Summary of “Women Do Ask for More Money at Work. They Just Don’t Get It.”

Having grown up on go-get-’em-girls magazine articles and legal dramas fronted by high-powered career women, I just assumed that the next step for me was to stride into my boss’ office and ask for more money.
In a 2017 study titled Do Women Ask?, researchers were surprised to find that women actually do ask for raises as often as men – we’re just more likely to be turned down.
In 2003, Babcock co-authored an era-defining book called Women Don’t Ask.
Her book and the studies underpinning it have been cited ever since as evidence of women’s reticence to ask for more in the workplace.
Unlike other studies that have been carried out in this area, the Do Women Ask? researchers had more detailed data that revealed a crucial fact: Women are far more likely than men to work in jobs where salary negotiation isn’t necessarily possible, such as low-skilled hourly wage jobs or part-time roles.
Previous studies that reached the “Women don’t ask” conclusion often failed to account for certain types of jobs being dominated by one gender, focusing instead on the overall number of men or women who’d reported salary negotiations, which – given the number of women who work jobs with “Non-negotiable” salaries – skewed their findings.
The Do Women Ask? study, on the other hand, found that when comparing men and women who do similar jobs, women actually ask for raises at the same rates as men.
Now for the bad news: Both McKinsey’s research and the Do Women Ask? study found that while men and women ask for pay raises at broadly similar rates, women are more likely to be refused or suffer blowback for daring to broach the topic.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Research: Men and Women Need Different Kinds of Networks to Succeed”

Women benefited in terms of post-MBA job placement from being central in the network too; but to achieve the executive positions with the highest levels of authority and pay they also had to have an inner circle of close female contacts, despite having similar qualifications to men including education and work experience.
While men had inner circles in their networks too – contacts that they communicated with most – we found that the gender composition of males’ inner circles was not related to job placement.
We estimated the average size of students’ networks to be approximately 12-18 students, which is consistent with paper and pencil self-report network surveys.
Also for each student, we computed the number of same-sex contacts in their network that was greater than expected given the size of their network and the proportion of women and men students in the class.
We found that the social networks of men and women MBA students affected their post-graduation job placement.
While women who had networks that most resembled those of successful men placed into leadership positions that were among the lowest in authority and pay.
If Jane is a second-year MBA student whose inner circle includes classmates Mary, Cindy, and Reshma, but these three women each have networks with few overlapping contacts, then Jane will benefit not only from her three inner-circle-mates but also their non-overlapping contacts.
Our study suggests that women face a greater challenge in networking to find professional opportunities – they, more than men, need to maintain both wide networks and informative inner circles in order to land the best positions.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Military draft: Judge rules male-only registration is unconstitutional”

On Friday, a federal judge in Texas ruled that now that combat roles are available to women, a male-only draft is unconstitutional.
A federal judge in Texas has declared that the all-male military draft is unconstitutional, ruling that “The time has passed” for a debate on whether women belong in the military.
The decision deals the biggest legal blow to the Selective Service System since the Supreme Court upheld the draft in 1981.
In Rostker v. Goldberg, the court ruled that the male-only draft was “Fully justified” because women were ineligible for combat roles.
U.S. District Judge Gray Miller ruled late Friday that while historical restrictions on women serving in combat “May have justified past discrimination,” men and women are now equally able to fight.
The ruling comes as an 11-member commission is studying the future of the draft, including whether women should be included or whether there should continue to be draft registration at all.
Should women be required to register for the military draft?
Judge Miller said Congress has never fully examined the issue of whether men are physically better able to serve than women.

The orginal article.

