NYT piece debunking 'Brain Sex'

Oh bloody hell. Look, you seem to have very fixed ideas about why some women and men behave in different ways to each other. I don't think a conservative religious upbringing would do anything to stop a man growing up to be predatory. I think it very obviously runs the risk of making it more likely. Repression and suppression aren't helpful and neither is the misogynistic view of women that the major religions generally promote.

To be clear, the socialization I was referring to is not a religious conservative one.

you seem to have a very dim view of men. Quite misandrist of you, actually.

Nope, I find the suggestion that men need to be fixed more offensive.

FamousPJ, you seem to have a very dim view of men. Quite misandrist of you, actually.

Nobody here wants group sex with you.

I never asked anyone here for group sex.

I suggested it as a means of avoiding violence during sex, as you're in the company of others

You're making the assumption that all men think the same as you

Men who have a problem with dick pics, prostitution, or camgirls only have a problem with it because (a) they're from a conservative or religious upbringing, or (b) they're virture signalling to women. So if women didn't have a problem with those things anymore, men wouldn't either.

Look, I'll try one more time. None of that is anything that I wrote or suggested. You have jumped to that conclusion, apparently because it's the only way you can think to socialise men differently! I don't agree with any of that, and wouldn't ever suggest it as a way to socialise men.

Umm, what? I never said you suggested socialising men that way.

My question was that, if the hypothesis that men behave the way they do, sexually, because of society, then why do we see predatory sexually behaviour in conservative/religious men? I'm not sure why you thought i was suggesting that men should be raised that way, as I never remotely suggested anything like that.

Look, PJ. Nobody here wants group sex with you. If any of us were interested in group sex you’d be the one fetching the tea and biscuits and wearing a blindfold.

The article concludes with this paragraph:

The claim that science tells us that the possibility of greater merging of gender roles is unlikely because of “natural” differences between the sexes, focuses on average sex differences in the population — often in combination with the implicit assumption that whatever we think men are “more” of, is what is most valuable for male-dominated roles. (Why else would organizations offer confidence workshops for women, rather than modesty training for men?) But the world is inhabited by individuals whose unique mosaics of characteristics can’t be predicted on the basis of their sex. So let’s keep working on overcoming gender stereotypes, bias, discrimination, and structural barriers before concluding that sex, despite being a poor guide to our brains and psychological characteristics, is a strong determinant of social structure.

Most biologists wouldn’t disagree with the idea of focusing on changing what can be changed - but the opening of that paragraph refers to ‘average sex differences in the population’.

Those average differences are precisely what biologists are talking about when they talk about sex differences.

And earlier in the article she speaks about the greater ‘odds’ of men having autism, and acknowledges ‘group differences’.

These are statistical differences, not absolute differences, but who exactly is making claims of absolute differences?

You have just suggested that women 'have group sex in the presence of others' to avoid being physically harmed.

Well, you said;

Nope, don't like your suggestions, PJ. They don't sound to me like they'd enhance my life or that of the women and girls I know.

So I thought you were talking about my suggestion for women to be conditioned the same way as men. Anyway...

I still reckon my preference is for men not to harm, rather than women to join your little group fantasy.

That's my preference too, but unfortunately, preference and reality generally don't match up. Personally, I pay for sex, but I'm also afraid of being attacked by men, so I only visit sex workers who have a proven track record, so I know I won't be attacked by any men.

Group sex was one suggestion. My other suggestion, which you missed, was to have sex in a building where friends are present, so they can look at for you. Alternatively, a blindingly obvious suggestion is to have sex with your friends, then you have an idea of their temperament beforehand.

"What I'm saying is, is that behaviours like sending dick pics, paying for sex, etc are only bad in the eyes of (some) women. So my suggestion is, why not change society so that women are sexually conditioned the same way men are conditioned, and then paying for sex, sending dick pics etc will no longer be perceived as being bad by anyone?"

You're making the assumption that all men think the same as you and that all women think in the way that you imagine.

"So according to your belief, men from conservative and religious backgrounds (in which men are taught that sex is sacred, sex before marriage is bad, adultery is bad, fornication is bad, prostitution is bad, women are deserving of a special level of respect, the family is the core of society, etc etc etc) should exhibit shy and prudish behaviour when it comes to sex, and also be very meek and kind towards women. While those religious men do exist, I hear stories, far too frequently of men from religious/conservative backgrounds being sexually abusive. Your job is to explain that observation."

Look, I'll try one more time. None of that is anything that I wrote or suggested. You have jumped to that conclusion, apparently because it's the only way you can think to socialise men differently! I don't agree with any of that, and wouldn't ever suggest it as a way to socialise men.

Nope, you dimbo. You have just suggested that women 'have group sex in the presence of others' to avoid being physically harmed.

I still reckon my preference is for men not to harm, rather than women to join your little group fantasy.

