Talk:Sex differences in humans/Archive 1

Redirect to:

• Talk:Sex differences in human physiology/Archive 1

Comments

Hi LacyK, I read through your article, and am having a hard time capture the flow of it. I recommend setting a pretty concise thesis that wraps in well with your conclusion. Furthermore, there seems to be a significant usage of quotes and qualitative statements. To really balance out the article I would also urge you to seek out some statistical information to introduce a quantiative aspect to your piece. Finally, I recommending doing your best to keep the article objective, and removing an opinionated grammar or sentences from the piece.

-Amandeep Singh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amandeep110 (talk • contribs) 03:44, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Amandeep. I think that your article would benefit from having some statistical facts to back up your work. Also, I think it would be good for you to explain why this is important. What effect does sex differences in humans have on people? What do these people go through? You give a good medical background...but there is more to this story. You have a great start! Tarak7 (talk) 16:23, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure if this was purposeful, but the nude guy has a penis so small that it can barely be seen. You can pick someone with a small penis, if you'd like, but if you want to point out sex differences it might make sense for the external genitalia to be visible.

That's a crap picture for showing sexual dimorphism. Men have more facial hair and body hair than women and this guy seems to be clean shaven in all different places. Not to mention his short haircut has nothing to do with sexual dimorphism as at many points in human history letting hair grow long has been the norm amognst men. If you wanna show what humans look like without hair, why not shave their heads as well. Enkidu6 (talk) 01:45, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Biased Usage of Gender Adjectives in Section

There is a bias with the usage of words 'masculine' and 'feminine' in subsection 'Communication' under section 'Sociology'

The first paragraph describes a culture and aspects of it that are less desirable such as unequality between the sexes. It labels this type of culture 'masculine'. The second paragraph describes a culture and aspects of it that are more desirable such as equality and additional vacation/sick days. However, it labels this type of culture 'feminine'.

It should be reworded so that 'masculine' and 'feminine' are not used as labels because the way indicates that a 'masculine' culture is less desirable than a 'feminine' culture. Instead a new word e.g. a type 'X' culture is less desirable than a type 'Y' culture.

SilverDrake11 (talk) 04:28, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

SilverDrake11, I see that this is the text you are referring to. We should be going by what the WP:Reliable sources state, and should generally not replace wording simply because we personally object to it. If you want to argue that the sources are biased, see WP:BIASED. Flyer22 (talk) 04:36, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

I wasn't able to verify the text in the cited source due to lack of access, but it looks like other sources say pretty much the same thing. I don't know where they came up with this naming convention, but it does seem to be established in the field of Communication (whatever that is). Kaldari (talk) 08:19, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Kaldari, looking at the source you linked and other sources, it seems the naming convention is established and originates from Geert Hofstede. It should have been named masculine-feminine vs. gender neutral (instead of masculine vs. feminine) or something similar. However there's no use in arguing what he should have named it. In order to uphold Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View, maybe we could reword the section to something like "According to Hofstede's Cultural Dimmension's theory..., a 'masculine culture' is defined as... and a 'feminine culture' is defined as..." On a side note, maybe the section in this article could be merged somehow or linked to this one. SilverDrake11 (talk) 18:46, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Actually just stumbled upon this direct quote from the wiki article: As a result of the taboo on sexuality in many cultures, particularly masculine ones, and because of the obvious gender generalizations implied by Hofstede's terminology, this dimension is often renamed by users of Hofstede's work, e.g. to Quantity of Life vs. Quality of Life. If the citations can be verified for that, then the 'Communication' section may not even belong in this article because it has more to do with variations between different cultures than sex difference in humans. SilverDrake11 (talk) 18:59, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

I agree. After looking at a few more sources, this seems to be a short-hand way of characterizing cultures (based on gender stereotypes), not a description of objective sex differences in humans. The section should probably be deleted or moved to a different article. Kaldari (talk) 19:20, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: Kaldari went ahead and removed the content. Flyer22 (talk) 12:06, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Psychology

removed these paragraphs: Women have larger corpus callosums than men which connects the two sides of the brain. Research indicates that this may be the reason why women may have more developed communication abilities than that of men Since both lobes are more connected in the female brain this may explain how women listen with both sides of their brain while males only listen with the left lobe

Reference is to popular magazines and conclusion, "Men listen with a half a brain," is more than inaccurate but vandalism. Here are links to surveys that show mixed results and at most small difference in this brain structure:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11755219 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21094882 Arodb (talk) 00:21, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

• I think the first paragraph is just fine as it's factual and based on decent published studies. The second para is just tabloid nonsense and speculation & totally needs to go - Alison ^❤ 02:54, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Sex differences in humans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060710061518/http://www.columbia-stmarys.org:80/19301.cfm to http://www.columbia-stmarys.org/19301.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:03, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Geodakyan's evolutionary theory of sex

Help required with Geodakyan's evolutionary theory of sex: the article of apparently fringe theory is based almost exclusively on primary sources and edited by a people with strong connection to the subject. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:20, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

The Google Memo: What Does the Research Say About Gender Differences?

I just found this article: "The Google Memo: What Does the Research Say About Gender Differences?", see https://heterodoxacademy.org/2017/08/10/the-google-memo-what-does-the-research-say-about-gender-differences/.

Maybe it's useful for improving this Wikipedia article. --Soluvo (talk) 08:42, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

high heels

Help — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.26.36 (talk) 03:30, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

There are plenty of women who are taller than men without the use of high heels, which is why you keep getting reverted on your "high heels" addition. Well, that, and because it's unsourced. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 01:34, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Use of hypothetical phrase

I corrected many points, especially at the beginning, where "alleged sex", for "child sex at birth", or "hypothesis" referred to the Darwinian evolution explaining social traits were used to instil doubt about positive sciences of sex. Please, do not gender the article, it is already highly controversial — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aristotele1982 (talk • contribs)

You were reverted. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:33, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

https://www.wikihow.com/Draw-People

Women are shorter/same height than men 142.161.27.211 (talk) 19:27, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Not always. See the article's refs. —Biscuit-in-Chief :-) ^{(/tɔːk/ – /ˈkɒntɹɪbs/)} 19:44, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

women are shorter same height

they cant be taller sometimes!142.161.27.211 (talk) 19:52, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, they can. Again, I'll refer to the references. —Biscuit-in-Chief :-) ^{(/tɔːk/ – /ˈkɒntɹɪbs/)} 13:19, 7 April 2020 (UTC)