Talk:Gender inequality/Archive 1

Archive 1

Gender inequality and religion

The article should likely discuss the role of religion in gender inequality, since this is one of the most common complaints from gender activists, namely that religion contributes to this kind of inequality. ADM (talk) 10:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Inequality seen as a bad thing

The slant of the article, particularly the "Explanations for gender inequality" section, is that inequality is bad. This should be made explicit, rather than remaining an (obvious?) subtext. We should say which people consider gender inequality to be bad. Also, if there are any significant viewpoint holders who consider gender inequality to be good - in any aspect at all - we should describe those views as well. Of course, if that is now a minority view, we must not make it seem that this is a 50-50 dispute. What percent of the general public, or of experts, are opponents or supporters of gender inequality?

At one point, the "Explanations" section starts off to praise gender inequality, i.e., that it can help to structure parenting and marriage. But how it helps specifically is not mentioned. We go right into a complaint that women "still" do most of the domestic chores.

One way to improve the article would be to talk about the division of labor in the family, or in society as a whole, based on sex differences, whether considered completely inherent, or socially constructed. For example, men seem to like to take more dangerous or uncomfortable jobs (like roofer, oil rig worker, lumberjack) or jobs that require a lot of solitary intellectual work (computer programmer). Women tend to choose jobs which provide more social interaction (?) or flexible hours. [This is off the top of my head, so don't copy and paste this text till we check with sources!]

The question, of course, is whether the 'inequality' is 100% the result of discrimination (against adults) and social pressure to conform to sex roles (as children develop into adults). Is this considered a given? Or is it just a very commonly held idea? Are there any people out their, whose views merit inclusion in the article, who disagree?

Are any verifiable, quotable sources writing about how men and women might be happy making different choices? Or explaining these choices as other than coerced? That is, do women actually like taking care of young children, and might this explain why so many (given a choice) will become schoolteachers or stay-at-home moms?

Please don't do a Larry Summers on me [1]. I just want to help write a complete and unbiased article. --Uncle Ed (talk) 15:13, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

most common reason ignored

Many women put their careers on hold to have have children. this both means less women get as far as their male counterparts who continue to work and also disinclines employers to hire them in jobs where training as expensive, because they may just lose them. this should be incorporated to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phil Ian Manning (talk • contribs) 11:01, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Do you have any specific suggestions for changing the content of the article? Kaldari (talk) 22:30, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

I think Phil's specific suggestion was to mention in the article what he just said above. --Uncle Ed (talk) 14:57, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Here's (what I believe to be) a citable source on the subject of income disparity between the genders: http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender Wage Gap Final Report.pdf 71.17.99.70 (talk) 21:39, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Bahrain female workers earn 40% more? could be a paradox

I am a statistical analyst and was going through the income by gender for Oman and was surprised I found that woman earn more than men too!

It can be explained as follows:

Men have the highest share in the labour market, which means Omani men will also work as security men or as taxi drivers with a very low salary. However, most Omani women will prefer jobs as school teachers or working for the government or a hospital, and some woman stay at home to be housewives,which gives the illusion that woman will earn more.

The fact here is that men work on a very broad scale of salaries and woman are concentrated on a higher scale.

I remember making a small presentation about this effect in the last year of university, it is called "Simpsons Paradox".

So can you just try to get the number of females and males included in the study if possible, because that would show the Paradox. The most famous example of this paradox is when an American university was accused of being sexist on admissions, when in fact thy were not sexist at all. (Hala014 (talk) 10:17, 28 January 2012 (UTC))

Proposed Revisions and New Entry: Gender Inequality in China

Hello Everybody! I wish to expand this article because I feel that it under developed and fails to provide a worldview on the subject. The subsection “Gender Inequality Across the Globe” provides only a brief summary of international gender inequality issues. There is no reference to the gender disparities that plague any other countries besides the United States. In hopes of expanding the worldview of this entry, I propose to add an overview of gender inequality in China under the “Gender Inequality Across the Globe” subsection. I also propose to link the summary to a new Wikipedia entry I will be creating focusing solely on Gender Inequality in China. I have found a significant number of scholarly resources related to the topic, such as works by the World Bank and Amartya Sen. It is evident that this is a topic of great discussion that deserves proper attention on this page and Wikipedia as a whole. In order to allocate this proper attention, my new entry will include subsections on legislation, cultural and societal norms, and implications in regards to family structure, education, healthcare, and employment. I hope that other contributors will continue my contributions by adding subsections including but not limited to, the history of gender inequality and the impacts of gender inequality on sexuality.

I will be completing this entry under the guidance of a Poverty, Justice, and Development course at Rice University. I have added the banner to top of this page, if you would like further information. If you have any suggestions for the execution of my proposed entry, please let me know. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated! Thank you. Nqogu (talk) 16:56, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Physical differences applied in discriminatory hiring.

While a law enforcement officer would obviously never have to use physical strength or endurance when responding to a call, the United States is rife with needless physical fitness tests that exclude women from law enforcement jobs.