Modesty culture' socializes men to believe that women are responsible for men's sexual behavior, and are to blame for what men do to them.

Well, my own position is that men are the way they are (sexually) regardless of how they are socialised, so I don't agree with the idea that the way women dress affects mens behaviour. In fact, I don't know a single man who thinks that, so I don't know where that came from.

This is upheld by the ways that these societies treat women and men -- for example, punishing rape victims.

I live in the UK. Where I live, there is no punishment for being raped.

*1. My safety and consent respected.

1. A decent chance of good sex (not 100% based on male pleasure.
2. No shame or judgement.*

None of this is incompatible with my suggestion for women to be conditioned the same way as men.

Think outside the box Dodo; the reason why you don't like my suggestions is because (according to the argument that your behaviour is due to society) you have been conditioned not to like them. If women were conditioned like men, then you would like the suggestion retrospectively.

Anyway, here's a completely radical idea; if we can change sexual desire by socialising people differently, then why don't we socialise girls and women to be more sexual? It would improve sexual compatibility between men and women... Women enjoy sex more often, mens advances are received more often. Win win for everyone.

I would have had more sex with more men if I could have been guaranteed the following:

1. My safety and consent respected.
2. A decent chance of good sex (not 100% based on male pleasure.
3. No shame or judgement.

Unfortunately a lot of men appear to be incapable of those three things so women have to be very choosy. You lot talk and behave yourselves out of sex. Pretty stupid if you think about it.

Nope, don't like your suggestions, PJ. They don't sound to me like they'd enhance my life or that of the women and girls I know.

Crsacre has a good point.
So if a child has cross sex hormones and socialised pre puberty as the other sex - the brains and functioning would be more likely to be similar to the post-transition sex? What would be the basis of segregation?

BTW I suspect that this NYT article is part of a slew of pro-gender anti-sex arguments by American liberals reacting against Trump—Alice Dreger, Nature, etc. The timing is not coincidental.

I disagree with much of what Fine says but I can’t see how it would support transgender ideology. Even the title of her book Delusions of Gender makes the point that gender is a ‘delusion’. There’s no mention of transgender in either Delusions of Gender or Testosterone Rex as far as I recall, and ‘transsexuals’ are referenced just once.

For the record, I enjoyed both Delusions of Gender and Testosterone Rex. She is a great communicator. If you haven’t read them, do so. Every now and then they drop to 99p on Kindle.

I just think plasticity doesn’t explain sex differences that are universal.

Let's work on how men and boys are socialised and see what impact we can make.

Why not change women and girls instead? Given that the common argument is that women and girls are sexually suppressed, it makes far more sense to condition women differently rather than suppress men too.

It's your suggestion that men from conservative backgrounds are somehow less likely to be predatory. I'd like to know how and why you think that's the case.

That wasn't my suggestion. It's your suggestion. You said upbringing and/or society solely influences sexual behaviour. So according to your belief, men from conservative and religious backgrounds (in which men are taught that sex is sacred, sex before marriage is bad, adultery is bad, fornication is bad, prostitution is bad, women are deserving of a special level of respect, the family is the core of society, etc etc etc) should exhibit shy and prudish behaviour when it comes to sex, and also be very meek and kind towards women. While those religious men do exist, I hear stories, far too frequently of men from religious/conservative backgrounds being sexually abusive. Your job is to explain that observation.

You said "if you think that men's sexual desire entails treating people badly" which is a complete fiction and not anything that I said.

My point hasn't connected with you. What I'm saying is, is that behaviours like sending dick pics, paying for sex, etc are only bad in the eyes of (some) women. So my suggestion is, why not change society so that women are sexually conditioned the same way men are conditioned, and then paying for sex, sending dick pics etc will no longer be perceived as being bad by anyone?

I think Fine is arguing against absolute differences between male and female brains instead of the far more likely statistical differences that evolutionary biologist are g about.

There’s no stag-antler or peacock feather differences that you can point to that make a male brain a ‘male brain’ but there are statistical differences in anatomy and behaviour.

If it was just down to social forces acting on plasticity than the differences would be more pronounced in less egalitarian societies.

Hands up who’s willing to say that the brains of men and women in Afghanistan show more differences than they do in Norway? Because that’s the corollary of believing it is all down to plasticity.

It isn't true to suggest that there are innate and fundamental differences between women and men. Differences are small, where they exist, and brains are plastic. Let's work on how men and boys are socialised and see what impact we can make.

I am confused about why a “strict conservative/religious background” is considered the most likely to reduce predatory behaviors in men.

You say you're a man, PJ. How often are you physically worried about what a female sexual partner might do to you?

Problem is easily rectified by having group sex, or having sex in buildings where friends are present and they can look out for you.

The point I was getting at though was, rather than trying to condition men not to pay for sex, not to use camgirls, and not to send dick pics, why don't we condition women to pay for sex with men, watch men on webcam, and send vag pics? Let's maximise the fun!