Economics of Feminism (2016? Again?)

On the subject that (a) women are expected to be more aggressive in the workplace, and (b) this works against them "due to patriarchal structures."

1.
Actually competent and aggressive - you need both, and I regularly have to smack down both genders for having one and lacking the other.

2.
Now then when you add into the equation the documented physiological/psychological data on women being more self-deprecating, more receptive to criticism, more sensitive (for better or for worse) to physical stimuli, more empathic to other mammals (lending itself to more group-oriented, less individual-oriented behaviours), (and to a significant degree I believe you can find interesting datasets on neural and endocrinal activation differences across genders (or is it sexes, really)... which for the purpose of discussion we can refer to as the four or five or six Fs) then you begin to have model of structures which show how the female personality is more susceptible to feelings of low self-esteem, gaslighting, snowflakey behaviour. Interestingly, if we compound this with the built-in differential of testosterone's effect on musculoskeletal structures, deepening of vocal tonality, etc., the female sex has a built-in harder time assuming any power pose in a herd (as predisposed by the biology of the species, not so much the culture... I'm racking my memory to find an example of falsetto being a culturally acknowledged sign of alpha dominance) - anecdotally relevant are the self-discovery stories of F2M transsexuals on testosterone supplementation who find that they have easier access to herd domination as a result of more masculine visual and aural appearances.

Le sigh. Long fuzzy story short: I (currently) believe that equal access to political clout requires affirmative action in the form of informal cultural and or formal organisational efforts to build confidence in women, and to help women project their dominance in groups.

Where the altRight/ angry males get off is saying that affirmative action is economically significant. Where the left/ feminism makes a misstep is if ever it denies that affirmative action is required to counter biological predispositions. What feminism needs to work on in this conversation, is in proving with data-driven economic studies... that the gross benefit (of affirmative action in combating biological predispositions towards political inequality between sexes - ignoring gender for a minute, we can get back to that) outweighs the gross cost. And if you frame it that way, we get back on the roadmap to science, instead of simply rolling our eyes at Breitbart... :P

3.
"Is womanhood an element in the category of sex, or in the category of gender?" Weak dichotomy, is an answer. (Looked it up, after making a few comments elsewhere on the economics of feminism.) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-gender/