| sc94597 said: Who said anything about genetics? I said "nature" which is as much epigenetics, and development as it is genetics. And I also never implied that it was my personal belief (I believe there is a natural component, but also a social component.) Statistically women are less interested in computer science and engineering. This is not an assumption, this is an empirical fact. It is sexist, however, to let that statistic inform your decisions when dealing with individuals. I am able to distinguish between a tendency of a group and the capabilities/interest of an individual. You, on the other-hand think that people should be distinguished because their group has a tendency that isn't the same as another group (i.e men are less nurturing on average therefore the child should go to the mother.) Also since there is no evidence that children who grow up without a mom have any serious impediments, I really don't see how you can assume that a child can't be nurtured with just the father alone, or as the primary parent. A child can. The child should go to whomever is MORE competent. And if the parents are equally competent, then custody is split equally. That is fair, and egalitarian. Anything else is sexist. Edit: I will use a more similar analogy. Should women be prevented from partaking in combat roles in militaries because they are naturally weaker (physically) than men? If a man and a woman are equally strong should they only accept the man over the woman because he has more potential that he might not reach? I don't think that should be the case. Edit 2: Another analogy. An employer decides to not hire a woman because she might get pregnant. Is it not sexist to say, "it is only natural?" |
Statistics don't show cause. As I said it's still up to debate where the lower interest comes from.
As for why an infant should go to the mother, is not because she is more competent by default, it is because the infant is attached to the mother from long before birth. Seperating a young infant from the mother is not the best way to go imo. Therefore when both are competent, the mother should get priority. Ofcourse if the parents are civilized enough that they can share custody without hostility then that's the way to go. However that's usually not the case during breakups. After things have settled shared custody can always be arranged.
I would think the military has certain tests you need to pass for certain roles. Nothing to do with potential. My wife deals better with sleep deprivation and pain, 2 things the military can use pretty well. Muscle strength isn't everything.
Why is pregnancy such a big deal when hiring? Not all women get sick and need a lot of time off.
I'm not a fan of forcing employers to hire certain candidates. For politics, yes that sector should be a reflection of society. For the private sector best man/women for the job should be the deciding factor. Of course favoritism always plays a role. That's the problem with society, it's run by humans.