For example: http://www.kktv.com/home/headlines/Too_Hard_For_Women_Aurora_Police_Department_Suspends_Fitness_Test_147323005.html?storySection=comments

Why doesn't this article mention this? Hcobb (talk) 17:28, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

I believe that your premise that "a law enforcement officer would obviously never have to use physical strength or endurance" is flawed. However, the section In the Workplace might mention job qualifications that on the surface don't discriminate but in reality discriminate against women, such as height limits or physical fitness requirements that are unnecessary or stricter than necessary hen seen in relation to the work. Your sources would have to be better than a comment section, though.Sjö (talk) 08:39, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/Abstract.aspx?id=165842 Results showed that females failed the physical ability test significantly more often than males. The study did not support the need to climb through a window or to drag and pull a 158- pound mannequin 30 feet in 9 seconds. Findings, however, supported other areas in which applicants might be tested for physical competence, such as pushing, balancing, and climbing and showed that the physical ability selection test did not depict actual physical tasks performed by police officers.

http://www.wric.com/story/17394451/fbi-sued-for-gender-discrimination-by-male-employee A male employee of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is suing the agency for gender discrimination, claiming that a physical fitness test to become an FBI agent is biased against men.

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/1997/February97/070cr.htm The Justice Department today sued the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) for discriminating against female transit police applicants by requiring them to meet fitness standards that are unrelated to successful job performance.

Etc. Hcobb (talk) 15:23, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Neutrality

The section I have tagged, and the Gendered media section, are biased towards women. --Joshua Issac (talk) 13:33, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the Gendered media section is highly flawed, although it is a necessary component to a gender inequality page. I think the discussion of racial differences in media portrayals is not necessarily appropriate for this section. Furthermore, there should be citations to support the claims made in this section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaurigem (talk • contribs) 20:47, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Follow the rules. That is mark the non-sourced stuff with the cn-tag and delete them if no supporting evidence appeards in time. Or better yet, search for material to support the claims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.154.216 (talk) 07:13, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposed Revisions and New Entry: Gender Inequality in Thailand

Hello everyone,

I am currently working on a term paper for my Gender Economics class. My topic is about Gender Inequality in Thailand which will mainly focus on the context of gender division of labor in labor market. I am planning on starting my article by pointing out the problem of gender inequality from various perspective based on the gender inequality indicators in order to build up the understanding of the situation in Thailand. I will then present, in detail, the gender in equality in labor market in several aspects such as gender wage gap, employment rate, etc. I would be appreciate if you guys can help me with the sources of data of further idea of what else should be included, or not included, in the article or what other indicator(s) I shall present in my article.

So far I have gathered some information from world bank website. Some of my literatures include:

Kampon Adireksombat, Fang Zheng, and Chir Sakellariou. The evolution of gender wage differentials and discriminations in thailand: 1991-2007. In Economic Growth Centre Working Paper Series, number 2010/05. Economic Growth Centre, 2010.

George Gray Molina and Mark Purser. Human development trends since 1970: A social convergence story, 2010.

Social Institutions & Gender Index. Gender equality in thailand. http: //genderindex.org/country/thailand, 2012. [Online; accessed 28- September-2012].

I am sure I need a lot more citations to make a good article and I would be appreciate if any of you could provide me some suggestion(s). Thank you very much.

Econkc (talk) 18:20, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Feminist Bias

This article has a large feminist bias and only mentions men in a negative capacity. Isn't that against wikipedias rules? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.29.251.159 (talk) 07:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Moved for chronological clarity.

I've reverted some recent IP edits, as they removed cited material, and replaced it with assertions and a YouTube link.

Article is not exclusively negative to men. Articles about discrimination must cite the existence of discrimination and its nature as determined by reputable sources. -Yamara ✉ 20:40, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Removed image and accompanying description that, "from a young age, a way to differentiate between boys and girls is to dress girls in pink." This article is about "gender inequality" not "gender construction." Note: is naming a child based on ethnicity (e.g. Stankowski vs. Wong) a sign of "racial inequality?" Eyeofpie —Preceding undated comment added 13:17, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Most women prefer to couple with guys who have high status occupations

Most women prefer to couple with guys who have high status occupations. Can this ULOL Ἦἇᾏbe added to the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.40.208.132 (talk) 23:28, 16 March 2015 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gender_inequality&action=edit&section=16#

Worldwide

There's been a tag at the top of this article for five years about the lack of worldwide balance. Does anyone here want access to a source on gender inequality in developing countries?

Jayachandran, Seema (2015-01-01). "The Roots of Gender Inequality in Developing Countries". Annual Review of Economics. 7 (1): 63–88. doi:10.1146/annurev-economics-080614-115404.

