Barring certain reproductive bits, men and women are basically the same. Discuss.

[ElephantsAndMiasmas]

I know we've touched on this on other threads, but I was hoping to troublemake start a discussion on this specific issue. So often I've heard people say "of course wanting equality does not mean we think women and men are the same. We cherish and celebrate the differences between them" and the like.

Well, what are the differences then?

The more I think about it the more convinced I am that men and women are fundamentally pretty much the same, squashy bits aside.

What do you reckon?

so have we come close to answering the OP??!

Perhaps this is easy for me to do as my dh is on the large side (he's 6'5" and has in his time been quite built too) and also a SAHD, whilst I have always worked, plus I'm quite tall too, so usually can look most idiots straight in the eye. Unless the person was comfortable in telling me to my face that both me and my dh are freaks of nature, then I suspect they'd probably keep their archaic views to themselves!

In fact the only person I know who really likes all the "men and women as so different" stuff is my big sister, who in the way of many big sisters believes she knows everything, and tends to veer more towards the men are incapable side (which gets my goat just as much to be honest).

Well my view is that people come with an incredible array of differences, and that is fantastic and to be celebrated. One of those differences is gender, but that is neither black and white, nor the most important thing. I'm all for recognising the uniqueness of each individual rather than bundling people into groups and stereotypes.

Yes, ISNT, I agree that seems to be the argument made by people arguing for male and female brains and roles.

But I don't really understand how spearing gazelle is similar to engineering or banking anyway.

Isn't it funny how the women on these threads often seem to have very big strong DHs who are also keen SAHP types.

I suppose the women who are vocal on these threads are likely to have selected men with non sexist personalities.

But how come they're all very "masculine" in appearance? People (me included) keep saying things like "well I drill oil rigs for a living and DH stays at home with the kids but back in the day he won the worlds strongest man competition 18 years in a row".

Its all very interesting...

Cyclops, I forgot about answering the OP. My answer would be that men and different are generally very different from each other in terms of character, but this is caused by culture.

ISNT, I am related to a number of tall men. I think that tall men grow up learning to be non-aggressive, because other men/boys try to pick fights with them to prove their hardness, and it gets boring/silly/a load of pointless grief.

Tall men don't have to prove their masculinity I suppose.

Actually nobody has to prove their masculinity to me, but society seems to demand it.

No it doesn';t make sense. Its a load of rubbish. its the provider vs nurterer stuff isn't it, which your link nicely exploded.

Men who work in things like the stock market seem to think that it uses adrenaline in the same way as catching a tiger though. And look at the mess we got into with that.

Risk taking i ssupposed to be another male trait isn't it, while women are supposed to play it safe. certainly you can see that in the papers when women with children who climb mountains are clobbered while men who do the same trek are lauded.

What do you lot make of the risk thing? Inherent or social?

On the other thing, are big powerful men more comfortable with displaying/taking on "womens work" as their appearance is so unarguably male that they have nothing to prove, sort of thing?

Loads of x-posts there sorry the first bit was in repomse to MillyR Fri 02-Apr-10 20:04:54

nooka PMSL @ "Ah well I'm afraid I'd just tell said person they were an idiot and that we don't live in a primitive society any more, nor have done so for many hundreds of years. Possibly I might tell them that they are personally welcome to go and live in a cave and live off the land"

ImSoNotTelling "Of course the problem is compounded by the fact that most "womens" work pays peanuts or even nothing while "mens" work is generally more lucrative and/or more well thought of."

Yes it is and that is just wrong isn't it.

There are two ways to deal with that. Get every woman into 'mens' work or finally and once and for all teach people that all the jobs that need doing are important and deserve to be paid and respected accordingly.

Or both of course, but the second part is essential since someone still has to do those other supposedly less important jobs.

Molesworth "apart from the patronising mansplanation of the phrase 'on average"

I haven't got a clue where you were going with that and suspect you don't either.

You disagree with me that "some feminists find the idea of men/women's work offensive". I'm amazed that you haven't encountered that, but read a bit more on MN and you will see that is the case or just read a bit.

NOW I'm being patronising in case you can't tell the difference since I take the made up 'mansplanation' to mean "oh god it's a man it must be evil - don't listen!!!"

You still haven't explained these 'obvious' biological differences that you referred to previously. That is what this thread is about, isn't it?

