The surprising neuroscience of gender inequality | Janet Crawford | TEDxSanDiego 

I worked for 27 years for a large, multinational corporation. Before they hired me, a clerk, someone who had no authority to hire or fire, gave me a written test that included math, science, logic, electronics, and miscellaneous stem information. I passed the test, and the clerk gave me an appointment to return to speak to a manager. He explained that managers were not allowed to see candidates before they had reviewed the results of the test. It was a way of protecting the manager from his own bias, sort of in the same way as in the video when the committee evaluated candidates for chief of police without knowing the names of the candidates. Seems like a good idea, even for CEOs.

It's as simple as this: respect ability. When anyone does something better than you, shut up and learn. I was taught by a female professor about computer tech. She was an amazing teacher. But I will not respect you because of your gender. What can you do that is of worth to myself or society? At the end of the day, that is what is important.

Don't get why this has that many downvotes. In my opinion that's quite a nice talk, although I didn't find the neuroscience aspect in it. However, I support the overall message; we all as a society have to work on solving inequalities for women and men.

There is no neuroscience in this presentation. "Neuroscience (or neurobiology) is the scientific study of the nervous system.[1] It is a multidisciplinary branch of biology,[2] that deals with the anatomy, biochemistry, molecular biology, and physiology of neurons and neural circuits."

If people associate "tall" with men and "short" with women, does it mean bias, or does it mean men are mostly taller them women? The IAT doesn't prove prejudice, it may just show an accurate association with natural differences between groups. And of course one should always judge the individual - like noticing a tall woman is tall, rather than assuming she's short because women are shorter. Same with leadership, strength, fragility, etc.

This is a really fantastic explanation of bias in general - maybe one of the simplest and clearest I've heard!

I was born in Soviet Union, where women "were equal to men" they were "Men in skirts" and they were expected to work just as hard as men; hauling iron ore, chopping wood, tilling ground, inhaling deadly chimicals in labs, you name it women did it. Any and all jobs were EQUAL & no one cared if they were pregnant, breastfeeding or on your period. Soviet women became sick, barren and angry at the world... and the government covered up all the stats... the population dwindled (and is still droping)... and then, soviet empire unraveled and fell apart - thank God! Now I'm going to go hugg my husband for working like a man, so I can be a mom to our kids at home!

I studied Engineering and after working for several years went on to study for a masters degree. There were 16 of us on the course - all men. I'm sure the Univerity would have loved to have accepted some women but there was a lack of applicants. When we went to our degree ceremony, the group before us had studied for diplomas for library studies - virtually all women. The men/engineers were heading towards jobs earning twice the national average while the women/librarians were heading for jobs earning half the national average. Why did the women make such bad choices and the men such good choices? Well, perhaps they were deciding what was best for themselves as individuals and ignoring what was best for their intersectional groupings. Were they making good or bad choices? - No, the choices were best for themselves. Barron-Cohen showed that one week old baby girls look longer at faces than moving objects while one week old boys do the opposite. The effect correlates with testoterone levels in the womb producing overlapping distributions of interest in people/things such that most women are predominantly interested in people while most men are interested in things. Of course, because it is a distribution and not a binary, this means that some women are, never-the-less, predominantly interested in things and they often go on to study Engineering - good luck to them! The women engineers bring a different perspective which is valued by the Engineering community as it is very welcoming of diversity of thought, unlike feminism. Engineering and Science accept that diveristy of thought makes us as a group smarter because we can debate a subject and the truth then emerges as the bad ideas get knocked down. Feminism does not believe in debate but orthodoxy so that bad ideas are never challenged and the result is the nonesense in this video. According to the talk, all differences in outcome between men and women are down to bias or wrong-think because men and women are actually identical. Wrong! Smell the politics and notice the lack of rationality.

The designers of the "implicit association test" themselves admitted that it cannot be used to draw any meaningful conclusions due to its flaws and ambiguity.

Very well put.