All you have to do is go to Wikipedia:Annual Reviews and sign up for free access to this (and dozens of other) journals from this publisher. Just this one journal, for just this year, would normally cost you US $93, but the publisher is offering free access this year to up to 100 established Wikipedians. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:44, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Gender inequality. 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/20110719161242/http://www.catalyst.org/etc/Catalyst_Written_Testimony_To_JEC_With_Appendix.pdf to http://www.catalyst.org/etc/Catalyst_Written_Testimony_To_JEC_With_Appendix.pdf

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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} 11:48, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Edited by Rylee

Chelsey and Emily,

I thought you both did a wonderful job with this article. Your addition about politics was intriguing and fun to read! I mostly fixed the run-on sentences by separating them into two sentences, and a few other minor edits. My only recommendation is to maybe provide a concession about what kind of inequality (if any!) that men may go through in politics. I know that politics is primarily male-dominated, but I feel it would really add something to your article. Because this article is called "Gender Inequality" I feel it would be important to focus on some things that men aren't as privileged for as women may be. It's just an idea, but I think it would be interesting if you happened to find something. Nice job!

- Rylee — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.186.98.140 (talk) 00:14, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Gender inequality. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20131008051216/http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf to http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110426194948/http://www.dol.gov/wb/stats/main.htm to http://www.dol.gov/wb/stats/main.htm
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110310100258/http://www.odi.org.uk:80/resources/details.asp?id=2386&title=gender-mdgs-gender-lens-vital-pro-poor-results to http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/details.asp?id=2386&title=gender-mdgs-gender-lens-vital-pro-poor-results
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080421034031/http://www.beliefnet.com/politics/religiousaffiliation.html to http://www.census.gov/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:07, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

In The Workplace: Death

This part of this section seems random and almost like it was just thrown in. With as little as the section has now it could be removed without changing the section all that much. On the other hand, adding more to it, what jobs the men were dying in compared to women, were the deaths avoidable, etc. would give this section more notability. Stormy419 (talk) 17:56, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Gender inequality

Gender inequality refers to unequal treatment or perceptions of individuals based on their gender. It arises from differences in socially constructed gender roles. Women are given less or no opportunity to prove or show herself as in most of the houses the male thinks that he has the right to take all the dissions and how the money could be spend. And even women are letting it happen. And if the woman is earning her earning has not that much of importance. Members in the family thinks that her earnings are gust additional to that of males. Sometimes people start to question if the male; leaves his job and they don’t ask the women if she leaves the job, Why is it so? Have you ever think of it. But the unfortunately most of women think that what is being done is right. Which is a major problem. Women should be Educate to at least her rights and should be able to fight for herself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.127.80.75 (talk) 11:43, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Non-heterosexual inclusion needed

There was a reference made to a book that claims the importance of opposite-gender parental roles but this does not apply to families headed by two men or two women, let alone families headed by a single parent. There should also be some distinctions made throughout the article in reference to heterosexual relationship trends as some of the statistics do not apply to all women or men or people who do not identify as either gender.Jwillowrose (talk) 18:57, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

New Additions

If you have any problems with the expansion of the sexual dimorphism, as well as to the gender pay gap section please discuss them here.Petergstrom (talk) 17:11, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Citation Added

I added a citation to the definition of occupation segregation within the section of Income disparities linked to job stratification. Cakers12 (talk) 22:15, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Citation Added

I cited a source from the Impact and Counteractions section. The source shows data that supports the original writer's claim that women were more likely to be living in poverty. However, I was not able to find claims that this was directly caused by the wage gap. Another source may be necessary to connect these claims. Matt Tosa (talk) 22:29, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

New Subsection

I am planning on adding information under the Variations by country or culture header. This information will detail gender gap variances in Europe and I specifically look at how Western Europe and Eastern Europe compare. My planned edit is in my user sandbox for anyone to critic. Matt Tosa (talk) 23:38, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Men "biological risk takers"?

Hi,
that qualifier, in the beginning of the Pay Gap section, is fairly bold in its proximity to essentialism ... but be that as it may, the cited source does not support that assertion.
The article can be found without paywall here: http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3098447
In the "Summary And Conclusion" section it is stated that "There is no evidence that this heritability differs between males and females". Perhaps I'm reading this the wrong way.
If not, I'll edit out the "biological risk" thingy. T 88.89.5.214 (talk) 03:56, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gender inequality. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100707002829/http://journals.aomonline.org/InPress/main.asp?action=preview&art_id=610&p_id=1&p_short=AMJ to http://journals.aomonline.org/inpress/main.asp?action=preview&art_id=610&p_id=1&p_short=AMJ
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140331190253/http://www.weforum.org/issues/global-gender-gap to http://www.weforum.org/issues/global-gender-gap

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:11, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Little discussion on Innate differences

Numerous studies have been done on the innate differences between the sexes and their behavior. This article does not cite these at all. I think it would be important, as part of the discussion in that field has also related how for example more assertive and aggressive behavior (expressed by all male mammals) most likely has to have at leas some kind of effect on human career progression and pay. If this discussion is not included the article will give off the incorrect impression that gender inequality (as in pay gaps et cetera) is only caused by bias.88.114.154.216 (talk) 07:36, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

This article don't cite those because people who create this article think that gender is a social construct. Facts be damned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.175.37.10 (talk) 15:36, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Planning to create a child article " Gender inequality in Japan"

Hi guys, as per a project in one of my classes, I plan to help contribute to Wikipedia with a new article about gender inequality. Specifically in Japan as I found no article currently exists specifically on this nation. My Sandbox.Please share your comments and suggestions. —Preceding undated comment added 21:54, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

@Cohoward: Before you do, please read WP:SUMMARY. As this article currently has nothing at all about Japan, it's not like there's a ton of material that is too much about Japan which would need to be split off into a new article. My recommendation would be to start here, first, by adding a new section on Japan with a summary version of the article you intend to create. If that looks good, and you feel like you have sufficient additional material to expand into a whole, new article, then that could be step two.

Also, please learn about signing your talk page posts. See also WP:TALK and WP:THREAD. Adding @Shalor (Wiki Ed):. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 22:55, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Oh, I see now that this is an old post, which has not been updated, and that Gender inequality in Japan already exists. That article, and this one, should still follow summary style. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 23:09, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

• Thanks for pinging me Mathglot! The class is over and the student doesn't seem to be active - I can try to work on this in my own time, but admittedly I don't have as much of it as I used to. (sigh) Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:43, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Critiques in the "At Home" Section

In the "Gender roles in parenting and marriage" it does not discuss the actual gender roles in parenting and marriage. Gender roles are socially constructs created by society not by actual biological traits. The statement about females with congenital adrenal hyperplasia does not fit into this category at all, it has no relevance.

In the "Gender inequality in relationships" section there is too much talk about IQ. The paragraph seems too rushed and too much information cramped into one short paragraph about a very broad topic.

In the "Attempts in equalizing household work" there should not be a mentioning of America because this is looking at the general world, there are specific sections where certain countries and continents are being discussed. There is not enough citations to support the facts that are being written.

The different proportions of the topics is very different throughout the article. The topics being discussed are all very broad and there are many different peer reviewed article written on these topics. There is not enough substance to these topics and they all lack proper citations, which makes it seem as if the facts being laid out are not true. The topics are also very all over the place and some are very cramped into small paragraphs. Jlee20 (talk) 04:23, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Whole article is "off-topic".

--Off topic. Yes. Because the topic isn't defined. The lede paragraph doesn't define what the heck "Gender Inequality" is. It just launches into talking about it. Text needs at least a sentence saying what it is, along with a good reliable secondary source (defining it and establishing notability), which can then be "summarized" in the lede.
--Notability of the subject isn't established, it can't be if the subject isn't defined.
--Does anyone have any reliable, unbiased sources giving a definition? Actually, a primary source would be okay for a definition, but a secondary source or two would be needed to establish notability. Finding secondary sources for notability shouldn't be to hard, but it needs to be done because without "proof" of notability a whole article can be removed.
RFinlay72 (talk) 04:14, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Adding Representation for African Countries

I'm working on a project for a class, and am hoping to edit the "Women in Africa" page to provide a more balanced focus on issues that women in Africa face today. I noticed that in the regional differences section of this article, that no country from the African continent is represented, and want to add a small section about African regional differences. I'm thinking of more ideas on my sandbox. Please feel free to comment and give feedback! Cl115 (talk) 14:38, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

I think that the topic is obviously notable, but the article does need a definition. Or more than one, given that different organizations have slightly different perspectives. I think [2] would be a good start. Sjö (talk) 06:28, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Adding Section on Africa

I've added some gender inequality related issues regarding Africa such as female genital mutilation, child marriage, feminization of poverty, and other issues to provide a more balanced focus to gender inequality globally. Please feel free to give feedback and comment!Cl115 (talk) 05:59, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

split recommendation

Due to the vagueness of this topic, paired with its length, i recommend deleting this article, and creating two new articles, One being "patriarchal inequalities", and the other one being "matriarchal inequalities". The former would belong to the feminism series, and the latter belonging to the series on masculism. If this is deemed unnecessary, i request that the article atlest be divided into matriarchal and patriarchal inequalities.50.126.142.46 (talk) 19:33, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Per WP:No split, WP:Spinout, and WP:No page, we don't unnecessarily create spin-out articles. Also, we usually go by WP:Common name. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 20:55, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

This article overall is structured pretty well, but as one analyzes more the title doesn't quite match the article. When one sees "Gender Inequality" as the main topic, I think it would be vital to include a balanced amount of facts with respect to both men and women facing inequality. This article was more geared towards the inequality of women more so than men. I would recommend adding additional research pertaining male inequality or cut back on the various references of female inequality. Overall good work. --Burgerbandits (talk) 01:52, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Stormy419.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:07, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Andrewlee155. Peer reviewers: Aslider.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2018 and 15 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Malra3.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 October 2018 and 11 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Qhdud12. Peer reviewers: Qhdud12.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2019 and 12 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jlee20, Jkalua, MuhammadIhsan24.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 August 2020 and 17 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Nickroakes. Peer reviewers: Kroset1.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 November 2021 and 10 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sunnycxz. Peer reviewers: Saronogd, Kaylacoughlin5, Quzelamu.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Income disparity

• white men continue to earn 25 percent more than equally-well performing women and minorities.

Does the reference show this, or merely claim this? And is this taking into account factors such as the willingness of men to work more hours per work, or that they have more unbroken years of experience (because they didn't take a career break to raise kids)?

