Originally Posted by Mjd-djm
I personally think that our tendency to talk about gear comes down to our origins. Way back when, when the men weren’t out hunting, they were sharpening their arrows, restringing their bows and tightening their loincloths. Having the right gear, finely tuned was the difference between eating and going hungry. Golf, shooting, photography... it’s all the same.
I think this is essentially true - spot on. Men love "stuff". Making "stuff", fixing "stuff", understanding how "stuff" works, improving "stuff", admiring well engineered "stuff". And men tend to have an action orientation - learning to excel at the skills needed to put those interests into effect. Men are over represented in the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) fields for a reason. And that reason has nothing to do with culture or "toxic masculinity" or oppression of women for the most part.
It mainly has to do with the reality that men are, in this respect, "wired" differently to most women in terms of their interests and behaviour. I am not speaking in absolutes here - we are all part of the human race, men and women, and there is a lot of overlap. Some women are the same in this respect but there are simply fewer of them. Marie Curie is an example - in fact she won 2 medals and not many men can claim that, but look at the overall list of Nobel Prize winners for disciplines like physics, chemistry, medicine etc and you will see what I mean.
OK some will say the game is rigged but then the same people say this about EVERYTHING. Historically women may have been excluded by social expectations about roles but are they seriously saying that is the case today? No. You get to the top of your field by being interested in "stuff' - how stuff works and in fact being obsessed by it.
In short, you do not get to the top of your field and earn a Nobel Prize by talking about your damned emotions all the time. You get there by being interested in "stuff". And then doing something about it.