Monday, September 14, 2015

Men Are Stronger Than Women (on average)

I posted before on a study which claims that conservatives and progressives are about equally anti-science.

Well, I'm beginning to wonder if that is correct.  It occurred to me that the study about which I posted seems to ignore some obvious propositions about sexuality progressives have a tendency to deny.

Just take the painfully obvious claim of common sense that men are stronger than women on average and ask yourself how many progressives today would think you are a sexist for even thinking about this let alone believing that it's true.   It took me exactly one Google search on the first page to find people at TED actually debating the issue, like this guy at the top of the page:

Jun 22 2011: Some men are physically stronger than some women and some women are physically stronger than some men.

Not all men are stronger than all women just as not all women are weaker than all men.

If you're talking about athletes in peak condition, then pitching those male athletes against female athletes in the same sport could possibly lead to more injuries on the female 'team'.

But overall, this discussion is far too general to be of any use other than at the level of stereotypes.

Read that last sentence again.  It's a stereotype and of course, as we all know, stereotypes are false or in some way bad.  He finds the conclusion problematic, changes the issue--drawing attention to some obvious truths such as the truth that not all men are stronger than all women--and then says the discussion is of no use.  Naturally, the discussion is not of any use, but not for the reason he thinks.  It's of no use because the conclusion of the study (that men are stronger) is so obviously true.  (If you want to read something intelligent about stereotypes read this.)

When it comes to sex, progressives often deny science and common sense.  The same holds true when it comes to race.  For instance, twin studies, which indicate that genes place limits on the level of intelligence one can achieve, are routinely ignored or condemned as racist without argument, partly because of the fact that on intelligence tests certain minority races score lower than whites (and Asians); and of course this is unfortunate in part because one can't change genes over night by passing laws to make everything come out equal (progressives are an anxious bunch when it comes to slow change).  It's also unfortunate because policies to make positive changes should take into consideration all of the available evidence and not just the politically correct evidence.  (It should go without saying that such evidence is defeasible and that we're only talking about averages not particular individuals.  But nothing goes without saying in a political world.)

So when it comes to race, any genetic evidence for differences in traits is off limits to consider, but when it comes to homosexuality it's genetics (or epigenetics) all the way down.

Not that we needed a study for this, but hopefully this study will put the brakes on the sexual experimentation being forced on the military, but I have serious doubts that it will.  It would stand in the way of "fundamentally transforming America."

No comments:

Post a Comment