If we can already prove gender bias, why is it so hard for the world to accept racial bias?

Wow, it just took her 12minutes to tell me that gender bias is a social construct and we should do something about it. Just glad she didn't go into detail, I don't have that long to live.

Does anyone know if there is a way to get a transcript of this video?

She’s so right... men and women are different. How could I have not seen this before.

Thank You Janet Crawford ... even if you did not exactly use "neuroscience" ... OR you did not make the neuroscience aspect clear??? Anyway, in the field of psychology I have read many studies that look at many forms of Bias ... and what you say here does indeed reflect the general findings of Bias (we all have effects of bias (not Just gender bias) due to how we take in ... store and use ... the information we are exposed to (be that from first or second hand experience or read etc ...) ... It was interesting for me to read the comments here and find tons of gender bias ... and they seem to have no clue. Those of us who do understand need to speak up at every opportunity available (and especially the males who understand because help is needed from males, for those males, who do not yet understand (they will see what males say as more valid) ... sad but true. Love & Peace to All

This video is very interesting.

These talks have one flaw: they do not address alleged biological bases from which the gender bias may arise. Until these talks can explain why the biological differences between the genders do not matter, these talks would continue to fail to be compelling.

some of those CEOs by the way are international companies, Swedish British etc.

I have an inherent bias against anyone who uses 'deliciously' in reference to anything other than food.

LMAO at all the comments... It seems that just about everyone missed the entire point of the talk. What is being said here is that there is inherent bias in all of our thought patterns and decision making in regards to gender. Even women unconsciously judge themselves and other women based on subtle patterns and messages picked up from language, behavior, and media within our culture. Men do the same to themselves, and that is not fair. Our realities are not made up of infallible facts--we are fed many untruths, even when the people who are serving them to us earnestly believe that they are true. Basically, not everything we think is true, and it is important for us to recognize that there are subconscious biases that affect the way we think and decision-make in order for us to consider things in an objective way.

Remember kids, gender equity, not equality.... it's about outcome, not equal treatment.

you are my hero! we need more strong, intelligent, outspoken, constructive people like you!

Wow it's almost like she studied this to prove her point rather than to understand it. We use this bias system unconsciously to decide the best potential of outcome for any given situation with too many unknown variables. It's instinctual. As much as we need to ignore bias against known information, like the resume test, and why we shouldn't be afraid to embrace it. We know factually the differences between the male and female brain, we know how that effects the male and female body, and we now know stereotypically what to assume from a candidate we otherwise know nothing about. We shouldn't be worried so much about the "what" that were trying to fix, but rather understand the "why" it is that way.

Bias is a very natural thing we need to get adjusted to the nature and the environment and survive at last We have to understand human being. We cannot ignore the outcome from biological progress. Why do we have to remove all the difference to make the world equity just to achieve the implementation of ideology. We need to focus on the harmony not on the equity. Even though we have to pursue the human right investing our resources for mechanical gender equality is not the top priority. Almost 50 vs 50 in every fields is not possible.We don't have to make such an unatural effort to achieve 50:50. Those who are uncomfortable for differences in gender is going to make unatural effort endlessly until they get 50:50 in the fields where they are only highly valued.

All I hear in the media is how much sexism exists out in the workforce and in the world. However, in my 25 years of life I have YET to directly encounter it. Now, if it is SO prevalent in our society (as the media puts it) how have I not experienced it yet?

11:07 we are creators and consumers of the environments that drive by us.

I agree with all your points and really enjoyed this presentation. Unconscious bias is such a influence on our everyday behaviour and interaction i wish it was discussed more.

I wish the speaker would have gone into a little more depth on the study with the two rooms: the stereotypically nerdy one and the neutral one. Men's interests apparently were unaffected by the environment, but the women's were. Is this bias? Is it something inherent in how men and women see things due to biology differences? There was some deeper insight that could have been gleamed from that but she didn't mention it. One could infer that the problem women run into in science and technology fields is environmental, not due to how they are treated - basically "I'd enjoy lab stuff more if there wasn't all that lab stuff in the lab..."

