** UPDATED PARAGRAPH FOR CLARIFICATION: "This study has some limitations of course. Most critically, the researchers didn’t investigate the developmental pathways of the brain differences. It must be noted that all brain networks develop as a result of nature interacting with nurture. Socialization processes are certainly at play at an individual level of development. That wasn’t the purpose of the study, however. Their findings suggest that at the group level male brains and female brains can be distinguished with a high level of accuracy and there are particular features of intrinsic organization of these brains that are significant and most likely evolved over the course of human evolution for adaptive purposes. All brains don’t have to be equal for there to be equality. Brains can be complementary with equal opportunities for contribution."
Studying the brain of adults or young adults doesn't tell us if the differences are caused by nature or nurture. This study doesn't answer any relevant questions if the differences noticed are the result of being raised and socialised as male or female from birth.
There seems to be 2 camps in research on this, with one camp saying exactly the opposite- that the brains of males & females AT BIRTH have minimal to zero differences.
This study was conducted on adults, therefore, the brain variation actually reflects how boys/girls, men/women are conditioned differently.
These studies are frustrating because they’re often used as ammunition in the culture wars that pit men and women against each other. “See, we’re just SO DIFFERENT! Even our BRAINS are wired differently!” And in my experience, the more we differentiate and separate ourselves, the less able we are to make progress towards equality.
This is definitely a crucial point that was mentioned at the end for SBK’s clarifying statement, but I think deserves more weight. It would be so useful to see more longitudinal study of brain processes that look at changes over time to better understand how our brain processes are shaped by our vastly differing experiences. Love the idea of learning more about the development of gender identity though.
I have seen more recent studies that look at the link between neurodivergent brains and gender non-conforming expression and that is really helpful and important for us to explore further.
Personally, I think the word equality should be banned outside of formalist mathematics. Fair is a more honest word but the semantics can become near impossible. Asian philosophy has strong warnings about forming rigid categories. Because of the indoctrination of the validity of the conceptual category “equality” through math education(I am abd on a phd in math) way too many people mistakenly believe they understand that word(category). Men and women are fundamentally different. I’m very happy with that reality! The word/concept/category worth more time us fairness. The wisdom traditions speak about love and compassion. Treating all people with respect and dignity, even the law breakers, is the foundation for a civilized society. Obviously, some form of institutional structures that ameliorate conflict are necessary. The philosophy of such structures is complex beyond imagination so, most likely, it will be a work in progress for millennia.
you just assert an empirically groundless / underspecified claim that "men and women are fundamentally different." what are you talking about? have you heard of polysemy and that definitions are mostly descriptive? banning words outside certain contexts is ridiculous.
Yes, I am very much aware of polysemy. She’s one of my bffs. I am not about to deliver a lecture. My beef was with the word equal. Categories are almost always porous. Mathematics has for thousands of years to wall itself off with axiomatics. Ambiguity is the enemy in the minds of many mathematicians. Polysemy is a horror to be avoided by using axioms to where math becomes like a game with writing symbols on a sheet of paper or some other like material(white board). The usual semantics for equal is to have some process by which two objects are indistinguishable. That works in Bose-Einstein statistics but in nearly all real world situations two objects ate never the exact same. Your courage is stunning! I’ve never met a flesh and blood human named organjissom.
are mathematicians the relevant experts studying phenotypical, behavioral, aesthetic... differences and their explanations between humans? if not, then i don't see how mathematicians' conventions are relevant here.
the only binary variable is gamete type between males and females. all other traits we use to construe the concepts of 'sex' and gender are continua and cluster bimodally.
if you understand polysemy, i don't see what's the problem with using equality? who cares how math people use it in doing math? it's irrelevant. advocates of equality in sociopolitical domains don't claim that people are or should be equal in their genotypes, phenotypes, behavior, needs etc., so getting hung up on the word is just weird and fruitless. words don't mean things; people mean things and use words and other ways to convey what they mean.
I’m sorry that what seemed like a very clear explanation from my pov fell on deaf ears. I tried to find something by using this search expression on Google Scholar
polysemy + “cognitive dissonance” + “equality”
But did not find anything quickly. I have experienced this kind of situation before when I say something that is grossly obvious to me but leaves some dumbfounded. Explaining the obvious is difficult. Since this is important to me I have decided to do a more in depth investigation. Interestingly, I have met people with PhD degrees who are dumbfounded by some of what I say. Many years ago an old high school classmate who earned a PhD in math from a major university could not believe me when I said that the U. S. government was an oligarchy where both the Democrats and the Republicans were their toadies. Subsequent research has shown I was correct but for me it was intuitively obvious. I am sure there are reputable psycholinguists who have research to prove what I say is correct. I gave it my best shot and clearly you are still dumbfounded. So I won’t be continuing this thread.
Interesting because your comment seems to contradict itself. Semantics aside, you seem to be advising against rigid categories (in the beginning of your comment) while then also stating that “men and women are fundamentally different.” And that’s where I disagree.
