Neurosexism: Does the female brain differ from the male
The inequality of women and men often try to explain with biology: Different rights and opportunities are allegedly associated with differences in the body. Especially often they talk about the "male" and "female" brain - and the prefix "neuro" has become a new round in the debate about innate differences. It would seem that modern research methods should give an unequivocal answer to the question of whether men and women really think, learn, solve problems and choose what is important for them in life. We understand whether this is actually the case and how these neurosciences are used to fuel stereotypes.
How it all began
Today, the attempts of American slave owners or Nazi scientists to prove the "inferiority" of a whole group of people with the help of measurements seem wild to us - but to look for biological arguments to show how women are worse than men, some still consider it logical. The idea that women's thinking is less developed than that of men, for many years was the “background” of research.
Scientists who examined the brain in the XIX century, could not "look" inside - they had to dwell on external measurements. They weighed the brain, measured the ratio of the height and width of the skull. The very first discovery of the Victorian era — the brain of women smaller than the brain of men — was used as evidence of the "inferiority" of women; then they began to talk about the small size of the face and the ratio of the height and width of the skull. None of the assumptions subsequently proved justified: it turned out that intelligence does not depend on the size of either the brain or the skull.
Two hundred years ago, many believed that women are not capable of science, are not meant for politics and live by feelings, their main talents are gentleness, meekness, submission and motherhood, while men seek discoveries, power and control. As the philosopher Neil Levy said, "on average, female intellect best copes with tasks aimed at creating comfort for other people."
Education was considered dangerous to women's health. Edward Clark, a professor at the Harvard School of Medicine, argued that the ovaries could be atrophied due to mental activity in women; supposedly it leads to masculinization, sterility, madness and even death. By the way, Clark's idea was refuted by medical woman Mary Jacobi.
Testosterone and embryos
In 2005, at a conference on the promotion of sociocultural and gender diversity in science and engineering, Harvard University Rector Lawrence Summers suggested that women by nature are less capable of exact sciences. Needless to say that the fact that women scientists were outraged by this statement, tried to explain their "sensitivity"?
To justify such a statement, excited by the scandalous speech of the media recalled the theory of prenatal testosterone. According to her, the release of testosterone in the male embryo at the eighth week of development changes the structure of his brain: it increases the centers responsible for aggression and sexual behavior, and reduces those responsible for communication and emotions. This approach of the androgen to the embryo supposedly creates a "real" man who is adapted for science.
But there are problems in this bold theory. First, the influence of "male" hormones on the brain was studied in rodents, whose brains are very different in complexity from the human organization. In addition, even scientists who consider how testosterone affects rat embryos cannot exactly answer how it changes the behavior of rats after birth. Secondly, there is not yet a way to directly measure testosterone in a child’s blood. We can assume its level by indirect indicators: by measuring its level in the blood of the mother or in the amniotic fluid or by correlating the length of the ring and index fingers (it is believed that testosterone in the womb affects this). This means that while researchers do not know for sure how much their measurements are generally related to fetal hormones that can affect the brain.
Of course, one cannot say that hormones do not affect the brain in any way - but so far we don’t know exactly how. Moreover, it is impossible to talk about the place people should take in testosterone or without it in society.
Thirdly, the only way to test how testosterone affects the behavior of children, and at the same time eliminate the influence of gender stereotypes in the environment - to conduct research on infants under the age of several days. By themselves, such tests are very difficult to organize. For example, they conducted such an experiment: boys and girls were given a look at the face of the scientist who conducted the experiment and the typewriter. It turned out that the boys looked at the typewriter for longer girls (51% versus 41%), and girls looked at the face (49% versus 46%). At the same time, the experiment was conducted not entirely correctly: the experimenters knew in advance the sex of the children, they were not convinced that all the babies were in the same fixed position and that the same distance from each of them to the object. Nevertheless, the experimenters said that girls are born with an innate interest in persons, and boys - in moving objects.
Of course, one cannot say that hormones do not affect the brain in any way - but so far we don’t know exactly how. Moreover, it is impossible to talk about the place people should take with testosterone or without it in society.
"Creative" and "rational" hemispheres
You have probably heard the myth that only one of its hemispheres is responsible for some abilities of the brain: for example, the right for creativity and intuition, and the left for logic and system. In fact, brain asymmetry concerns only low-level “technical” processes, including sensory control (for example, information from the left viewing angle of the eye processes the right hemisphere, and so on). It is impossible to say that men use the left hemisphere of the brain for speech (and therefore can express their thoughts clearly), and women use the right hemisphere (and therefore talk about feelings). If this were the case, men would have problems with speech only if the left one was damaged, and women had the right hemisphere, but this does not happen. It turned out that the location of the "speech" and "spatial" zones of the hemispheres varies for many reasons, including those not related to sex.
