Friday, January 06, 2012

Surprise! Men and women really ARE different: Sexes share just 10 per cent of their personality traits

Ever suspected that the opposite sex comes from another planet? It seems they might as well. Men and women really are different, according to a study – and while the differences between them may not come as a shock, the scale of them might.

Researchers found that the average man and woman share only 10 per cent of their personality traits.

Psychologically, they concluded, the sexes may as well come from different worlds – along the lines of the bestselling book Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus.

Psychologists at Manchester University and in Italy analysed the results of personality tests which were given to 10,000 people and measured 15 traits. In keeping with age-old stereotypes, women scored more highly on sensitivity, warmth and feelings of apprehension, while men fared better on emotional stability, dominance and rule consciousness, or sense of duty.

The researchers concluded that there were ‘extremely large’ personality differences between the sexes which could have implications in the workplace.

Co-author Dr Paul Irwing, of Manchester University’s Psychometrics at Work Research Group, said: ‘It was a really surprising finding. ‘The conventional view, and my own view, was that there would have been much greater overlap, but actually there is an extremely large difference.

It sounds highly stereotypical, but you find a huge proportion of women in the caring and socially related professions such as teaching and nursing and administration. ‘People self-select professions in which they will feel happy and satisfied and that is no bad thing.’

In the study, published today in journal PLoS One, the researchers conclude that it is ‘difficult to overstate the theoretical and practical importance’ of their findings.

But Dr Irwing stressed that there are still ‘massive individual differences’ between men and women, partly due to personal variations in hormone levels.

And Janet Hyde, Professor of Psychology and Women’s Studies at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, argued that other studies based on millions of people showed men and women are ‘very similar on most psychological variables’


Half of the British workshy would give up their benefits rather than get out of bed

Half of those claiming unemployment benefits would prefer to lose their handouts than do a stint of unpaid work. Figures show that 20 per cent of those ordered to take part in four-week community projects stop claiming immediately and another 30 per cent are stripped of their benefits when they fail to turn up.

Officials suspect many of those who stop claiming benefits are working in the black economy and would rather lose their welfare than give up their undeclared earnings.

Government sources say the results of a trial scheme are so striking that ministers are preparing to roll it out nationwide in a programme hitting up to 50,000 unemployed. Job Centre staff have been given the power to force anyone claiming out-of-work benefits to take part in ‘mandatory work activity’ – unpaid posts designed to get them used to working from nine to five.

Those who appear unwilling to look for work can be referred to the scheme at any stage, even on the first day of their claim. The placements are typically with charities or involve some kind of community service, such as helping to maintain parks.

Those who refuse to take part, or agree but then fail to turn up, have their £67.50-a-week unemployment benefit stopped until they agree to do so.

A source close to the programme told the Mail that the results so far had been ‘extraordinary’. ‘This has started on a relatively small scale, to see how it would work, but nobody expected the results we are seeing,’ he said. ‘More than half of those people referred are coming off benefits. Around a fifth sign off straight away after being referred for mandatory work activity. ‘Another third simply don’t turn up, and then have their benefits stopped unless they are prepared to re-engage with the programme at a later date.

‘They have to spend a month working in a charity shop or with various voluntary organisations. The idea is that they have to get up, go out and come away with some sort of work ethic. ‘Instead, for the majority it is proving to be a push that gets them off benefits. What this demonstrates is that there is really a hardcore of claimants who have absolutely no intention of working come what may.’

Employment Minister Chris Grayling will announce a major expansion of the scheme next month. It will cost around £5million because officials have to arrange work placements and monitor claimants’ attendance. However, ministers believe it will produce big savings to Britain’s £100billion benefits bill in the long term.

The expanded scheme will focus particularly on the young amid concern that the number of young people not in employment, education or training – so-called Neets – has passed the one million mark. Figures show that more than a fifth of 18 to 24-year-olds are Neets. One in seven 16 to 18-year-olds, more than 250,000 teenagers, is on the dole.

The Coalition plans a £1billion package designed to take thousands of youngsters off the dole.Employers are to be offered subsidies worth £2,275 a time to take on 160,000 youngsters who have been unemployed for more than six months. The cash will effectively subsidise half of the cost of paying someone the youth minimum wage for six months.

Funding has also been released to pay for an extra 250,000 work experience places. And employers will be offered ‘incentives’ of £1,500 a time to create an additional 20,000 apprenticeships.

Under the youth jobs initiative, unemployed youngsters will be required to sign a new ‘youth contract’ committing them to accept the offer of a job or work experience. Those who refuse will have to go on to the mandatory work activity, or face losing their benefits. The mandatory work scheme has been piloted at job centres all over the country.


Postcard From Islamic London

by Ben Shapiro

I’ve been spending my Christmas vacation with my wife in Rome and London. We arrived in London on Christmas Eve. It’s truly an amazing city – everywhere you look, there’s history, from the Tower of London to the Churchill Museum. But everywhere you look, there is a more ominous presence: Islam.

Now, no less a personage than Prime Minister David Cameron has already admitted that the integration of Muslims into British society has failed dramatically. In February 2011, Cameron stated:
Under the doctrine of state multiculturalism, we have encouraged different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and the mainstream. We have failed to provide a vision of society to which they feel they want to belong. We have even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run counter to our values.

That failure of integration is clear from the get-go. There are official signs translated into Arabic for those who do not wish to speak or read English. The chatter of Islamic languages is as prevalent as the mother tongue. The hijab is omnipresent.