Summary of “The deadly truth about a world built for men”

For these women, the consequences of living in a world built around male data can be deadly.
Women tend to be smaller than men and have thinner skin, both of which can lower the level of toxins they can be safely exposed to.
Little data exists on injuries to women in construction, but the New York Committee for Occupational Safety & Health points to a US study of union carpenters that found women had higher rates of sprains, strains and nerve conditions of the wrist and forearm than men.
Even if male and female toilets had an equal number of stalls, the issue wouldn’t be resolved, because women take up to 2.3 times as long as men to use the toilet.
Men are more likely than women to be involved in a car crash, which means they dominate the numbers of those seriously injured in them.
Swedish research has shown that modern seats are too firm to protect women against whiplash injuries: the seats throw women forward faster than men because the back of the seat doesn’t give way for women’s on average lighter bodies.
Article 8 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union reads, “In all its activities, the Union shall aim to eliminate inequalities, and to promote equality, between men and women.” Clearly, women being 47% more likely to be seriously injured in a car crash is one hell of an inequality to overlook.
This is an edited extract from Invisible Women: Exposing Data Bias in a World Designed for Men by Caroline Criado Perez.

The orginal article.

Summary of “The magical thinking of guys who love logic”

Specifically, these guys – and they are usually guys – love using terms like “Logic.” They will tell you, over and over, how they love to use logic, and how the people they follow online also use logic.
These men will tell you, over and over, how they love to use logic, and how the people they follow online also use logic.
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is a commonly used go-to site for academic summaries of philosophical topics, and it doesn’t even have a single unified article for “Logic,” “Reason” or “Rationality”; instead they have a plethora of articles about all the myriad subtypes and debates around the topic, most of which I suspect would mystify the average self-identified logic fan.
Related to this type of logic are other “Formal” types such as propositional, mathematical, and computational logics, but it’s rare to come across that particular type of logic online as it relates to real-life political issues; more likely you are talking about some other “Informal” logic.
For the Logic Guys, the purpose of using these words – the sacred, magic words like “Logic,” “Objectivity,” “Reason,” “Rationality,” “Fact” – is not to invoke the actual concepts themselves.
Everything must be reducible to numbers, hence the typical logic lover’s obsession with IQ. In The Mismeasure of Man, one of the most well-known critiques of intelligence research, Stephen Jay Gould notes the dangers of scientists’ bias toward reification – the desire to find a definitive thing that is intelligence – and quantification, the desire to slap numbers on stuff.
A good, contemporary example of the logic incantation at work can be found in the career of Ben Shapiro.
The logic lover wishes to use again and again their favorite magic words as a shield against criticism and as a weapon against others.

The orginal article.

Summary of “My Life at 47 Is Back to What It Was Like at 27”

In 20 years, my life has come full circle, 360 degrees for real.
At 47, my life looks uncannily the same way it did at 27.How did I get here? Nearly two decades ago, I moved from New York City to the Midwest and then to California, where I came as close to settling down as I’m probably ever going to come, which is to say I got married.
Nearly two years ago, the marriage ended, and I got in the car and literally drove through my life in reverse.
My 1997 self would have suspected, correctly, that such benefits would lead to a severe enough case of impostor syndrome that I would slowly, and very sadly, wend my way back to the life I had before.
I did not know that the life I was living in my twenties, a life I was certain was a temporary condition, was the only one for me.
This is not to be confused with my best life or even the life I’m still on some level programmed to believe I want.
I love sleeping when I want and socializing when I want and being able to travel at the last minute without throwing another person’s life out of whack as a result.
I’ll state the obvious and say that much if not all of the reason my life hasn’t changed is that I’m not a parent.

The orginal article.

Summary of “‘Traditional Masculinity’ Can Be Harmful, Psychologists Find”

What exactly “Traditional masculinity” means depends on who’s talking about it.
In popular culture “Traditional masculinity” has a fuzzier, broader meaning, which generally encapsulates whatever the person reading or saying it associates with being a man.
If McDermott sounds like he’s being careful in his distinctions, it’s because the APA’s efforts to critique masculinity’s most harmful norms have not been universally well received.
When an article in the APA’s Monitor magazine characterized traditional masculinity as “On the whole, harmful,” writers for conservative media outlets including National Review and Fox News saw it as an attack on a population that’s suffering exactly the ills the APA hoped to address: elevated levels of depression and anxiety, and higher suicide and overdose rates.
“As we survey a culture that is rapidly attempting to enforce norms hostile to traditional masculinity, are men flourishing?” asks the columnist David French.
“It’s positioning traditional masculinity as a problem to be solved,” he says.
“If you’re a man who holds traditional values, why would you go see a psychologist when the starting point is that traditional masculinity is the problem?” That conflict, he says, might exacerbate an issue the guidelines seek to manage.
“Part of the problem among men is that one of the markers of traditional masculinity is independence and rejection of help.”

