Gender myths, challenging the stereotype

[TheBat812]

I believe that is the case, yes.

EDIT: Actually, I've been re-reading some of his posts, and I'm not sure anymore.

Actually, there is a way to conclusively answer this question, but to do so would potentially require the violation of many, many ethics rules and regulations.

Again, my only problem is that your initial assertion (as well as your rationale here) is still speculative. I appreciate that you provided further support, however. It certainly helps your case, as far as I can tell. Then again, I have very little experience in the field of neurobiology.

Fair enough on both counts, haha.

 

[Anita18]

Again, I think you have to be careful about misconstruing too much from scientific data and studies because said studies are based on very small sample groups and yet routinely reported as being much more "groundbreaking" or valid than they actually are. A lot of studies don't even manage to get the minimum amount of people to even begin to make a valid statistical analysis, which is 30 (and in the case of a scientific study would require 30 of both genders and a control group that is not participating in whatever conditions you've developed, possibly 30 of both genders again...so 120 people at minimum to even BEGIN to make any kind of real theorizing in the slightest...and one study obviously isn't going to be enough). You also have to look at the control conditions for objective validity of even testing what they are purporting to test.

A good example of "bad" or "crazy" studies is on the NCBI ROFL blog here: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/discoblog/category/ncbi-rofl/#.UPS_yfKwWSo Many are gender based and if you look at the actual descriptions of them are pretty laughable as scientific studies, and yet they are the kind that inevitably get reported in the press and get news coverage.

As a molecular biologist, this is exactly why I take human-based population studies with a grain of salt. There's just no way to prove a causal relationship in anything, because it's impossible to study correctly. To get any controls anywhere close to the stringent level of a molecular biology experiment, would be considered cruel and unusual punishment on human beings. It's just not possible.

Especially with gender, and how gender roles are so distinct from the day we are born. A 5-year-old boy is raised differently, taught completely different expectations from a 5-year-old girl. I believe our cultural gender differences start even earlier than that, and only diverge more as we age. And it's proven that our brains adjust to our experiences (eg people recovering from stroke, as well as that echolocating blind boy), so you can't even say that women's brains are different from men's brains solely because of biology. It's just as likely that the women's brains have adjusted to the expectations of being maternal and emotional, not only because of hormones or whatnot.

You'd have to raise two siblings (actually more, but two siblings to directly compare, then hundreds more to call it a study) whose genders are completely unknown to the parents to eliminate any gender bias, to adulthood, to be sure. You see how impossible that is.

 

[TheBat812]

As a molecular biologist, this is exactly why I take human-based population studies with a grain of salt. There's just no way to prove a causal relationship in anything, because it's impossible to study correctly. To get any controls anywhere close to the stringent level of a molecular biology experiment, would be considered cruel and unusual punishment on human beings. It's just not possible.

Especially with gender, and how gender roles are so distinct from the day we are born. A 5-year-old boy is raised differently, taught completely different expectations from a 5-year-old girl. I believe our cultural gender differences start even earlier than that, and only diverge more as we age. And it's proven that our brains adjust to our experiences (eg people recovering from stroke, as well as that echolocating blind boy), so you can't even say that women's brains are different from men's brains solely because of biology. It's just as likely that the women's brains have adjusted to the expectations of being maternal and emotional, not only because of hormones or whatnot.

You'd have to raise two siblings (actually more, but two siblings to directly compare, then hundreds more to call it a study) whose genders are completely unknown to the parents to eliminate any gender bias, to adulthood, to be sure. You see how impossible that is.

Great point, it's definitely something very hard to study and distinguish. However, aren't there studies that show that males and females are fed varying degrees of different hormones even before birth? "Female brains are flushed in utero with estrogen hormones, while male brains are washed with testosterone." (Source) While I would never argue that this is conclusive evidence of the eventual biological difference between men and women, it would seem to be a logical conclusion that they do/will have different biological tendencies in a broad sense.

 

[Anita18]

Great point, it's definitely something very hard to study and distinguish. However, aren't there studies that show that males and females are fed varying degrees of different hormones even before birth? "Female brains are flushed in utero with estrogen hormones, while male brains are washed with testosterone." (Source) While I would never argue that this is conclusive evidence of the eventual biological difference between men and women, it would seem to be a logical conclusion that they do/will have different biological tendencies in a broad sense.

I'm not debating that that we have different hormones levels. Of course we do. I'm debating whether if we can ascertain those differing hormone levels cause specific structural changes in brain activity, which is what some people (not necessarily here) use to explain the complicated emotional differences between men and women. I think that's reaching, with the information that we have. There's a difference between comparing non-human mothers (who often display self-sacrificing behavior) and non-human fathers (who can have a range from complete indifference to actual hostility to offspring) to human parents of both sexes, because our species evolved to include both parents in child-rearing. There are even fish and birds who evolved such that the father takes care of the offspring by himself, so I don't think we can chalk it all up to "it's an evolutionary sex difference." Mammals' pregnancies take too long for the mother to just up and go, but there are still species where the father has a huge hand in raising the offspring.

We'll never be able to hold a controlled study to find out exactly what those hormones do to brains, and even though the data doesn't lie, scientists are human and we are biased. If we're looking for a specific result, we'll probably find it.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

As a molecular biologist, this is exactly why I take human-based population studies with a grain of salt. There's just no way to prove a causal relationship in anything, because it's impossible to study correctly. To get any controls anywhere close to the stringent level of a molecular biology experiment, would be considered cruel and unusual punishment on human beings. It's just not possible.

Especially with gender, and how gender roles are so distinct from the day we are born. A 5-year-old boy is raised differently, taught completely different expectations from a 5-year-old girl. I believe our cultural gender differences start even earlier than that, and only diverge more as we age. And it's proven that our brains adjust to our experiences (eg people recovering from stroke, as well as that echolocating blind boy), so you can't even say that women's brains are different from men's brains solely because of biology. It's just as likely that the women's brains have adjusted to the expectations of being maternal and emotional, not only because of hormones or whatnot.

You'd have to raise two siblings (actually more, but two siblings to directly compare, then hundreds more to call it a study) whose genders are completely unknown to the parents to eliminate any gender bias, to adulthood, to be sure. You see how impossible that is.

Human brains are fairly adaptive. It's the most adaptive organ. Also your brain picks up on imprinting, I think this process continues until the age of three. The baby is very unaware of the whole thing, but the brain is just learning to mimic based on cues. And it knows to look for things that are "like it", like, for example, if it's a boy maybe it latches onto a father for imprinting, or a family friend, or a television character/personality.

So you're very correct. You can't assume women have "different brains". How could we when our genetics are so gosh darn similar!

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

I'm not debating that that we have different hormones levels. Of course we do. I'm debating whether if we can ascertain those differing hormone levels cause structural changes in brain activity, which is what some people (not necessarily here) use to explain the emotional differences between men and women. I think that's reaching.

Seems to me to be fairly reaching. You can manipulate hormones fairly easily. I've never really bought the argument either. It's very chicken and egg.

 

[Thundercrack85]

What a tragedy. Look at how disappointed I am. ---->

I sure am going to miss that condescending attitude you seem to bring to every thread.

 

[TheBat812]

I'm not debating that that we have different hormones levels. Of course we do. I'm debating whether if we can ascertain those differing hormone levels cause specific structural changes in brain activity, which is what some people (not necessarily here) use to explain the complicated emotional differences between men and women. I think that's reaching, with the information that we have. There's a difference between comparing non-human mothers (who often display self-sacrificing behavior) and non-human fathers (who can have a range from complete indifference to actual hostility to offspring) to human parents of both sexes, because our species evolved to include both parents in child-rearing. There are even fish and birds who evolved such that the father takes care of the offspring by himself, so I don't think we can chalk it all up to "it's an evolutionary sex difference." Mammals' pregnancies take too long for the mother to just up and go, but there are still species where the father has a huge hand in raising the offspring.

We'll never be able to hold a controlled study to find out exactly what those hormones do to brains, and even though the data doesn't lie, scientists are human and we are biased. If we're looking for a specific result, we'll probably find it.