Perhaps all this might be a charming byproduct of multiculturalism if it weren’t for the fact that so much of the Islamic population of Great Britain is radicalized. That radicalization is not difficult to spot.

With all the major official sites closed the day after Christmas, my wife and I headed over to Madame Tussaud​’s to take in the famed tourist trap. As we strolled the halls filled with famous cultural figures, most from the 20th century, we came across the wax doll for Albert Einstein. And there, crowded around the figure, stood five young Muslims – two male, three female. While other guests stood next to the model and smiled, or put an arm around it, these Muslim worthies stood next to the wax model – and put their hands around its throat, simulating strangling it. At first, I couldn’t believe what I was watching – did Einstein do something to offend these people? – but then it dawned on me that they were doing this because Einstein was a Jew. In fact, Einstein was the only prominent Jew in Tussaud’s. And who wouldn’t want to strangle a prominent Jew, after all?

That suspicion was confirmed a few minutes later when we reached the wax statue of Adolf Hitler​. Britons and Americans tried to choke the figure, or pointed their fingers at it in imaginary guns, or yelled at it. These young Muslims happily stood next to it, and took smiling photographs with it as though they’d stumbled upon a friendly uncle. Which, in a way, they had.

And, of course, nobody said anything to these delightfully diverse young people. Mustn’t show evidence of that old, imperialist spirit, you know.

But that old imperialist spirit hides beneath the surface nonetheless. While visiting the Tower of London, my wife and I followed a Beefeater on a tour. He was former British military, and acted it. Great Britain, he announced, was the greatest country on earth. It had civilized half the globe. There was a reason, he said, that Great Britain was the only country to preface its name with the word “Great.” When an Australian audience member asked about the Great Barrier Reef, he answered slyly, “You only know about it because we bumped into it on the way to founding your country.” These comments were accompanied by a slightly uncomfortable laughter amongst the natives – but it was good to hear that somewhere, deep down, the British are still British.

But that Britishness is buried rather deep. The day after Christmas in the United Kingdom is Boxing Day, a sort of Black Friday in this country. It’s a nightmare to navigate the crowded streets, and the shops are packed solid.

It was precisely this day that the British Tube employees – workers of the British subway system – chose to strike for 24 hours. This meant that everyone was now obliged to use taxis, which were charging double rates, or take a bus – and the traffic was snarled more horribly than Matthew Pocket’s hair. What were these employees striking for? Triple pay on holidays – and an offset day to make up for having to work on Boxing Day. They were already slated to make double pay.

In any rational society, the British government would fire these ne’er-do-wells forthwith and hire scabs to replace them. But Britain’s post-WWII bargain with the devil has been the same as the rest of the West’s: go Marxist and remove your imperial aggression by doing so. Capitalism, in the Marxist view, leads to imperialism; breed the capitalism out, and so too will the imperialism fade into history. And so Britain has castrated itself, both economically and socially.

But deep in the British soul, there stirs the echo of heroism: the echo of Churchill and Henry V, the echo of Elizabeth I and Cromwell. As time passes, that echo will grow ever louder. The question is whether the echo will restore Britain’s fortitude before it descends into a self-imposed dark night of final decline.


Money trumps Islam

Spas ban lifted after prostitution claims dismissed

The Maldives president said yesterday he had lifted a ban on spas in the upmarket tourist destination after establishing they were not being used for prostitution, as alleged by Islamist protesters.

The tourism ministry ordered all massage and beauty treatment centres to close six days ago in response to public demonstrations in the capital against spas organised by the hardline Islamist opposition Adhaalath party.

"There was a huge demonstration in Male against spas, saying they were brothels," President Mohamed Nasheed said. "We had to respect the crowd so we ordered a quality control regarding their use.

"We found that they are perfectly healthy and places where families can obtain top class treatment. We feel comfortable that we can now open the spas."

The private tourism industry in the Maldives had also sought the intervention of the Supreme Court to lift the ban, saying it was unnecessary and would deprive them of business.

The tourism industry is a vital foreign exchange earner and employer in the Maldives, a popular high-end destination for well-heeled honeymooners and celebrities where luxury rooms can cost up to $US12,000 a day.

The Indian Ocean country last year received more than 850,000 tourists, drawn to its secluded islands known for turquoise blue lagoons, corals and reefs filled with multi-coloured fish.

The move to shut the spas was seen by some observers as being politically motivated, with the government keen to turn the tables on the Islamist opposition.

Key opposition figure Gasim Ibrahim, head of the Jumhoory Party, is also a major owner of resort hotels and his businesses were set to be affected by the ban.

Nasheed said the government move had jolted the country's "silent majority" which favours a moderate form of Islam practised in the nation of 330,000 Sunni Muslims.

Despite the Islamic republic's reputation as a laid-back holiday paradise, burnished by frequent international marketing campaigns, there is growing concern about the influence of a minority of religious fundamentalists.

There have been anti-Semitic protests recently about the transport ministry's decision to allow direct flights from Israel, while a restaurant that hung up Christmas decorations in 2010 was also targeted.

Also in 2010, a marriage celebrant was filmed abusing a Western couple as "swine" and "infidels" in a religious-tinged hate speech during a ceremony conducted in the local Dhivehi language.



Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of other countries. The only real difference, however, is how much power they have. In America, their power is limited by democracy. To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges. They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did: None. So look to the colleges to see what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way. It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCH, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, DISSECTING LEFTISM, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL and EYE ON BRITAIN (Note that EYE ON BRITAIN has regular posts on the reality of socialized medicine). My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here. For readers in China or for times when is playing up, there is a mirror of this site here.


No comments: