I have been conducting the MiProfile Diagnostic for over 20 years with over 75,000 participants and the evidence is clear, gender makes a difference when it comes to tackling risk.
I just completed a huge MiProfile in India but have diagnostics from over 30 countries and the results are consistent. When it comes to gender, females think differently about risk. Indeed, females think differently than men about many aspects of work.
Indeed, one of the many silences in risk and safety is a feminist perspective (https://vimeo.com/237511120). A feminist perspective on risk is missing everywhere, even in the discourse of women in safety. For example, the AIHS BoK has nothing on it indeed, women are expected to be silent and allow the predominantly masculinist discourse of safety rule.
It is sad to see that even in women in safety maintain masculinist discourse, deontological ethics and power-centrism.
Recent research by the University of Bath (https://neurosciencenews.com/gender-risk-taking-23431/) also confirms many of the findings I have confirmed in my research and diagnostic results.
We also know that these differences are not just biological but very socially driven. We know that risk and loss aversion are very different because of social, cultural and neuropsychological formation. In the Social Psychology of Risk there are very strong connections with feminist, post-feminist and post-structuralist studies. This is also supported by extensive studies in Semiotics (https://safetyrisk.net/what-is-spor/). All of this determines why SPoR stands at such distance to the discourse of S1 and S2. It is not about disagreement or contrariness but worldview.
In SPoR there is simply no link to the worldview to behaviourism and masculinism (https://safetyrisk.net/safety-as-a-masculinist-activity/) that shapes the activities of Safety. These worldviews are infused with the lust for power-centrism and control not engagement (https://safetyrisk.net/cultural-silences-in-safety-power-and-politics/), connection, conversation, helping and listening.
This is also why Safety has no hope in getting it together on issues like sexual harassment (https://safetyrisk.net/can-there-be-a-feminist-safety/) and psychosocial mental health (https://safetyrisk.net/what-is-psychosocial-safety/ ).
How fascinating that there is so little research by Safety on feminist discourse and risk (https://safetyrisk.net/the-wisdom-of-the-beguines-for-safety/). Of course, this silence further confirms the masculinist discourse of the industry (https://safetyrisk.net/safety-ethics-spor-and-how-to-foster-the-abuse-of-power/) .