Online words that hurt your feelings are not VIOLENCE.

08:25 But if the "Nerdy Male" decor affected the female students negatively. While the abscence of "Nerdy Male" decor didnt make any difference to the male students... doesnt that suggest that the female students were the ones who were more biased? The idea of coffee cups and plants being "neutral" decor is after all subjective. Also, im kind of curious to whether that study took into account the ammount of Trekkies who are female.

Beautifully put🙌🏽

It's funny that the people who complain there are no female engineers or business leaders never went into those fields themselves...

equity is a very dangerous concept, what we need is equality of opportunity and a hierarchy of competence, not a hierarchy of oppresion

Status quo conservation vs. Conscious choices based on temperament.

So what you're saying is women have unconscious bias against Star Wars.

So true. The details are in the little things.

Men have more pressure to earn money, therefore take said studies and said jobs. I LOVE history...but damned, it's not exactly reliable, go into teaching? No thanks. Money not good enough. So I became an accountant. My sister loves children, therefore studied to work with disadvantaged children. We need people like my sister, but I'm sure I'll be earning a lot more because I didn't follow my passion, I followed what I could tolerate and make money with.

"in this case, fortune magazine told us necessary that melissa mayer is the real deal because as a blonde attractive young woman we might assume she wasn't". this. or, maybe, she was hired to turn a company around and she only just managed to sell the company to be dismembered and give a profit to stock holders. having acquired yahoo stocks around the time she was hired, and having sold the remainder of the company with a good profit some years later, i would personally vouch for the second: many a times it looked like i had thrown the money down the flush. and, rest assured, the doubts and the hard looks at the company actions weren't aired because mayer was a "blonde attractive young woman". i had fca, too, and i can assure you things were *much* harder for marchionne in a more or less similar situation, who was anything but blonde, attractive, or female. so, who's gender biased here? note: fca was much more worse off than yahoo. i did acquire it when marchionne had already worked some serious miracles into the company. and yet, the disbelief continued on and on and on, pretty much until the day he died.

I went to a nearly all male school. Lots of bullying went on, never was gender a part of it. I was an oddball for many different other reasons. Maybe it's just a cultural thing. I rarely encounter gender bias anywhere, except my own. I personally don't get along with women at all, even though i am one myself. I find it extremely unpleasant to work with women. I live in a society where it's all about finding your niche in life and making choices that fit your personality. I don't see why it has to be set in stone, 'this is right and this is wrong'. I'm female so i should love the baby chat, the coffee breaks with the gossip, the talking behind people's back, the invitations to go for coffee, the never ending chatter. No, i don't. I like hanging out with the guys, silently drinking a beer, slump in the chair, flipping through a magazine on a friday after work, "Bye, John, see ya", "Yep, later" kind of thing. I would hate to think i got a job because i needed to fill some kind of quotum. That's depressing and sad, to be honest. I prefer a workplace where i can sit with the people i enjoy being around in the breaks instead of being in some kind of forced group-hug situation where everyone should get along and like eachother. That forces unnecessary stress on people. I'm in a place where the mix and match culture is alive and vibrant. It provides a unique and ever changing athmosphere where you can freely explore people on your own terms. Of course, there are women i care deeply about but mostly because their personality matches mine. Not because we were forced to get along. I don't see what's wrong with proving your worth and showing your personality first. Why should anyone accept you for anything simply because you are female. Instead, let your knowledge and capacity shine. I promise you, it shines brighter than the equality banner you're holding up. We are not in fact the same and we all have preferences. Why should a preference be forced upon any of us. I was kind of a racist too... until i met my best friend. Although i still think his and my culture are a bit oil and water but at least we found eachother on a personal level. Racism from the other side is also a very, very real thing as are cultural differences. Don't kid yourself. I also found out many of my friends rejected him innitially. I do not think so highly of them now and distanced myself from a fair few of them. Some of my cultural bias was true, most was not. so what if you admit you were wrong. Life is dynamic and full of surprises! Why bother trying to capture it in rules or some graph. It's proving or fixing nothing.