Fair enough, I agree with you here. But I believe the argument that the Question had made (and I admit I could be wrong) was that men and women DON'T think differently at all, but are all based solely on societal thoughts. I would argue that there IS enough evidence to say that people who grow up in a society WILL think differently at a biological level because the societal experience wires their brains to think in different ways, much the same way being in love literally rewires the brain. So, in my non-scientific opinion, in general men and women DO think differently biologically based on the experiences they've had that have wired their brains in that way. I'd say that in many ways people can re-wiire their own brains so that the gap is shrunken. Whether or not they started out the same or not becomes irrelevant because that's not where they end up.

Ultimately, I agree with you guys that we can't really know either way without some very invasive testing, but in practical terms, it's important to realize that men and women DO think differently in society, so to treat them the same can alot of times be counter-productive. If you think what makes a women happy is what makes a man happy, you're probably going to run into some problems, haha. Nobody was raised in a vacuum, and the societal factors will (in general) lead to a difference between them. I definitely do think there's a 'chicken or the egg' thing going on here that will be very hard to overcome, but overall, do you think it's unfair to say that it's likely that humans operate like animals in that they are different biologically?

 

[Doctor Evo]

I sure am going to miss that condescending attitude you seem to bring to every thread.

Says the guy who started this little exchange with a comment about "educated circles."

 

[Doctor Evo]

On-topic: this argument has become extremely convoluted and confused. People are misinterpreting arguments left and right.

 

[Colossal Spoons]

Like a stereotypical convo between a man and a woman. Boom! Back on track.

 

[Doctor Evo]

Like a stereotypical convo between a man and a woman. Boom! Back on track.

Haha. Women talk a lot.

 

[NicoSuave]

So, from the look of it, this thread hasn't been touched in a while. Might as well restart the conversation.

I guess you could call me somewhat of a male feminist. I support equal pay, I support a woman's right to choose, I was one the biggest internet advocates for women to be in the UFC, and lately I've been on somewhat of a mission to try and improve the status of AJ Lee on the WWE roster (girl has talent, and the writers are so ****ing stupid, they don't know how to use her right).

Among my other views of, should I ever get married, I would like to be the one who stays home and takes care of the kids and the house, and my wife would be the breadwinner (with the exception of my MMA dream jobs).

Also, I don't mind if a lady has a set of washboard abs that puts Thor to shame. That means two things:
~1.) She takes really good care of herself.
~2.) She can help me take better care of myself.

And lastly, while the stereotype is that most women love a sharp dressed man, in a nice tuxedo, I actually find it sexy when the WOMEN are the ones in the tuxes. It shows uniqueness, open-mindedness, and an ability to look good in just about anything.

 

[Pink Ranger]

I guess you could call me somewhat of a male feminist. I support equal pay, I support a woman's right to choose, I was one the biggest internet advocates for women to be in the UFC, and lately I've been on somewhat of a mission to try and improve the status of AJ Lee on the WWE roster (girl has talent, and the writers are so ****ing stupid, they don't know how to use her right).

Among my other views of, should I ever get married, I would like to be the one who stays home and takes care of the kids and the house, and my wife would be the breadwinner (with the exception of my MMA dream jobs).

Also, I don't mind if a lady has a set of washboard abs that puts Thor to shame. That means two things:
~1.) She takes really good care of herself.
~2.) She can help me take better care of myself.

And lastly, while the stereotype is that most women love a sharp dressed man, in a nice tuxedo, I actually find it sexy when the WOMEN are the ones in the tuxes. It shows uniqueness, open-mindedness, and an ability to look good in just about anything.

Actually Nico, I believe you've gone past male feminist and achieved the elusive ranking of Male Lesbian. Congratulations, it's something many men strive for, but so few achieve. You will receive your season 1 box set of Scandal in the mail shortly.

 

[Hobgoblin]

My girlfriend and I really dont follow a lot of traditional gender traits. She is the athletic one, has a dog, is politically conservative and has the stronger personality. I cook, have a cat, am liberal, am unathletic and more quiet.

Also in college I lived with some high school buddies and we had salmon for dinner one night. My mother thought it was odd that college men would eat salmon.