In other words, are we saying that women or blacks are not getting equal pay for equal work, or are we implying that the only possible reason men (or whites) make more is that? --Uncle Ed (talk) 19:30, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

White men definitely make more than any other person when it comes to a specific workplace because people of color or women are seen as less and weaker than them. This has a lot to do with the stereotypes of society and how white men believe everyone else lives in their world. Women's responsibilities as a wife and a mom should not have to affect their opportunities and income at a workplace due to flexibility and about of time they are willing to put in because they do more than what men do and just are not recognize for their hard work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jzaragoza23 (talk • contribs) 20:08, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

No clarification needed for image caption (first image on page)

Dressing female babies in pink to make them look "girly" and "feminine" is considered common knowledge because most people understand that. We do not need to cite anything because it is already common knowledge. Also, no clarification is needed in my opinion. --Carrot Lord (talk) 23:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

most people understand that. See the tag at the top of the article - that assumption seems rather culture-centric. The caption also makes assertions about "heteronormative idea of femininity", which need to be clarified and sourced. Also, did you know that pink was sometimes the preferred color for boys in 20th-century America before the 50s? Diego (talk) 06:49, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

This idea seems to be controversial based the cultures and gender norms society has created for each gender. However, in todays society it has been more normalized for children to be dressed in gender neutral colors and also from the opposite assigned colors of gender such as blue or pink. Color should not matter because we are allowed to express our style , personality, and identity in our own ways without having to have gender coercion due to society's expectations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jzaragoza23 (talk • contribs) 20:16, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

In television and film section issues

The statement "Hollywood actresses get paid less than actors." is logically flawed if taken literally. I could find many examples of an actress lead in a film being payed more than their male supports or counterparts in other films. Another way to read this is that actors are paid more than actresses for performing a similar role, however the following text taken from Forbes magazine doesn't justify that similar work is being performed. A simple solution is to change the statement to "On average, Hollywood actresses are paid less than actors." or "Top Hollywood actors are paid more than their respective female counterparts", however for that last statement to hold up I'd actually have to do some research and cite it. I don't like the way this statement implies that the actors and actresses are actually performing similar work by comparing their overall income. I feel like if this section is trying to show inequality, as per the articles topic, it should prove more relation by examining the income of actors and actresses from situations of a single movie with two lead roles of roughly equal importance (one male and one female) with other factors accounted for. I know this may seem pedantic but I believe it to be important to the quality of the article. If there are no objections I will happily modify or remove the related material myself. I don't have much experience using the talk page so excuse me if I haven't followed conventions. Cynicle (talk) 14:45, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

This point is quite interesting and important because it can also represent the glass ceiling effect point of view since it indicated the gender disadvantages. The disadvantages of this is shown in a deeper representation on the top levels than on the bottom which can affect a persons career depending not their gender. It has been shown that the glass ceiling effect has impacted women the most. This relates to the idea of actresses getting paid less that actors when they are committed in a high level of career. It is not fair that men are getting paid more than women on the same job and position being done simply because of their gender because everyone should be allowed to have the same opportunities and not be discriminated based on their gender. This simply shows that gender inequality does exist in everyones lives because everyone faces a certain situation that favors the other gender more. The glass ceiling effect is a higher level of inequality but can still be compared to gender inequality since it profoundly included all sorts of inequality.Jzaragoza23 (talk) 20:23, 15 March 2022 (UTC) Cotter, D. A., Hermsen, J. M., Ovadia, S., & Vanneman, R. (2001). The Glass Ceiling Effect. Social Forces, 80(2), 655–681. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2675593 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jzaragoza23 (talk • contribs) Jzaragoza23 (talk) 20:23, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Men's inequality

This article needs to mention men as victims of inequality as well as women. Wrad (talk) 01:57, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

The fact that men and women experience inequality is inherent in the idea of gender inequality.

The article itself is an example of what it describes. Ironic, isn't it? --Joshua Issac (talk) 12:23, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree. I will look and see if there is any studies on the issue. One would suspect that there has to be, but I don't know. 88.114.154.216 (talk) 07:11, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I recently tried to cover men's inequality but my edit was reverted — Preceding unsigned comment added by BiggieCheese2 (talk • contribs) 01:46, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Adding onto the concept of inequality in men specifically, it does not have much attention towards since men are seen as dominant and superior in society. However, men do face inequality in their lives that can even lead to risks. This type of inequality is profoundly shown all over the world and is considered underrated because of the lack of attention. In many places’ men are at a higher risk than women due to illness because of their unattended health issues. Men are also in the high risks of death than women due to their job position and descriptions. This is important because it shows that because men are seen as the dominant in the society, they are not getting much attention and are facing unfair discrimination which can potentially affect their health outcomes. For instance, in Africa women are getting much more attention than men in general because it also includes boys. This has been identified as gender inequality targeting men because women are put first.Jzaragoza23 (talk) 21:10, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Sexism and Discrimination

This section needs more citations and structural examples of how gender inequality is institutionalized.