On average, men have five inches in height and more than 25 pounds more skeletal muscle than women. It's hardly surprising then that our unconscious association for 'strong' would be the male rather than the female figure, and for 'fragile' the reverse, or that, in order to advance 'gender equality' we've had to adjust the standards for physical strength in some professions to get even a small proportion of women into them. Wouldn't it be better to simply acknowledge that, in a job that rewards physical strength, there will most likely be more men than women? There will be women who are physically strong enough, just not as many. Big-five personality testing has the mean for women at the 60th percentile for agreeableness, but for men at the 40th percentile. Why should we expect equal numbers of male and female lawyers (who benefit from disagreeableness) or therapists (the reverse)? There will still be women lawyers (speaking from experience, there ARE women who score in the bottom 10th percentile on agreeableness, believe me!) and male therapists, just not, perhaps, equal numbers. That doesn't rule women out of any career, but it gets us away from this obsession with equality of outcome as the measure of whether we have succeeded in making the career open to women, as it should be, or whether, instead, we are afflicted with the mysterious disease of "implicit bias." Bias is making a judgment about an individual, without adequate data. We actually all have adequate data to make judgments about "normal"* men and "normal" women. The latter are weaker. Fact. But any one woman may well be much stronger than any one man. That's where the need for data comes in. But that's not what these "implicit bias" tests measure, and the science behind them is mostly bogus. *I am using the word "normal" here to refer to the population at or near the mean on a standard distribution curve, not to imply anything pejorative about those who fall outside that range, either above or below.

The title alone is ...

It's hard to take this seriously when I have never heard people that fight for equality in jobs show interest in leveling the gender gap in mining and construction working or any jobs they don't like the look of. It's always higher paid or higher education jobs that are chased. People only care about issues when it benefits them which is another form of bias that should be discussed more.

I wasnt expecting such attractive men to be CEOs...damn

she right

I would have rather listened to the woman reading about angel investing.

This is a really good talk

"When we associate masculinity with money, and muscles, and domination, and agression, we dishonor legions of good men who do not embody these characteristics". Men are selected by women on these very characteristics. It's not about being "good" or "bad", it's all about getting "laid". Then it's about helping our offspring against others' offspring. It's natural selection.

How can there be gender disparity if men and women are identical?

"Neuroscience is a relatively young, exciting, and fundamentally interdisciplinary field devoted to the study of the nervous systems. Problems range from investigation of the evolution of nervous system in basal vertebrates to the application of neuroscience to education and law. Neuroscientists also seek to develop neurologically plausible models of human thinking, affect and behavior.Neuroscience creates a context for scholarly conversation about the nature of mind, brain, and behavior." - University of Notre Dame This video shows that clearly. Gender deals with human behaviors with regards social expectations. In my opinion, we can solve this boring gender issue. How? it is all about love man (the hippies got it hhaha). In more practical terms, it is respecting others to be who they are, and what they want to do with their own lives. (a virtue that is rapidly diminishing in our societies). The problem is fear. It is fear of anything out of the norm, fear of change, fear of diversities, fear of differences, fear of losing our identity, fear of growing power (other than one's own), fear of loss of authority to women? (last one was a hunch) I would like people to accept and respect me for my choices as i do respect them for being them. Those that don't, should watch out hahaha. I will leave you with some wise words: You know that term "the world is not fair or nothing is fair in this world?" Well, MAKE IT FAIR THEN, (that's not my answer, that's the grumbling of my six year old brother when i tell him he can't have what other kids have). Learn from our young, they see no limits.

I found Janet's talk heavily biased. She focused only on professions dominated by men. Interesting that she didn't mention 9 of 10 teachers are female in K-12 with a study showing that they grade boys 30% lower than girls for equal work.

