I agree with most of the rest of the post, but I’m confused about the “real job” part. You’re right that people would call it “early retirement,” but I think it’s particularly crazy to insist that an activity that adds value is considered not a real job because it’s not performed on behalf of someone else. Especially if you would pay someone else to do your housework, gardening, home improvement, whatever, I think it’s clear that doing it yourself is a “real job” with real economic value– perhaps not the most efficient use of your time economically, but still something that many simplistic accounting schemes miss.

I agree with most of the rest of the post, but I’m confused about the “real job” part. You’re right that people would call it “early retirement,” but I think it’s particularly crazy to insist that an activity that adds value is considered not a real job because it’s not performed on behalf of someone else. Especially if you would pay someone else to do your housework, gardening, home improvement, whatever, I think it’s clear that doing it yourself is a “real job” with real economic value– perhaps not the most efficient use of your time economically, but still something that many simplistic accounting schemes miss.

Concur in part, dissent in part.

From an evolutionary perspective, isn’t there possibly something to the idea that men do have a predisposition toward “good-natured sexual harassment”? I mean, I’m strongly against it and all, but the reproductive imperative is rather strong, evolutionarily speaking. The anti-sexual harassment norm seems like a (great) recent social norm developed to counter what was in part a strong evolutionary urge.

Whereas, it seems very hard to imagine why towel-folding has anything to do with female evolution. (Also true as to pipe-smoking and males.)

Concur in part, dissent in part.

From an evolutionary perspective, isn’t there possibly something to the idea that men do have a predisposition toward “good-natured sexual harassment”? I mean, I’m strongly against it and all, but the reproductive imperative is rather strong, evolutionarily speaking. The anti-sexual harassment norm seems like a (great) recent social norm developed to counter what was in part a strong evolutionary urge.

Whereas, it seems very hard to imagine why towel-folding has anything to do with female evolution. (Also true as to pipe-smoking and males.)

I think she does an admirable job of discussing in a self-aware way, with due deference to all possible explanations (including “indoctrination has rotted my brain”).

The counterargument to this is that “these stereotypes are a touchy subject so this is not the right time or venue to raise this discussion.” That’s a fine position to take. But it’s not valid in my book to say she should not have written this article because gender-behavioral differences are definitely 100% socially indoctrinated, and thus her article reinforces an incorrect stereotype.

As I mentioned, we need to wait for the science to know the real facts. In the meantime we have to find a practical compromise between 1) stereotype management and 2) an unfettered discussion of feminine identity.

She walks the delicate line just fine, in my view.

I think she does an admirable job of discussing in a self-aware way, with due deference to all possible explanations (including “indoctrination has rotted my brain”).

The counterargument to this is that “these stereotypes are a touchy subject so this is not the right time or venue to raise this discussion.” That’s a fine position to take. But it’s not valid in my book to say she should not have written this article because gender-behavioral differences are definitely 100% socially indoctrinated, and thus her article reinforces an incorrect stereotype.

As I mentioned, we need to wait for the science to know the real facts. In the meantime we have to find a practical compromise between 1) stereotype management and 2) an unfettered discussion of feminine identity.

She walks the delicate line just fine, in my view.

The same is true about a lot of things, such as the nature of intelligence and whether geography has influenced cognitive evolution over the past few hundred thousand years.

But, Will’s point is still OK to make in a different way. Stereotypes can be corrosive. The relatively certain negative consequences of them usually outstrip the possible truth they may have.

The same is true about a lot of things, such as the nature of intelligence and whether geography has influenced cognitive evolution over the past few hundred thousand years.

But, Will’s point is still OK to make in a different way. Stereotypes can be corrosive. The relatively certain negative consequences of them usually outstrip the possible truth they may have.