PS here's a definition of 'mansplaining' for you:

"Mansplaining is when a dude tells you, a woman, how to do something you already know how to do, or how you are wrong about something you are actually right about, or miscellaneous and inaccurate "facts" about something you know a hell of a lot more about than he does.

Bonus points if he is explaining how you are wrong about something being sexist!"

I guess it depends how you define 'risk'...and the circumstances in which a risk is taken. In unstable times, I would imagine both men and women are as willing to take risks as each other (for example, readiness to engage in looting after a natural disaster in order to feed oneself) whereas in more stable times, it could be that more burglars/bank robbers are male. Then there is moral risk-taking, which IMO is often demonstrated by women more than by men: Rosa Parks, the suffragettes, etc.

I'm a risk manager in RL, and on the whole it's not something that most people approach in a very rational way. I've not read anything to suggest a consistent male/female bias though. That's not to say that there have been many men who do risky things though.

I was thinking more about things like young men driving in a risky way and a whole lot of them writing themselves off in the process. Which they definitely do.

Socialisation or testosterone?

Testosterone

and I think so because of the play choices made by very young boys and very young girls. It's likely that socialisation then builds upon these play differences, enlarging them and making them even more distinct but the testosterone is there to start with.

I always enjoyed play opportunities with my brother and his friends (he wasn't so keen to have me along though) but it was totally clear to me that boys quite naturally took things to another level in terms of their interactions. More daring, tougher, rougher, more outwardly competitive, etc. If they were fuelling each other, then the fuel that was fuelling them all was testosterone!!!

Good blog article here about Brizendine's new book, The Male Brain

"Such is the imbalance between male and female brains, it?s a miracle we get along at all. Men, for instance, are neurologically constructed to deactivate what they perceive to be 'white noise? (instinctively 'tuning out? of everything from their mother?s nagging to female office gossip) in order to concentrate on important stuff"

Pfffffffffffffffff.

Did you read the comments at the bottom of the times article? Apparently this womans book is "feminist propoganda"

Oh wow, I just read the Times article

Some "self-professed feminist", peddling bullshit like this!

I know.

No wonder feminism has such a bad name in some quarters.

How on earth could anyone imagine that it would be a feminist message to say that men can't help leching over all and sundry?

(guilty of not reading all pages here, only 1st and last.)

I think there are differences, but they are not all based on the sex of people. Hormones are in different levels in men and women and do affect behaviours in some ways, but the way the brain functions isn't necessarily one of them.

I have a very male brain, apparently, according to various IQ tests/brain challenges. emotionally male, logically male, etc. etc. I can read maps no problem. I have better spatial awareness than DH and most other men I know (a supposed male trait). I can't bear women who "play down" any kind of stereotypical "male" behaviour in case they are seen as less feminine - that makes me sick.

I don't agree that things like multi-tasking, seeing things that need doing etc. are purely female traits - that is down to conditioning.

I do like the NLP idea of representational systems that give an idea of how we process and experience the world - I had a quick test for these, and discovered a couple of very important things about my parents and DH.

Mum always complained that Dad never listened - Dad always complained that Mum never saw his point. Well no - their representational systems worked differently (mum was primarly audio; Dad, visual.)
Testing DH was valuable because I know that his visual representations are beyond low - which is the reason why he never sees anything, not because he's "just a man".

Cyclops, unless you were playing with your brother and his friends in their teens, then testosterone has very little to do with it, as prepuberty boys and girls have very similar levels of testosterone (Biddolfs little boy testosterone surge idea has no factual basis). Plus post menopausal women have hormone levels much more similar to men, but I've not noticed anyone saying that older women are generally considered "more daring, tougher, rougher, more outwardly competitive" than they were pre menopausal.

I liked that blog, especially the facts mixed with bullshit line, a common problem with bad science.

I stand by what I said.

Go into any school playground and even a casual observer will see differences in styles of play between boys and girls.

I have no problem seeing or accepting this.

That may well be the case, but it's got nothing to do with testosterone. Personally I think socialisation has a huge influence on young children, who are often very conformist. Little girls get consistently praised for sitting still/doing what they are told whilst little boys who run around and are adventurous have their misdemeanors mostly ignored and often encouraged (boys will be boys) starting from a very young age. Even things like the clothes they are dressed in (daft things like little girls having lots of pretty and easily damaged clothes whilst little boys have a more rough and tumble wardrobe) affect behaviour.

I'm not ignoring the different behaviours of boys and girls (I have one of each and in many ways they are highly stereotypical) I just think the reasons are much more complicated.