I stopped in the middle of this video when she suggested the "Implicit Association Test" and went and took a "Implicit Association Test" through Harvard and found it to be very frustrating. It had 7 stages and each staged almost seemed rigged. The answers you're able to select from are seemingly designed to force the outcomes. For instance- A few of the stages asked questions like "Which category does this word fall under? Category being: Family/Women or Men/Career" and then gives you words like Family, Business, Success, Marriage but it forces you to select these categories under a fixed association that you cannot change. Obviously, I'm going to associate the word Career with Career/Men and Business with Career (of which Men have been assigned to by the test, not by me). Just the same, I'm going to associate Marriage with Family/Women because FAMILY is the topic and you've attached women to that answer. By lumping in Women with Family, you're forcing me to categorize these by gender - not because of a bias, but because you've ONLY given me that choice. The test seems dangerously malicious. I stopped listening to this women speak after that

Just because u guess on a mens picture while thinking of the word and meaning of Protection, that doesnt mean women cant protect and also doesnt mean that u should expect every man to be protective by nature. The physical and psycological differences between men and women just favor the majority of their kind for some "tasks" and "positions". I know a lot of women telling me they made only bad experiences from female Bosses. That doesnt mean women are bad in leading positions in general! But in the EU for example the big concerns were forced to raise female leading positions to 25% overall to lower the gap. So now even with equal or better qualification the woman will get the job and thats why i dont think feminism will make this world any better. The german army write on their "commercials" that women will be prefered. I know the german army didnt fight for a long time and just special ops teams got involved in anti terror missions, but why should women be rated higher then men when it comes to be a Soldier? There are far too much "nonsense" actions based on gender-equality that didnt even reach the real social problems with the gender-differences such as violance or abusing.

I like bias. Bias is good. Its an evolutionary survival trait that leads to ... us.

I thought the creators of that test had distanced themselves........?

On average men have more muscle mass. Men produce more testosterone and have an amplified response to testosterone, which leads to stronger muscles and denser and stronger bones. They also, on average, have a larger cardiac and respiratory capacity. I don't think that men are better than women, but associating the word "strong" more easily with men isn't bias, it's anatomical and physiological science.

Men and women are different , we are physiological unequal.

When applications were anonymised in my company fewer women were employed and promoted. What was the bias before that?

She keeps saying that improving the education of women/girls will help men/boys too, but then how does that explain boys performing worse in school and less boys graduating high school or college in a education system geared towards girls?

So she’s saying is a learned behavior and not genetic?

I cannot see it.

I don't see women in the coal mines either.

Wasn’t she biases when assuming that Forbes was biases by informing that Marissa Mayer is a “real deal”?

It is what it is from the begining of creation why change it now. When I first established my company years ago things was'nt as it is today. It was only men who were able to carry on a certain task more effectively in my firm since the nature of the job was physicaly demanding and more complex. Those men were able to deal with every technical issues effectivly. I still remember which gender the firm got the most productivity from back in the days. Now that it is fully automated and things has become easier, i know the right Gender to employ and what position to post them. Because i hav't forgotten the history of my company on ( who, what and how i started with). In conclusion, we need to ask why this is happening properly. The legacy.

Women complain about problems , men solve the problems..

