Maybe, but that isn't always the direction that kids go in with this kind of thing.
My statement was just a head's up that this
can turn into a discussion which asks some
really challenging things about income disparity along gender lines, and how much bias/stereotype is somewhat permissible in some contexts.
Because biology really
doesn't care about humanitarian ideals or higher-order thinking. It's our civilized construct that forces us to consider others and live as though we were all equals. Underneath that construct, we are still animals, in spite of our idealism. Sometimes the two things are not good roommates, to say the least. Makes for interesting rationalizations to listen to a hard-core misogynist explain why women SHOULD be paid less than men.
Bottom line-- gender distinctions at the very least inform/rationalize stereotype-driven biases.
Maybe it's just that
my kid in particular goes after the ethically sticky, social-justice stuff like a truffle-sniffing dog. Could be that's it.
(She's the one that concluded, as a very serious 4yo, that the answer to rule-breakers who were endangering her with their behavior needed... improved adult literacy efforts-- or pictograph signage-- since naturally nobody would be ignoring a rule unless... um.. they were reading-impaired for one reason or another...
)
