to think boys really ARE different to girls and it's not just nurture?

[Shovelnotspade]

I went into parenthood armed with a first degree in psychology (combined with philosophy) and the notion that until puberty, little boys and little girls are the same and any differences are simply nurture.

I have 3 boys, 4 including DH's son from his first marriage and to me, they're so different to girls I can't believe it!

My SIL came over with her 5 and 4 year old girls to play with my 3 and 2 year old boys - they live in the US so we don't see them often and hers say nicely and did crafting, played with my old dolls, and decorated biscuits. Mine did not stop shouting and running. At all. I wouldn't change them for the world and am used to having to think of them as having a LOT of energy and a short attention span but SIL looked amazed and offered me lots of largely pointless tips.

I hate generalisations (generally ) but in my experience, at this age, little boys need far more supervision!
AIBU?

My wife is a kindergarten professor/teacher, for a special program we have, "with games to sports".

She often describes how different boys and girls are - in terms of energy level, interests, attention... Little girls do mature (and learn) faster than the boys.

Of course, this is generalizing, but we are looking for general idea here...

Inovacije - but whilst teachers can say "I tend to observe X difference" how on earth do you generalise that out to say that they are inherently different, which is what the OP is suggesting. Interests and attention span are both obvious examples of things which could be 100% conditioning/nurture, 100% innate or anywhere in between. Your comment suggests your wife thinks it is innate. Why?

On Global Gender Gap list, Iceland, Finland, Norway and Sweden are the first 4 (as most equal). Yes there is no absolute equality in Sweden either, but the society is certainly doing better than UK.

My point is though that Sweden is often held up as a country where children are brought up far more equally than the UK. Yet there is still the same lack of women in top jobs, women still do the same kind of jobs as here and do most of the caring and housework etc. So bringing up boys and girls the same doesn't seem to achieve much as far as equality is concerned.

I bought lego for my 2 small DDs (as they weren't going to be just given dolls etc to play with) and they built (pretty amazing) houses wth floor plans. 'This is the kitchen, here's the table and chairs, this is the bed etc'. DS, when he came along, ONLY built tractors, aeroplanes and tractors and aeroplanes. So there is a difference, or at least there was in mine.

BTW I think that equality is an admirable aim but I do wonder if expecting boys and girls to be the same will achieve anything.

'BTW I think that equality is an admirable aim but I do wonder if expecting boys and girls to be the same will achieve anything'

Surely treating people equally involves moving away from stereotypes and instead looking at girls/boys and men/women as individuals? I don't think it's useful to group people according to gender and then suggesting that everyone in that group will have the same needs.

Surely treating people equally involves moving away from stereotypes and instead looking at girls/boys and men/women as individuals? I don't think it's useful to group people according to gender and then suggesting that everyone in that group will have the same needs

I totally agree. I do think that male and female brains are different though and if we expect an equal amount of women to be builders for instance as men then we are always going to be disappointed. Any women who wants do a job that is currently mostly a male preserve should be encouraged to do so. Which didn't happen when I was a child.

Haven't read whole thread but as the mother of a 5yr old ds, lots of little friends some boys some girls and two nieces. There is a difference.

My ds needs exercising each day otherwise he climbs the walls and everything else in the house! He cannot sit still even to eat its a challenge for him and forget calming down tasks like colouring in or baking. Play doh works for a while untitled it becomes monsters and a fight brakes out.

My nieces sit and colour in, even if for only 10-15mins, they read, play together and can actually sit and watch a film without having a noisy jumpy interlude. They can be very loud and at times manic but never for all day long. My ds girl friends actually get tired out by him and end up coming to talk to me because they are worn out.

A generalisation but in my experience boys need outside, big spaces and fresh air! Girls like a bit of quiet time even if only an hr before bedtime.

cupcake that's YOUR Ds and YOUR nieces....other people on the thread have claimed the opposite. Personal stories do not a fact make.

My DD's are like your DS and have to be taken out daily.

They are different, no doubt about that. But our expectations do play a role in making the difference more extreme than it otherwise would be.

I am always amazed how quick people are to discount nurture. They feel that because they 'treat their children equally', there can be no difference of nurture. In fact:

• I would be amazed if one person in the UK could be said to have raised their child 100% gender neutrally. Our society is just too gendered.

• Even if you are 100% neutral, the surrounding society isn't.

• The effects of nurture are very subtle, and more deeply wired than many of us believe. For example, I read about a study (or a group of studies, can't find the citation) where women were asked to write their gender on the top of a maths test. They did worse than control groups not reminded of gender just before the test. Men showed no change. And I bet none of those women thought that 'women are bad at maths', they had just absorbed societal stereotypes at a deep and unconscious level.

Why 'no doubt' MrsBethel? I am not discounting the idea that there might be an innate difference, but the idea that there is 'no doubt' that they are innately different seems a big leap. How does it get from observation of behaviour to conclusions about causation?

YoullScream, I'm sure that study was cited in 'Delusions of Gender'

A lot of the steroetypical 'female' behaviour seems to hark back to the image of women sitting daintily on little chairs doing needlepoint. That skips the fact that, whilst they were doing that, other women and girls were pushing carts full of coal underground.

It doesn't matter how many people come on and say that their boy loves trucks, cars and fighting... If there are any girls brought up in our sexist society that love those things, your argument is spurious and gender differences are not inherent. Luckily, I have one of those girls. DD is tough, brave, loves cars and truck (if only she would say truck rather than f@#$ which is how she pronounces it). She is active, crazy, can't sit still, first to climb, jump and run. I see fathers of boys looking sadly at her and saying the immortal phrase to their DSs, "if that little girl can... you can". Charming.

On these threads, there is always more that one poster who comes on argues that differences are innate, with something like this: 'Of course boys and girls are different. I have a DS and a DD and they are completely different. Totally diffferent. It's innate. Of course it is. So there'. Not a terribly convincing argument but some people are seriously invested in the idea that there are innate differences and can get really quite narked if you suggest otherwise.

I agree with YoullScream about how ingrained gender stereotyping is. I am the most anti-gender stereotypes person ever, yet when I buy my niece a present, I find myself reaching for dolls and tea sets and toy kitchen type stuff. I am also fantasing about the day she is old enough to wear glittery scarves and gloves I have to physically restrain myself from buying them for her and force myself to think about other options!

Were the women told that they wouldn't do well? I didn't see that.

Kim147- I recall that test, but I am not sure that's the one I was thinking of. The one I was thinking of didn't include messages to the participants on their likely performance. It was simply 'name' at the top of the paper or 'name and gender'. It might have been in Cordelia Fine, but my copy is out on loan and Google is not my friend today it seems.

Lottapianos you need to read this. I agree about this stuff being tempting.

So you are talking about the same test? OK.

MrsTerryPratchett, I read that a while ago but thanks for the reminder - it's great