an island they will still be effected by society- their own society. The only way you can do this experiment is by putting someone in a vaccuum.

[Hatman 🍁]

Nature. Here's a serious question. If you put two male babies and two female babies on an island ( they don't die), do you think that in 5 years they will be acting differently according to sex and by ten they will find some sort of attraction to the opposite sex. I would think so. It's inherent. A male has XY and a female has XX. They produce different levels of different hormones and 96% of the time, they are attracted to the opposite sex, and I'm sure that in many African tribal societies with no contact with the radical libertarianism and social permissiveness of he West, the number is 100%.

African tribes work to nurture their children too. That's why different societies have different gender roles. If you put 4 people on an island they will still be effected by society- their own society. The only way you can do this experiment is by putting someone in a vaccuum.

So you think if four people, two men, two women were put on four different planets, each their own, each supplied with their own necessities, that it would necessarily be all that different?

What I am saying is, we wouldnt know what would occur. It is also not the best way to test whether it is nature or nurture (or a combination) that is true.