The orginal article.

Summary of “‘It’s a man’s problem’: Patrick Stewart and the men fighting to end domestic violence”

These men have gathered for a panel event organised by the domestic violence charity Refuge.
The author of The Macho Paradox, Katz teaches the “Bystander approach”, in which communities are encouraged to take ownership of the problem of relationship abuse and men are encouraged to challenge sexist comments and unacceptable behaviour.
“My response is that if a personal story was all it took for a man to speak out on domestic abuse, we’d have millions of male voices – fathers, sons, friends and partners of women who’ve experienced abuse. But that hasn’t happened. So, the bigger question is: why haven’t more men come forward? What are the reasons, in 2018, that this hasn’t become a mass movement among men?”.
One obstacle, Katz believes, is men’s fear of judgment from other men.
We need men to say to other men when they cross a line.
“It riles a lot of men, as they think they’ll have to realign what’s right and wrong. I don’t want to bash men, because they’ll just switch off – but I would like to get them thinking and speaking about how we treat women in our society.” Katz believes ending men’s “Collective silence” is the only long-term solution to domestic violence.
“We need men to say to other men when they cross a line, when they say or do something unacceptable: ‘That’s not OK.'”.
“There are all these influential men in politics, education, business, religions, sports, and men in mentoring roles – fathers, uncles, coaches. But, for whatever reason, they stay silent,” says Katz.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Spandex for Men: How Stretch Jeans Became Masculine”

Denim is traditionally 100 percent cotton, but mixing in 1 or 2 percent elastane fibers gives jeans a softer feel and helps ease the adversarial relationship between the durable, rugged textile and tender bits of the human body.
For something as innocuous as slightly less restrictive pants, stretch jeans have caused a lot of hand-wringing among men’s-fashion types over the past couple of years.
In opposition to stretch jeans stood the popularity of selvedge denim, an old-fashioned manufacturing method whose stiff, rough product found an ardent following among menswear enthusiasts online that hit a fever pitch a few years ago-long after women had largely embraced the ability to painlessly sit down.
According to Matt Sebra, the style director of GQ magazine, the popularity of selvedge required men to buy into an overtly masochistic idea of what it means to be authentic and masculine.
Nancy Deihl, a professor of fashion history at New York University, echoed Sebra’s feeling that the slow embrace of elastane among men was at least in part the result of how it violated the belief that masculinity requires testing and achievement.
“Stretch jeans go against ideas of male authenticity-the Marlboro Man image that jeans are supposed to have,” she says.
The thinking went, what if the jeans were no longer stretch-what if they were centered around the practical advantages of having a full range of motion?
The first is recoding stretch denim as an aid in athletic performance, even though modern fashion jeans aren’t intended to be worn for anything resembling exercise.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Research: Women and Men Are Equally Bad at Multitasking”

Women came out as better multitaskers when researchers used fMRI scans to measure brain activity, computer tests to measure response times, and an exercise in which people walking on a treadmill had to simultaneously complete a cognitive task.
There are a few tasks in which men and women consistently outperform each other – on average: For example, it is well-established that men typically fare better when imagining what complex 3-dimensional figures would look like if they were rotated.
One reason for these inconsistent findings may be that, to date, the vast majority of studies have examined gender differences using artificial laboratory tasks that do not match with the complex and challenging multitasking activities of everyday life.
To address these concerns, we developed a computerized task – The Meeting Preparation Task – that was designed to resemble everyday life activities and, at the same time, that was grounded in the most comprehensive theoretical model of multitasking activities.
He defines two types of multitasking – concurrent multitasking, in which you do two or more activities at the same time and serial multitasking, in which you switch rapidly between tasks.
It’s this latter type of multitasking that most of us do most often, and this type of multitasking we wanted to test.
Our idea with the present study was simple yet rare in the scientific literature: to use a validated task to assess whether there are gender differences in multitasking abilities in an everyday scenario in the general population.
We found no differences between men and women in terms of serial multitasking abilities.

The orginal article.