That's a bit of a logic leap. Wanting more opportunities & not to be auto-locked-out of positions, equates to neither sacrificing men nor all-women-only workforces.
There should be no discomfort in a man choosing to go into nursing, teaching, childcare, etc. or a woman choosing engineering, crime-fighting, etc.
To the original topic, one could argue that women/girls/females having lower diagnostic rates might indicate higher intelligence in their abilities to adapt better. Higher social iq would just be different, not lesser.
Mountain Goat wrote:
hurtloam wrote:
Mountain Goat wrote:
One thing is what my Mother says and I actually agree with her in this is that males and females are different, and part of the issues in the past (E.g. the 1970's when I grew up where they "Tried" to get men and women to be the same) is that it simply did not work.
No. What nonsense. Women wanted to have opportunities that they were denied when they were quite capable of doing them.
It has worked. I have a job in a male dominated industry that I would have been denied in the 70s. And I'm allowed to wear jeans to work, not horrible nylon tights.
How many mens lives are you willing to sacrifice to promote all companies to have a women only workforce?
I agree with blue star. You made a leap of logic there Mountain Goat I didn't say men couldn't have jobs.
Do you really think that I have taken a man's job? That it is not my right to use my brain to do something that I am good at?
I definitely think I was not diagnosed because I am intelligent, higher than average and did well at school even though my social skills were obviously bad.