2015. It's 2022 and a loooooooooooot of people still discuss if misogyny is even real. :'D Cause guess what, asking women and believing them and their retelling of their own experiences are still not valid and trusted options. Ocassionally males have a closer look and start speaking about it to male peers and guess what, they then learn what it's like to get tons of confirmation of the problem by other (mostly but not exclusively) males rushing in to shout around rudely. I'm at a point where I cannot unsee how most issues we have originate in misogyny. I thought there were different causes and capitalism and all that, but the more I look, the more I notice the system doesn't matter. The deprecation and disregard wreck them all and misogynistic concepts turn up no matter if you dig at the chore of racism, ableism, .... pick your sorrow! A very sensitive balance has wrecked and seperated the attributes of archaic feminine and masculine between people, when all people are both, yin and yang and both are actually equall to each other! And once the balance is off and tilts further and further over generations, it becomes more and more difficult to reinstall the balance. Generations of "working field build from males for males and equaling 'norm' " cannot be fixed by quickly applying some feminism. It's rooted deeply. The perception of norms has started to shift. But it's a marathon and those benefitting from the scewed system (seemigly, they do not get that they, too, are paying the price) thrash, scream, scratch and bite in refusal to move from the entitled spot of "why does she get to have a second cookie????" when she's only asking for the other half of what has always been her cookie but he somehow got used to the idea that that should be shared, too.

Are women more x than men (or vice versa). If you answered yes, then you are biased. But you may also be correct...

Hey you!! The structures out there aren't self design but naturally expressions of gender characteristics. And THAT'S WHY there's a relationship between the two. Isn't gender bias, is gender identifiers.

How was that neuroscience??

Please point to the reputable study that unconscious bias training has a positive effect on a workforce.

Wow, assuming that women cant enjoy star trek or video games

This sounded like an interesting topic, unfortunately, it did not turn out to be about _the surprising neuroscience of gender inequality._ Our speaker, Janet Crawford, does touch on neuroscience a bit when she explains that we all cope with the influx of data by using rafts of associations. So, if two concepts have a strong association in the world that we observe then they will very likely have a similar association in our minds. This will be true even if the observed association was in an artificial social construct. The rest of what she had to say was apparently the musings of a gender prejudiced ideologue whose field of study may ironically include bias when she cannot seem to recognize her own. Whenever anything which might not be leading to equitable outcomes for women is mentioned it does not lead to any examination of why that is the case, it just moves directly to the conclusion that it is something that must be changed. When something is brought up where men are receiving an inequitable outcome there is still no examination of why that is so, but this time the reaction is rejoicing an achievement. The achievement being that women were doing better than men in that regard. I really am sorry for whatever it was that happened to her that left her so bitter and unhappy. It must be horrible to view the whole of society as a competition between men and women with the two basic genders locked in a zero-sum game of domination. I do not think this avenue of research can be very good for her, nor do I think that it does this field of research much good to have her speak in public about it.

I understand where she is coming from but not all women want to work in the fields that would be male dominated. I would never want to be a politician or work in I.T. I love protecting people but I would be too a scared for my life to be a cop. But I would love to be a professional athlete or a poker player. I just wish for equal opportunity, respect and professional credit. 😌

Dope

Actually, career tendencies and differencies between men and women are increased the less gender bias is. It is shown clearly bt numerous studies of the Scandinavian universities. Men, in genefal, are biologically orientated towards objetcs. Women, towards people. I am saying this being a white anthropologist. But ey, im doing my best.

This isn't bias, of course if you force participants to pick a gender associated with a trait then they will pick the one that is exhibited the most in society and history. If you HAVE to pick a gender associated with strength, of course you will pick a man because you will most likely think of pure physical strength which is without doubt a main physiological difference between men and women scientifically. That's just logical association, not bias. It will of course work in reverse too, so if you say strength for man then logically you will say fragile for women, even if you don't associate the word with that gender at all. To draw such conclusions about unconscious bias is a massive leap to push forward an ideological agenda on people. It is in fact an incredibly biased study, or at least very biased interpretation of the study. She is right, we are all responsible, responsible to actually exercise some critical thinking and not believe everything people like her try and push on us. Take some time to really think about issues and be willing to listen to others when making opinions. Maybe then we will actually be able to solve a lot of societies greater issues. Uneducated, biased reading of botched studies being preached to people as evidence is far from responsible.

I'm still waiting for the science bit . . . .