Also, with regards to "benevolent sexism"--is that really a term? Is there any type of sexism/discrimination that may be considered "benevolent"? Furthermore, the idea of "positive" stereotypes is disputable. I would argue that stereotypes are inherently negative. This section needs serious work and I would go so far as to suggest a complete overhaul. (Kaurigem (talk) 18:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC))

There are many types of discrimination that might affect a person’s lives due to their gender. For instance, there is social discrimination, stereotypes, gender discrimination, and employment discrimination. All of these concepts reflect to a person’s gender because they are being treated differently depending on their gender and roles assigned. Although many people talk about women being discriminated and sexualized in certain jobs, no one really talks about the discrimination men face in their work environment. Men are always put first when work places need a certain job done that might be a little too risky, but men don’t really have an option to deny. However, women also face this because there are many situations that involve manipulative coworkers and managers that threaten women to lose their job if not done what they asked foe that can seem a bit odd. Overall, women and men both face discrimination during work hours and can even be taken to a personal level.Jzaragoza23 (talk) 18:02, 16 March 2022 (UTC) DONNA BOBBITT-ZEHER. “GENDER DISCRIMINATION AT WORK: Connecting Gender Stereotypes, Institutional Policies, and Gender Composition of Workplace.” Gender & society 25.6 (2011): 764–786. Web. <ref>DONNA BOBBITT-ZEHER. “GENDER DISCRIMINATION AT WORK: Connecting Gender Stereotypes, Institutional Policies, and Gender Composition of Workplace.” Gender & society 25.6 (2011): 764–786. Web.</ref>Jzaragoza23 (talk) 18:02, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Technoculture 320-01

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Dlapis (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Katies01.

— Assignment last updated by Marimend (talk) 21:41, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Rhetoric 1-06

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 September 2022 and 14 November 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): KatelynTreece, HNFST1, AlexiaSteele (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Jialeijiang (talk) 13:26, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: LLIB 1115 - Intro to Information Research

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 August 2022 and 16 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ejgrimm (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Ejgrimm (talk) 17:11, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - FA22 - Sect 201 - Thu

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 September 2022 and 8 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Riven3388, WZ2372 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by WZ2372 (talk) 09:51, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at University of Utah supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Fall term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:19, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Rice University supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2011 Q3 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by Primefac (talk) on 16:33, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Lede wording

Men and women -> on the basis of sex/gender? It seems like the wording in the lede is a little outdated. Shouldn't it be "on the basis of sex and/or gender" or something like that to include all gender identities? The void century (talk) 17:48, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes, it was definitely outdated. This edit helps update it, and more neatly integrates the sentence at the end about how gender inequality affects non-binary people. Sideswipe9th (talk) 00:47, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

I think "on the basis of gender" is preferable to "other gender identities". It is simpler and still covers other gender identities than men and women. Also, the lede should reflect the body of the article and as of now I can't see that the body covers more than the disparities between men and women. Sjö (talk) 09:48, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Technoculture 320-01

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 January 2023 and 8 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Chenzhih (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Lucy.kary.

— Assignment last updated by ACHorwitz (talk) 20:20, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

“it is women who are most affected”

Isn’t this a breach of WP:NPV and possibly WP:V? I💖平沢唯 (talk) 08:19, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Why would it be? WP:NPV does not translate to the lack of POV. The guideline specifies: "representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." Dimadick (talk) 15:43, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Because Wikipedia pages should present the facts rather than make a subjective conclusion based on them. To quote WP:NPOV, “The tone of Wikipedia articles should be impartial, neither endorsing nor rejecting a particular point of view. Try not to quote directly from participants engaged in a heated dispute; instead, summarize and present the arguments in an impartial tone.” The article goes on to list many ways that men are affected by gender inequality (men are far more likely to commit suicide, be imprisoned, be murdered, work a dangerous/demeaning job, and die in war for example), and it should be up to the reader to decide which gender is more privileged. I💖平沢唯 (talk) 02:30, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Women are far more affected than men, as described in the mass of scholarly studies on this topic. It's not remotely possible that men are equally affected, or somehow worse off. The reader isn't going to decide this matter—that would be ridiculous. Instead, we must tell the reader that by far the greater damage is done to women by gender inequity, as described in countless scholarly studies. It wouldn't hurt to cite one or more review articles assessing the literature. Binksternet (talk) 03:08, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

There are also countless scholarly studies showing that men are more affected: here, here, here, here, here, here, here, plus all the ones quoted in the article. Saying things like “not remotely possible” and “ridiculous” won’t change the fact that “women are more affected” is simply an opinion and not a fact. It’s also unprovable (hence the WP:V because you cannot objectively measure which gender has it worse. Not to mention that that sentence was probably written with just men and women in mind, not non-binary people who probably have it much worse than women. According to Wikipedia policy, “women are more affected” should at least be changed to “so-and-so believes that women are more affected” or “according to these studies, women are more affected”. I💖平沢唯 (talk) 05:15, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Complete nonsense. One of your linked papers is about moral typecasting, a non-issue. The WSJ piece is an unreliable op-ed, not a clinical study, and they cherry pick the data to align with their pre-conceived notions. Another link is about counting more women than men in college, and they make no attempt to analyze why. This paper is about trying to cut down on the classic gender inequality tool GGGI to simplify it to show more disadvantages for males—they make no attempt to look at sex-differentiated roles such as motherhood, and they didn't bother to address women getting paid less than men. This paper works toward improvements in teacher interaction with young students, addressing teacher biases, but it doesn't try to understand how why.

