Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism and natural sex differences

162 replies

WriterofDreams · 20/11/2010 12:36

I am a woman, but I know very little about feminism, so this question is posed out of curiosity more than anything. Where do feminists generally stand on genetic/biological differences between men and women? By that I mean would a lot of feminists believe that they don't exist, or would they believe that they do exist but are irrelevant?

Just to give my current thinking on it (am open to having my mind changed) I do believe there are certain stable sex differences between females and males. This has been borne out by research into the way that girls and boys develop. I realise culture has a large role to play in these differences but I also believe it is not entirely the source of them.

Would like to hear other views.

OP posts:
AliceWorld · 20/11/2010 13:00

I'm not an expert on hormones, but I do notice that whenever one thing is debunked another springs up to take its place. People used to say it was size of brain that made a difference, now not believed.

Sakura · 20/11/2010 12:59

downplay not play down!

Sakura · 20/11/2010 12:58

I think Post natal depression is mainly circumstantial. IN other words, I don't think women get the emotional and practical support they need. Also, some experience birth trauma or are treated like pieces of meat on the delivery table. ALl this can contribute to PND.

Not sure what I think about PMS. I've only had 1 period in 5 years because of pregnancy and breastfeeding.

I can't play down the desperate need I had to be with my baby when it was born. Someone took DD1 out of the room without asking and I felt as though a limb had been amputated. I was not expecting to feel like that; nobody had warned me mothers feel so strongly towards their babies.

AliceWorld · 20/11/2010 12:58

Agree with the book recommendations.

I think it is important when looking at any research about anything, to recognise that it too operates in a cultural context. The people who produce such 'evidence' are not neutral robots, they are hu (mans interpreting data in a way that makes sense within their cultural expectations. I'm not saying they're are (necessarily) deliberately pushing one agenda or another but they do not operate outside of our world. This is alongside the evidence that is presented in the books recommended above that show there is research that is counter to pretty much any gender difference that has been 'proven'.

Personally I think there could be some differences. None of the evidence that there is impresses me, but I don't rule it out as a possibility. (I don't rule out possibilities in most things) I am thinking pretty small differences though. However I totally don't believe that any difference there is could explain the huge difference in society between men and women. That is utterly cultural. So relating back to the original question anything there is irrelevant.

motherinferior · 20/11/2010 12:55

I have yet to be convinced that hormones have any effects on cognition. Because all this Difference stuff is usually used to justify the idea that Girls Are A Bit Thick - you know, we're good at emotion, maybe even, at a pinch at words but oooh not those nasty male concepts like Big Numbers or Technical Ideas.

earwicga · 20/11/2010 12:55

Riven - it's just basically bad science. Scary that it has been so accepted.

Sakura · 20/11/2010 12:54

I think that the genetic differences due to our XY (male) and XX (female) chromozones determine our life paths to a large extent.

For example, in The Equality Illusion, Kate Banyard examines research which shows how women are discriminated against in the workplace for having the potential to bear children. IN other words, a woman might not get a job on this basis. There is no way of her finding out that this is why she did not get the job.
I was looking at the trade conference EXPO last month on TV. IT was literally dominated by men, and the only women there were for decorative purposes. THis tells me that, in 2010, women are still losing out big time, and it's because of discrimination because of their sex.

I also felt an extreme need to be with, and breastfeed, my babies, which I emphatically put down to biology. Lots of mothers are obsessed with their newborns, which I believe is an evolutionary survival trait.

Gender, OTOH, is a completely different kettle of fish. THis is a socially constructed concept of "masculine-dominant" and "feminine-subordinate". This concept of gender causes problems for feminism, because it reinforces the notion that masculine and feminism identities should exist.

WriterofDreams · 20/11/2010 12:51

I believe natural differences exist because of hormones. The hormonal structure of boys and girls differs hugely and these hormones have clearly been shown to have a huge effect on the body, in terms of physical structure, strength, mood, susceptibility to illness etc.

Would feminists be of the opinion that oestrogen has no effect on the brain? What would their stance be on PMS or post natal depression?

OP posts:
sarah293 · 20/11/2010 12:49

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

earwicga · 20/11/2010 12:47

x post motherinferior.

earwicga · 20/11/2010 12:47

'This has been borne out by research into the way that girls and boys develop.'

I think you really need to read:

  • Delusions of Gender: The Real Science Behind Sex Differences (which is book club here this month)
  • Living Dolls: The Return of Sexism (second half)

Why do you believe that girls and boys are different because of of non-culture related reasons?

motherinferior · 20/11/2010 12:42

Have you read Natasha Walter's book Living Dolls? It is very good at analysing and indeed debunking the 'research' into these differences.