What scientists have really found is the difference in the connections in the brains of men and women. In the brain of men there are more connections inside the hemispheres, and in the brain of women - interhemispheric. True, to prove that these features are related to the behavior and abilities, so far failed. It was noted that the method of communication in the hemispheres depends on the size of the brain: the larger it is, the more intra-hemispheric connections it has, regardless of the sex of the host. The size of the brain is proportional to the body, so people with a smaller body have a smaller brain and more inter-hemispheric connections.
From these features to conclude that men are better suited for mathematics and spatial problems, and women for speech problems and intuition, it is impossible. Interestingly, researchers of mathematically gifted adolescents argue that just a great connection between the hemispheres (ironically more often seen in women) gives abilities to mathematics.
Spatial and speech abilities
Often, those who seek to prove the difference between men and women are guided by what seems obvious to them from life experience: women make fewer discoveries, are less represented in science, listen to others more and tinker with children more often. Something like this in the XVIII century proved the failure of female intelligence: women did not show talents in the sciences, which they were simply forbidden to engage in.
In order to prove these "regularities" today, spatial tests for the rotation of three-dimensional figures are often used: it is believed that men do it better. This opinion was well researched by social psychologists. It turned out that if the test subjects were told before the test that they would determine their engineering and aircraft building abilities (or that men cope better with it), then the women show lower results. If we say that the skills for crocheting and other needlework are being tested (or to say that the tests are better for women), then women cope better.
This effect is called a “stereotype threat”. Both men and women are subject to "intuitive" ideas, which are not so easy to dismiss, especially if they express authority: scientists and opinion leaders. Interestingly, other information can influence the passing of tests, the manifestation of leadership qualities and ambitions: for example, biographies of women leaders, scientific articles about women's abilities for mathematics and spatial thinking significantly increase the results of girls.
Toys, children and primates
A few years ago, anthropological observations of a wild chimpanzee tribe shocked everyone: scientists discovered that young females were coddling like baby dolls. This study was used as an argument for the fact that the main role of women is motherhood. But the human woman is not quite a female chimp. To prove (or disprove) the tendency of cubs of higher primates and humans to stereotyped occupations from an early age, it is necessary to conduct large-scale experiments with those and others.
The results of such experiments on monkeys turned out to be inconsistent. Chimpanzees offered a boyish car and a ball, a girlish doll and a saucepan, and a neutral picture book and a plush dog. The males played with all the toys equally, and the females spent more time on the toys "for girls". True, there is a serious problem: human things have a different meaning for animals. When the same toys were smashed into other categories — animate and inanimate — the difference between the preferences of the females and the males disappeared.
Often, studies that do not reveal differences between men and women are ignored - but studies confirming the difference are published and reprinted by the media and bloggers.
In experiments on children, unambiguous conclusions also fail. "Boyish" toys are trains, cars and tools, "girlish" - dishes, baby bottle or crib. On average, it is possible to show that boys play more time with cars and girls play with bottles. With gender neutral toys such as mosaics, pyramids, soft toys, they both spend the same amount of time. Other researchers believe that soft toys are not gender neutral, but are designed for girls, and argue that girls spend more time with them.
Just as with monkeys, experiments with children can become a “self-fulfilling prophecy,” and many questions remain after them. What exactly attracts kids in toys: color, temperature and texture, sounds, strength, smell? With what the boy will play more willingly - with a fire truck without wheels or with Barbie on a pink typewriter? What particular properties of toys are attractive to primate females and males, and is it possible, knowing them, to construct such toys that would be of interest only to one sex?
So does it matter
Neuroscience is a group of new sciences at an early stage of development. Our technology is still imperfect, there is still very little information about the brain - and many discoveries about man are still ahead. There are recommendations for neuro research, they propose to take into account not only the sex of the subjects, but also their age, origin, social status and so on. This requirement takes into account neuroplasticity - the ability of the brain to change under the influence of experience throughout life. If we get data on the differences in the work of the brain in different people, we must understand, they have appeared from birth or under the influence of experience. The stereotypes are also supported by what information reaches a wide audience: often, many studies that do not reveal differences between men and women are ignored - but studies that confirm the difference between women and men are published and reprinted by the media and bloggers.
There are no zones in the brain responsible for talent for mathematics, writing, empathy, or culinary skills: this is a “mosaic” that involves many areas that can solve the same problem in different ways. "Intuitive" conclusions can be a stereotype, experiments should be reproduced correctly in different laboratories and give the same result.
Of course, one cannot say that biological differences between the sexes do not exist at all. Studies can, for example, help deal with such features as autism, which is more often diagnosed in boys. The difference must be taken into account in the experiments themselves. Even for cellular studies, it is now proposed to use cells taken from both men and women, since the determining chromosomes encode up to 5% of our genome and affect cell responses.
At the same time, “difference” does not at all mean “opposites”, scientists suggest talking about the “gender effect”: humanity is a single species with many variations of the brain. The "male" and "female" brain is a myth, and the existing differences are not a reason to believe that some brains are "better" than others.