What we need here are high quality WP:SECONDARY sources such as sociologist Joan Huber's book On the Origins of Gender Inequality, published by Routledge. Huber shows that gender inequality cannot be understood apart from human reproductive biology, in which the difference between motherhood and fatherhood is vast. This difference sets the stage for male domination of society and women being second-class citizens. Huber shows that many published studies fail to take into account the basic biological foundation. It's hard to believe that this Wikipedia article about gender inequality cites nothing from Huber, who is perhaps the most respected topic expert. Binksternet (talk) 06:41, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

You need secondary articles? Didn’t you say you need “scholarly studies” (i.e primary sources)? Either way, there are plenty of sources suggesting that men have it worse, certainly enough that Wikipedia endorsing one view would violate WP:NPOV.

Oh and by the way, since you keep mentioning that women get paid less, women have more personal total wealth than men in the US and get paid 95% of what men are when adjusted for things like hours worked, occupations chosen, education and job experience. Meanwhile men are 78% of suicides, 68% of homeless people, 93% of prison inmates, 80% of murder victims, 98% of military casualties, and 92% of workplace fatalities. So there’s your “male privilege” I💖平沢唯 (talk) 23:53, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Statistics bent to make a point. By far the greater mass of literature on this topic describes women as having the worse deal. If someone tries to build a Wikipedia article by adding disparate statistics together to prove a point, that person will be reverted per WP:SYNTH. Rather, the article should be built based on scholars who have studied the broadest reaches of the topic. Time for a library visit. Binksternet (talk) 01:09, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

That’s not what I suggested (although those statistics really should be added). All I’m saying is that Wikipedia can’t have a statement like “it is women who are most affected”. Since you really have no argument against this besides annoying snarky comments (hell you didn’t even suggest what author or study should be listed if the sentence is changed to “according to so-and-so...”), I’ll just go ahead and remove it I💖平沢唯 (talk) 02:16, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

I think your characterization of Binksternet's points is inaccurate. He, among others, has given you valid reasons to oppose your change. I'm in agreement with those points, as well as ParticipantObserver's concern stated below. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:21, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

No he hasn’t. He mostly just insulted me and acted very uncivil, seemingly trying to start a fight. That sentence needs to be changed either to “so-and-so believes/argues that...” or removed altogether. Since “women are more oppressed” is not a fact and cannot be proven, it can’t be stated like one. To quote again: “The tone of Wikipedia articles should be impartial, neither endorsing nor rejecting a particular point of view. Try not to quote directly from participants engaged in a heated dispute; instead, summarize and present the arguments in an impartial tone.” I💖平沢唯 (talk) 03:32, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

"not a fact and cannot be proven" is an assertion, made by you. If you convince more people of it, you'll have consensus for your change. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:36, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

It’s an assertion based on the definitions of objective and subjective. Sure, you may agree with it, but you have to admit that it’s not a fact. And besides, I brought up a concern that that sentence doesn’t take into account non-binary people I💖平沢唯 (talk) 03:49, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

If you're looking to add article content about non-binary people, I'm all for it. The last time we talked about it was in #Lede wording, which led to the current lead line, but there's a gaping hole in the body of the article. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:53, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

How about just removing it altogether? I💖平沢唯 (talk) 03:54, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

As an aside: it would probably be good to add some text to the article re: gender inequalities in suicide, homelessness, and violence-related fatalities.

Right now, these things are either not mentioned, are mentioned in passing when discussing a different issue, or relegated to the 'see also' section. But these are certainly notable issues that have been addressed by plenty of reliable sources. ParticipantObserver (talk) 16:28, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

ILoveHirasawaYui: removing what altogether, exactly? Also, you just reverted again, despite knowing you're doing so against consensus. Was it unintentional? You didn't provide a reason in your edit summary. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:11, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Removing the bit that I removed. I asked “How about just removing it altogether” and didn’t get a response so I assume it’s okay I💖平沢唯 (talk) 04:15, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

No, I continue to oppose your change, and you should presume everyone else who disagrees with you still does. Please self-revert. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:18, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

I think the phrasing is somewhat imprecise (after all, men are affected by getting more money and having more power) but in general a reasonable summary of points made elsewhere in the article. ParticipantObserver (talk) 20:59, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

ILoveHirasawaYui, you keep making false statements here to support your point of view. You said,

• “women are more affected” is simply an opinion and not a fact.
• It’s also unprovable... because you cannot objectively measure which gender has it worse.
• “women are more oppressed” is not a fact and cannot be proven
  

