It goes beyond that. The idea that children should be made as means for a cause is equally disgusting.
Yes, but I woudn’t expect that sentiment to really be all that gender-biased, though.
It goes beyond that. The idea that children should be made as means for a cause is equally disgusting.
Yes, but I woudn’t expect that sentiment to really be all that gender-biased, though.
Valid point. Thanks for the clarification.
Though to my experience, even women seem to think the the part that comes after is in fact more laborous that the carrying part—and that part can be equally shared between genders. Of course, it usually/traditionally isn’t, so I guess that’s a point towards male bias too.
[children are] the lowest-hanging-fruit contribution one could make towards a better future
Lowest-hanging? I consider having children to be quite a huge investment of my personal resources. How is that a low-hanging fruit?
Everyone who doesn’t want to have kids (as many as they can, within reason) is both missing a major point of life and complicit in creating a dysgenic society—which, btw, should be included on the list of existential risks.
^ See this? This is one of the reasons this forum is 90% male.
Hmm. Why does a comment like that lead to a preference to males?
I wonder how many people cooperated only (or in part) because they knew the results would be correlated with their (political) views, and they wanted their “tribe”/community/group/etc. to look good.
I don’t think the responses of people here would be so much affected by directly wanting to present their own social group as good. However (false) correlation between those two could happen just because of framing by other questions.
E.g. the answer to prisoner’s dilemma question might be affected by whether you’ve just answered “I’m associated with the political left” or whether you’ve just answered “I consider rational calculations to be the best way to solve issues”.
If that is the effect causing a false correlation, then adding the statment “these won’t be correlated” woudn’t do any good—in fact, it would only serve as a further activation for the person to enter the political-association frame.
This is a common problem with surveys that isn’t very easy to mitigate. Individually randomizing question order and analyzing differences in correlations based on presented question order helps a bit, but the problem still remains, and the sample size for any such difference-in-correlation analysis becomes increasingly small.
I wonder what would be the possible indications about entry barriers? I would think they’d be much easier to address by direct survey query to lurkers about that specific issue.
While of course very interesting, I’m afarid trying to find any such specific and interpretation-inclined results from a general survey will probably just lead to false paths.
… which, I guess, is rather suitable as a first comment of a lurker. :)
Oh, historically sure! But I think these days in western culture, especially(1) among the group being discussed (people interested in this site), I wouldn’t expect to see a large gender bias to that sentiment.
(1) [possible projection fallacy going on here, hard to know]