• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Where are all the women audiophiles?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 87496
  • Start date Start date
Yes. Men are susceptible for developing the nasty habit of being excessively "analytical".
Which yields them nothing, really, except when they are composers or studio pros etc.
 
Almost certainly your parents would have treated you differently from your sisters - even if subtly. Even as parents we are products of the way we have been brought up, and even if we consciously want to treat all our children the same we cannot stop our unconscious biases influencing how we behave.

Then there are all the influences from TV and from outside of the home - it is relentless.

I'm not saying it is all nurture - I've no actual knowledge but I'd guess there is some nature in it also. But I think nurture is far more significant than most people think.
If you are arguing that gender preferences are cultural/environmental — and that was the prevailing view 20 years ago — then you are butting up against the current ethos.
 
If you are arguing that gender preferences are cultural/environmental — and that was the prevailing view 20 years ago — then you are butting up against the current ethos.
Not so convinced that is the case. Still seems to be plenty of debate.

Plus when you see all the relentless socialisation, it is difficult to see how anyone could withstand it and not be changed by it.

 
It is not so that women do not take place in audio, as to be seen with Manger, Scheu, Manley and others.
They simply avoid to enter certain terrains, and they know why, as long as sales go on ...
 
I was sarcastically saying that a (typical) woman would not describe a metallic colour as being metallic because women tend not to be interested in technical details.

Women generally have a larger color vocabulary, and make far finer distinctions when naming colors than most men.

Or if I stick with stereotypes, there's a LOT of metallic fabrics in the fashion world. There are also pearlescent colors. Maybe men are not interested in the technical details of fabric color and construction?
 
Do you realise you just made their point for them?

Do you realise that you have a logical fallacy here? Premise: "Women feel dismissed and talked over".

If you agree, then women are dismissed and talked over.

If you disagree, then that is an example of women being dismissed and talked over.

IOW: every position one takes "proves" the premise, ergo the premise can not be falsified.
 
Do you realise that you have a logical fallacy here? Premise: "Women feel dismissed and talked over".

If you agree, then women are dismissed and talked over.

If you disagree, then that is an example of women being dismissed and talked over.
No, this is actually illogical. The formulation isn't "agree/disagree" but rather dismiss/consider. Your comment was clearly a dismissal, replete with eyeroll emoji for anyone tone-deaf enough to miss it otherwise.
 
Having considered your post, I'm left with no choice but to conclude that no, you did not consider :rolleyes::rolleyes:

(am I doing it right?)

Disagreement is part of normal discourse. I am fine with people disagreeing with me, I have no need to pull out the victim card / gender card / race card, or any other card. What I have an issue with is people encountering normal discourse, and then trying to play the victim to silence debate. And look who you are trying to defend, the CEO of a cable company who is complaining that her views are dismissed. If she comes here to promote her cables, and we dismiss her argument, and she complains that it is because she is a woman ... what would you say then?

Unfalsifiable premises are a logical fallacy. If agreement/disagreement lead to the same conclusion, it is unfalsifiable.
 
But beyond that, active threats or hateful expression is probably not the dominant type of behavior that might help explain the situation. Rather, it's more what some other members have mentioned: over and over and over again, in all fields of online activity (and in most professional and employment fields too) women report the same thing: unwanted attention from men; friendly overtures that have clear undertones of a hope for a romantic connection; slavishly flattering or conspicuously enthusiastic interactions, which often come with the risk of things turning very unpleasant if the women tries to gently ask the guy to back off or in some cases if she even just tries to discourage the behavior by not responding to it very often. Anyone wanting to find objective corroboration of these common phenomena will have no trouble doing so with a quick search of the academic literature.

Now, whenever I write something like the above paragraph, inevitably one or more of my fellow dudes jumps in to say they would never do that and none of their friends or the folks they've come to know on the forum would do that, and they know this or that woman who's into the hobby and has never complained to them. Here at ASR we should know better - that's anecdotal information, not data, and it also includes an overestimated level of certainty about what your friends might or might not have inadvertently said or done, and what your female buddy in the hobby might have actually experienced over the years and possibly just never mentioned to you.

Anyone who denies that women are treated differently, and treated that way often enough to be systematic (which is not the same thing as intentional), is either delusional or too defensive to admit the obvious reality.
I once talked to a female software developer at my company about the, at the time, last female Linux kernel developer publicly announcing her leaving the project. I had read the chat exchange that immediately preceded her making that decision. It was harmless ribbing, with no obvious sexist subtext that I could find. So I asked our female dev whether she could explain what had happened. She said: "You know, it's not any one exchange. It's that it's all the time."
 
About proof of no brain differences. I sat in on a public lecture about minds being indistinguishable between the sexes. Aside from the trucks you could drive through the holes in the cited studies I thought of off the top of my head while listening, at the end lecturer replied to a comment, "even if something is not true, we should make it so." The only thing worse than social science is politized social science.
 
About proof of no brain differences. I sat in on a public lecture about minds being indistinguishable between the sexes. Aside from the trucks you could drive through the holes in the cited studies I thought of off the top of my head while listening, at the end lecturer replied to a comment, "even if something is not true, we should make it so." The only thing worse than social science is politized social science.

What a well-supported strawman argument!
 
There are nations where boys outscore girls in standardized math test, nations where girls outscore boys, and nations where there is no difference.
That's very interesting. Sounds like a ripe area of further scientific inquiry...what variables - social, biological, cultural, national?,etc. - make a significant difference. It'd be cool to compare a nation where males score higher and one where females do in factors that might be at play. Do you know of any research that's looked into it? Thank you.
 
Back
Top Bottom