These assertions are wrong according to volumes of work published by topic scholars such as Joan Huber. Women are certainly more oppressed than men. You also said that "it should be up to the reader to decide which gender is more privileged" which is not how Wikipedia does things in a topic like this one, with a strongly supported thesis making the mainstream view countered by minor and fringe views from men's rights activists. We are not going to create a false balance between mainstream and activist views. Binksternet (talk) 17:57, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

78% of suicides, 68% of homeless people, 93% of prison inmates, 80% of murder victims, 98% of military casualties, and 92% of workplace fatalities Statistics on their own aren't evidence of a causal relationship. Establishing causality is difficult, but with women, it's almost WP:BLUE that they're worse off because of the history of legal systems and religions that codify inequality. The scholarly evidence just bolsters the claim further. But it's a fair point that unequal treatment of non-binary people deserves more examination. The void century (talk) 15:45, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Global Genders

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 January 2023 and 5 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mogu23 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Swo235 (talk) 14:42, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Education

In 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognized for the first time a universal right to education. Since then, progress, like the expansion of access to education, has been made. But still more than 127 million girls and women are out of school around the world. Discriminatory practices stand in the way of girls and women fully exercising their right to participate in, complete, and benefit from education. Poverty, gender-based violence, early marriage, gender norms, and stereotypes are some of the barriers keeping girls out of a classroom.

Early Marriage

Child or early marriage can be defined as “any marriage where at least one of the parties is under 18 years of age” and “is considered to be a form of forced marriage, given that one and/or both parties have not expressed full, free and informed consent”. This discriminatory practice is often rooted in gender stereotypes and can place girls’ educational development at greater risk, as children who get married are more likely to leave school. It can also lead to forced exclusion from school and an increased risk of domestic violence. The practice of early marriage tends to apply predominantly to girls, who are sometimes legally allowed to marry at a younger age than boys. 30% of all countries set the legal age of marriage for girls at 18 years old, without exceptions, 18% set the legal age of marriage for girls below 18. While the risk of child marriages can increase depending on various factors, the disruption of education and the closing of schools are likely to increase the number of child marriages. At regional level, Europe and North America have the highest proportion of countries with a minimum age of marriage set at 18 years old without exceptions (or allowing judicial exceptions from 16 years old only). Yet, 47% of countries of this region are enshrining a minimum age at 18 but with exceptions that either fall below 16 years old and/or are not granted by a judge. Arab States are the ones with the highest number of countries setting a minimum age of marriage below 18 for girls. According to data collect by UNICEF, 765 million children are married of which 650 million are girls. 1 in 5 young women aged 20 to 24 years were married before their 18th birthday compared to 1 in 30 young men.

Physical Punishment in Educational Institutions

Corporal or physical punishment is defined as “any punishment in which physical force is used and intended to cause some degree of pain or discomfort, however light”. School-related gender-based violence (SRGBV) are “acts or threats of sexual, physical or psychological violence occurring in and around schools, perpetrated as a result of gender norms and stereotypes, and enforced by unequal power dynamics”. All violence in educational institutions and learning environments has a negative impact on children, including corporal punishment and gender-based violence. While all learners can be targets of violence, girls and young women are disproportionately the victims of certain types of violence, such as verbal and sexual harassment and abuse and violence by classmates and teachers, while boys are more likely to be targets of physical violence. This phenomenon also extends to the digital environment where discrimination persists and can be amplified, leading to girls and young women being more likely to be targeted by online sexual violence. This risk has intensified during the pandemic, as children and youth have seen their online time increase exponentially because of lockdown and school closures. All available data show an increase in the scale of both cyberbullying and online child sexual exploitation by adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. Similarly, both girls and boys can experience corporal punishment. The gender dimensions of corporal punishment lie in the type of punishment and the behaviours that are sanctioned. When used against girls, corporal punishment aims to control and regulate their behavior, including social and sexual ones, and encourage deference, hence it reinforces traditional gender roles and is closely linked to domestic violence against women.

Lisa Rechelle (talk) 13:44, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

References

Vague "for the majority of relationships, the power lies with the male"

What is "the power" here? There seem to be specific powers, such as custody rights over children, that are often said to lie more with women. This "the power" seems a reductionist statement that sounds as an appeal to emotion rather than an argumentation. Wallby (talk) 10:04, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Incorrect/incomplete reasoning

"Men and women have better visuospatial and verbal memory, respectively. These changes are influenced by the male sex hormone testosterone, which increases visuospatial memory in both genders when administered."

I.e. "These changes" should refer to "men [having] better visuospatial memory" and "women [having] better verbal memory", but the explanation given says "testosterone increases visuospatial memory in both genders" while not explaining what causes "increase of verbal memory". Does testosterone also cause a decrease in verbal memory?

The referenced study is inconclusive about this is seems?

The results are, however, inconsistent. In a study analyzing the effects of a single testosterone injection on elderly men the treatment caused a worsening of verbal memory. Similarly, biweekly injections of testosterone during 90 days resulted in memory decline

— https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4330791/

Perhaps the text "These changes are influenced by the male sex hormone testosterone" should be changed to "The visuospatial difference is influenced by the male sex hormone testosterone"? Wallby (talk) 10:17, 28 November 2023 (UTC)