 

[CyclopsWasRight]

Women aren't the only ones who want kids, I'm single but would love to be a parent.

 

[Feenix]

Women aren't the only ones who want kids, I'm single but would love to be a parent.

On the flip side, men aren't the only ones who don't want kids.

I never want to be a parent to a child (a puppy, yes).

 

[NicoSuave]

Actually Nico, I believe you've gone past male feminist and achieved the elusive ranking of Male Lesbian. Congratulations, it's something many men strive for, but so few achieve. You will receive your season 1 box set of Scandal in the mail shortly.

I still consider myself a dominant male though, so combining our summaries of myself, I'm basically a Male Dyke...

Oh brother...

By the way, you can keep that box set of Scandal to yourself. If you want to send me a copy of 2 Broke Girls though, I'll happily accept.

 

[Pink Ranger]

By the way, you can keep that box set of Scandal to yourself. If you want to send me a copy of 2 Broke Girls though, I'll happily accept.

Hey! You're a Male Lesbian, not a Heterosexual Gay Guy! Stop confusing everybody!

 

[NicoSuave]

Hey! You're a Male Lesbian, not a Heterosexual Gay Guy! Stop confusing everybody!

 

[Colossal Spoons]

So, from the look of it, this thread hasn't been touched in a while. Might as well restart the conversation.

I guess you could call me somewhat of a male feminist. I support equal pay, I support a woman's right to choose, I was one the biggest internet advocates for women to be in the UFC, and lately I've been on somewhat of a mission to try and improve the status of AJ Lee on the WWE roster (girl has talent, and the writers are so ****ing stupid, they don't know how to use her right).

Among my other views of, should I ever get married, I would like to be the one who stays home and takes care of the kids and the house, and my wife would be the breadwinner (with the exception of my MMA dream jobs).

Also, I don't mind if a lady has a set of washboard abs that puts Thor to shame. That means two things:
~1.) She takes really good care of herself.
~2.) She can help me take better care of myself.

And lastly, while the stereotype is that most women love a sharp dressed man, in a nice tuxedo, I actually find it sexy when the WOMEN are the ones in the tuxes. It shows uniqueness, open-mindedness, and an ability to look good in just about anything.

You're an egalitarian, not a male feminist. I'm one as well. I don't want children but I see nothing wrong with the idea of a stay home dad if that's what you wanna do

 

[Colossal Spoons]

My girlfriend and I really dont follow a lot of traditional gender traits. She is the athletic one, has a dog, is politically conservative and has the stronger personality. I cook, have a cat, am liberal, am unathletic and more quiet.

Also in college I lived with some high school buddies and we had salmon for dinner one night. My mother thought it was odd that college men would eat salmon.

Haha, you mom's a hoot. Salmon is so protein rich; you said you're not athletic so you probably don't care though. When I cook salmon, my g/f's lucky if there's any left for her

 

[Pink Ranger]

"Male feminist" is kind of a controversial term, considering how broad a political spectrum feminism itself encompasses. There is even a sector of feminism that believes men cannot be feminists period, because they are not men and have not had the experience. And the difference between egalitarianism and liberal/libertarian feminism can be measured in millimetres.

Also in college I lived with some high school buddies and we had salmon for dinner one night. My mother thought it was odd that college men would eat salmon.

Atlantic salmon or Pacific salmon? Because everyone knows Atlantic is the gay side.

 

[Black Narcissus]

My girlfriend and I really dont follow a lot of traditional gender traits. She is the athletic one, has a dog, is politically conservative and has the stronger personality. I cook, have a cat, am liberal, am unathletic and more quiet.

Also in college I lived with some high school buddies and we had salmon for dinner one night. My mother thought it was odd that college men would eat salmon.

I laughed way too much at this.

 

[Hobgoblin]

"Male feminist" is kind of a controversial term, considering how broad a political spectrum feminism itself encompasses. There is even a sector of feminism that believes men cannot be feminists period, because they are not men and have not had the experience. And the difference between egalitarianism and liberal/libertarian feminism can be measured in millimetres.




Atlantic salmon or Pacific salmon? Because everyone knows Atlantic is the gay side.

Farm raised.