this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2023
43 points (62.4% liked)
science
14767 readers
86 users here now
A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
rule #1: be kind
<--- rules currently under construction, see current pinned post.
2024-11-11
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This so much this. I'm sick of "woe is me" incels complaining about problems caused by toxic masculinity, then they proceed to blame women
Their primary issue was with the source and whether this is the right sub for it
there isn't a lot of formal moderation rules here and mods are volunteers. I never liked heavily moderated groups because I always violate someone's arbitrary rules. downvote and scroll. lemmy needs a sort by vote total or something.
I'd be pretty careful about drawing any conclusions that are too broad from this study when trying to compare the female vs male experience, for a multitude of reasons.
The least of which being that while the splay might be slightly larger for men, the overall social mobility is higher than women. This is to say, unattractive males still have higher social mobility than unattractive women.
In the case for economic mobility specifically, even the ugliest men have more social mobility than the most beautiful women.
So, sure, it might (big asterisk) be the case that being attractive plays a larger role in social mobility for men than it does for women....
... But simply being a man, according to this data, still places one statistically heads and shoulders above being a woman for social mobility.
So... Yeah... The reason people are wary about studies like these is that they're incel honey. We recognize them as being extremely easy to draw terrible and unsupported conclusions from. That doesn't intrinsically make them bad, it just makes people want to nip those obvious misconceptions in the bud.