Fighting the Neurotrash industry

[AskBasil]

Perfect term for it.

Professor Gina Rippon

Exactly scallops, as Rippon say, there are far more similarities than (proven) differences.

The point being that any biological/hormonal/hardwired differences cannot justify any prejudice or discrimination. You cannot say that 'well, rhesus monkeys play with trucks so we cannot allow women to work in haulage' or 'male rhesus monkeys don't play with dolls that much so we cannot allow male humans near babies'.

If women and men were 'biologically hardwired' (god, I hate that phrase) to certain behaviours and certain careers then why have gender roles changed since suffrage, contraception, feminism etc.? The number of women in STEM has massively increased, the number of lone fathers and stay at home dads has massively increased. If we were all biologically disposed to the roles we've been playing for hundreds of years, then why the sudden change?

The overlap is too significant to ignore. I read something recently that said that only 2% of men are physically stronger than ALL the women in the world. That means that some women are physically stronger than 98% of men.

Rippon isn't even talking physical strength...the most widely accepted difference.

My point was that both men and women end up both driving and parenting whatever toys they played with as kids.

So why are we trying to draw conclusions about human adult behaviour from the toys that young monkeys, not even children, play with?

No I am not missing any point thanks CoteDAzur. There is evidence that societal structures and orders do exist in groups of monkeys.

However, I think KaseyM has pretty much said what the problems with that research is. As does Cordelia Fine.

And Rippon doesn't say there are no differences between male and female brains. Just that there are far more similarities and that the differences do not necessarily manifest themselves in the ways that are currently thought.

My longwinded point being...how can we use the conclusions from (contentious) studies that prove there IS a difference?

Answer: in no useful way.

Unless Cote has other ideas? How would YOU use the studies to effect change in say, education, careers advice, bodily autonomy legislation etc.?

A doll is clearly closer to a "monkey shape" than a truck is to anything a monkey might naturally see. What parenting and other social behaviour had these monkeys seen before the experiment started, I wonder.

(I appreciate the link, Cote, but haven't read 90 odd pages on my phone so this may be addressed)

Yes Kerry agreed.

Kasey - You might like to refrain from calling strangers on the internet "sweetie" if you have such thin skin re "patronising".

"Melissa Hines (author of many of the studies in your link)"

She is one of the authors of two of the studies among many studies in that link.

"... has spoken several times of the need to reduce society's influence with regards to gender stereotyping"

So? Good for her. I agree with that. Gender stereotyping is a bad thing.

"The monkey study was criticised for being subjective in its interpretation. Cooking pans were regarded as a girl's toy"

Are you thinking of some other study? Because this one doesn't have pans. Here are the toys they used:

Materials
Because we hypothesized that some aspects of sexually differentiated toy preferences reflect activity preferences, we categorized our toys not by traditional gender assignment, but by specific object properties that made our categories comparable, though not exact matches, to stereotypical gender assignments. Thus one set of toys was “wheeled,” most comparable to the masculine vehicle toys and the other was “plush,” most comparable to the feminine doll and stuffed animal toys. The seven plush toys were: Winnie-the-Pooh™, Raggedy-Ann™, a koala bear hand puppet, an armadillo, a teddy bear, Scooby-Doo™, and a turtle. The sizes ranged in length from about 14 cm to 73 cm. The six wheeled toys were: a wagon, a truck, a car, a construction vehicle, a shopping cart, and a dump truck. These ranged in length from 16 to 46 cm. Plush and wheeled toys varied considerably in shape and color as well.

"I had said "not much of a biological component". Doesn't mean that I think there isn't one, just not a big one"

I'm not sure that is a meaningful comment. So you know that women and men are different, but not really. Or, you understand that women and men are different but it suits you to say that the difference isn't important?

Do we at least agree that girls and boys tend to choose different toys not just because they are socially conditioned to do so?

But Prof Rippon isn't the only one to think so. Do you remember the recent study that was all over the news saying that male / female brains diverged after adolescence?

Everyone blathered on about the differences but it was very clear in the study that there was very little difference in the brain structure of boys and girls and that these changes didn't manifest themselves in childhood.

Which gives you a conundrum. Because if you adhere to the logic that brain structure predicts behaviour and skills then you would have to come to the conclusion that pre-adolescent boys and girls are identical in their behaviour and skillset. Which you obviously don't believe.

"There is evidence that societal structures and orders do exist in groups of monkeys."

You miss the point again.

Nobody claims there is no societal structures & orders in monkey societies.

The point is that there are no trucks, cars, trains, or their toys in monkey societies and therefore little monkeys cannot be conditioned by their society to prefer them.

"Do we at least agree that girls and boys tend to choose different toys not just because they are socially conditioned to do so?"

Speaking for myself (and I suspect for others) no, I don't agree that.

Toys are social constructs in themselves. They are selected and provided by parents who operate in a social structure and within a social structure where the initial caregiver is predominantly female.

"Rippon doesn't say there are no differences between male and female brains"

From OP's link:

... she publicly dismissed the idea that women's brains are wired differently from men's as "patronising nonsense."

From where I'm sitting, it looks like that is exactly what she has said.

And in the very next sentence...

"There may be some very small differences between the genders but the similarities are far, far greater," Rippon announced in a lecture at British Science Week in September.

Again we go back to the fact that there are a considerable number of these studies done that show no significant differences between the sexes. So no sorry I don't think boys and girls choose different toys when free of societal pressures.

And a few paragraphs later:

Rippon acknowledges some structural differences between male and female brains in terms of size and amount of grey and white matter, but they are small and not absolute and with no proven link that these cause any functional differences.

Garth - How can you not agree that toy preference is not just societal conditioning when you do agree that there is a biological component to this preference?

Can you at least acknowledge that there were no "pans" as "female toys" in the monkey study, as you previously claimed?

Thank you GarthsUncle.

I said nothing about pans - you must be mixing me up with another poster.

Going to bed now so not ignoring you!

I thought it was clear that the male/female differences I have been talking about and were being discussed in that link are not differences in physical appearance of the brain, like amount of white and grey matter, but well-documented cognitive differences.

So yes, Rippon is wrong when she "acknowledges some structural differences between male and female brains in terms of size and amount of grey and white matter" and then talks about "no proven link that these cause any functional differences".

Garth - Ah yes, that was Kasey. Sorry, I'm getting tired as it is 00:30 here. I'm going to bed, too

Can I ask CotedAzur what your investment is in maintaining that there are these differences between the sexes and that they are significant?

"So you know that women and men are different, but not really."

Despite your sarcasm, I'd say yes that's exactly right. On a collective level there are probably differences but on an individual level it makes no sense to talk in generalisations because there is too much overlap, too many exceptions and nothing is binary.

As for whether it suits me or not, how does it suit you? Or are only feminists the ones allowed to be accused of subjectivity?

And yes I would probably agree with you that there is at least some biological component, but until we create an entirely equitable society we can't know for sure.

Oh the pans are real!!! I said monkeys but I didnt say which monkeys. You might be confusing your rhesus with your vervets!

It was vervets. Alexander and Hines. Sometime in the noughties.

Moral of the story= don't get your monkeys in a twist!

Night night.

Yes I'm pretty certain that the pans one was one cited in the link Cote provided.

There is a lot of subjectivity too with these studies mentioned in the link when cognitive differences are measured because there is just not enough known. The studies in that link draw conclusions that aren't there to be drawn.

I do agree that there maybe some biological differences. I don't think these biological differences manifest themselves in choices of toys or that toy choices give much indication of significant differences between sexes. Not enough anyway that women should be discriminated against, objectified, assumed to unpaid caring roles etc etc.