Its not really neuroscience but it is psychology

There is no pay gap its about lifestyle choices

So to summarise: This person came into gender science with a bias, did some research, ''looked at the data'', and arrived at the normal conclusion on gender which is that there is a natural unconsious bias, and discovered herself that woman are just as biased towards men as men are to woman. And the proposed solution is to do what normal individuals were already doing anyway. ''To commit yourself to becoming a good observer of your enviroment' That's some interesting neuroscience right there.. *Standing ovation.

Women and men are like two people who drive their cars in different ways and meet at the same point

Maybe gender biases exists because men and women are actually different? Yes some of the biases may be negative but should we really strive to eliminate them by dismantling gender roles and concurrently dispensing with basic biological mechanism by which we've evolved to function?

Neuroscience? Where?

Which Kim-chi is more delicious North Korea Kim-chi or South Korea Kim-chi?

The "neuroscience" seems to be missing being the title is the "neuroscience of gender inequality"

This talk on unconscious bias begins with an anecdote about the speaker literally judging a book by its cover, along with the wealth/intellect/status of its reader - I wonder if the irony was intended? The claimed insights drawn from the IAT have been widely debunked, including by the Harvard academics who designed it, but it is easiest to see the inherent flaws of the test when you just take it yourself. And although hiring bias certainly exists, it’s not all one-way: a 2017 study of the Australian Public Service found that removing gender and ethnicity markers on applications actually increased the likelihood of preferring white male candidates, i.e. there was otherwise a bias towards hiring women and ethnic minorities. All that said, I agree with the underlying message - we all have natural biases and should be careful to control the unhelpful and unjustified ones - but oversimplifying these issues doesn’t further the cause.

Below compelling

Excelent

When they couldn't make women more, not even as powerful as men despite all efforts they shifted the focus on making men as weak, preferably weaker than women, by posing a compassionate pro-men stance that "O men, please understand, that it's ok and there's no dishonour or shame if you are weak, or even weaker than a woman".

Take a good hard look at the Scandinavian countries. The more egalitarian a society becomes, the bigger the differences in interest, career paths and distribution among jobs between the genders become.

12 mins of nothing

Now I would like to see this cross referenced with the bias of those who believe in identity politics vs those who do not, and then compared to the bias of those who prefer ketchup over mustard.

Less opinion, more facts. It would be nice if someone a little more qualified spoke about such issues.

Can we say more and more women are afraid to take risks? Isn't there a stereotype among women themselves about what is a woman's job and what's a man's? We can't say few women are in hollywood and few are in silicon valley. It takes decision from an early stage or age and book work for qualification to get there. If more women take the first step towards inclusion, then no one wi be able to stand in their way or to put it plain, they will see that there is nothing in their way...Take Pride where you are a pioneer, go against the tide and surprise the waves, that takes strength. A woman shouldn't wait to be 'carried' to where she says they aren't represented...men represented themselves by taking risks and getting things done themselves, and it soon become a tradition that men are engineered that way. It is just a tradition and going against a tradition is more and more no more a taboo...more and more women should take risks, rather than sit back, relaxed, and complain to the world how they are left out. The soviets got to space first, the Americans didn't complain that the soviets never went with them. What did the US do? It went ahead with its own and even made history by taking a greater risk by putting a man on the moon.

She starts with the presumption that equality is good or isn't biologically driven, and if I claim she's being unconsciously bias with this talk......what defense does she have to rebut my claim......hint......THERE IS NONE!!!! It turns into "in know you are - you said you are but what am i" This is religious in nature NOT science

Men and women evolved separately and are different so there would be biases but where's your proof? Facts.

I didn't learn anything and I watched the video twice :/

It's annoying. Men and women should respect each other. They have different roles in society. One is not better than the other. It's just different. I'm tired of being the punished rose. My thorn made me sharp. Pissed off rose.

Interesting; but I didn't hear anything about neuroscience.

But the most egalitarian societies like Sweden, Denmark and Norway report that fewer women want to go into STEM, most want to be a wife and mom.

Two minutes into it and it's already clear there will be no science based discourse but ideology. It's not even worth a try