I'm so glad to read this clear summary of the male/female differences are in such important areas. I'm in the middle of questioning all of the advice given to women on goal setting and the default advice for generations seems to tilt towards benefitting men, and I hope that we'll be seeing more and more standard treatments for everything being questioned along gender lines.
what supports the claim that what's measured in adults is 'intrinsic' after years of development in particular cultures?
also if it's not 100% then it's not binary, no? couldn't strictly sort everyone into 2, so it's bimodal. only gamete type is binary. you can 100% reliably distinguish gamete type. if you can't do that with other variables, you shouldn't claim those vary binary discretely.
This is a very nice paper. Very unlikely that this is due to socialization alone because of the short time period where the changes had to occur. Could also be that there is a pre imprinting driven by genetics and early development in the womb which then is triggered by socialization.
I have also found in my coaching practice that there is definitely an internalised/externalized difference between men and women. If there is evidence to suggest things like more neurosticism or rumination, could this difference also cause men to be more violent and aggressive? Or to have a stronger drive toward competition over collaboration? What about creativity—isn’t that connected to the DMN? Is it the same in infants and babies?(re: previous comment?).
Wondering around any control of variables related to how one’s environment relates to a human’s specific gender presentation and how that relative relatedness or even relationship effects gender specific brain differences, given the brains malleability and adaptivity. Maybe missed something in my reading though. Will read again 🙏
** UPDATED PARAGRAPH FOR CLARIFICATION: "This study has some limitations of course. Most critically, the researchers didn’t investigate the developmental pathways of the brain differences. It must be noted that all brain networks develop as a result of nature interacting with nurture. Socialization processes are certainly at play at an individual level of development. That wasn’t the purpose of the study, however. Their findings suggest that at the group level male brains and female brains can be distinguished with a high level of accuracy and there are particular features of intrinsic organization of these brains that are significant and most likely evolved over the course of human evolution for adaptive purposes. All brains don’t have to be equal for there to be equality. Brains can be complementary with equal opportunities for contribution."
Studying the brain of adults or young adults doesn't tell us if the differences are caused by nature or nurture. This study doesn't answer any relevant questions if the differences noticed are the result of being raised and socialised as male or female from birth.
There seems to be 2 camps in research on this, with one camp saying exactly the opposite- that the brains of males & females AT BIRTH have minimal to zero differences.
This study was conducted on adults, therefore, the brain variation actually reflects how boys/girls, men/women are conditioned differently.
These studies are frustrating because they’re often used as ammunition in the culture wars that pit men and women against each other. “See, we’re just SO DIFFERENT! Even our BRAINS are wired differently!” And in my experience, the more we differentiate and separate ourselves, the less able we are to make progress towards equality.
This is definitely a crucial point that was mentioned at the end for SBK’s clarifying statement, but I think deserves more weight. It would be so useful to see more longitudinal study of brain processes that look at changes over time to better understand how our brain processes are shaped by our vastly differing experiences. Love the idea of learning more about the development of gender identity though.
I have seen more recent studies that look at the link between neurodivergent brains and gender non-conforming expression and that is really helpful and important for us to explore further.
Yes there's some really interesting research suggesting significant overlap between autism and non-binary/trans identification.
Personally, I think the word equality should be banned outside of formalist mathematics. Fair is a more honest word but the semantics can become near impossible. Asian philosophy has strong warnings about forming rigid categories. Because of the indoctrination of the validity of the conceptual category “equality” through math education(I am abd on a phd in math) way too many people mistakenly believe they understand that word(category). Men and women are fundamentally different. I’m very happy with that reality! The word/concept/category worth more time us fairness. The wisdom traditions speak about love and compassion. Treating all people with respect and dignity, even the law breakers, is the foundation for a civilized society. Obviously, some form of institutional structures that ameliorate conflict are necessary. The philosophy of such structures is complex beyond imagination so, most likely, it will be a work in progress for millennia.
you just assert an empirically groundless / underspecified claim that "men and women are fundamentally different." what are you talking about? have you heard of polysemy and that definitions are mostly descriptive? banning words outside certain contexts is ridiculous.
Yes, I am very much aware of polysemy. She’s one of my bffs. I am not about to deliver a lecture. My beef was with the word equal. Categories are almost always porous. Mathematics has for thousands of years to wall itself off with axiomatics. Ambiguity is the enemy in the minds of many mathematicians. Polysemy is a horror to be avoided by using axioms to where math becomes like a game with writing symbols on a sheet of paper or some other like material(white board). The usual semantics for equal is to have some process by which two objects are indistinguishable. That works in Bose-Einstein statistics but in nearly all real world situations two objects ate never the exact same. Your courage is stunning! I’ve never met a flesh and blood human named organjissom.
are mathematicians the relevant experts studying phenotypical, behavioral, aesthetic... differences and their explanations between humans? if not, then i don't see how mathematicians' conventions are relevant here.
the only binary variable is gamete type between males and females. all other traits we use to construe the concepts of 'sex' and gender are continua and cluster bimodally.
if you understand polysemy, i don't see what's the problem with using equality? who cares how math people use it in doing math? it's irrelevant. advocates of equality in sociopolitical domains don't claim that people are or should be equal in their genotypes, phenotypes, behavior, needs etc., so getting hung up on the word is just weird and fruitless. words don't mean things; people mean things and use words and other ways to convey what they mean.
I’m sorry that what seemed like a very clear explanation from my pov fell on deaf ears. I tried to find something by using this search expression on Google Scholar
polysemy + “cognitive dissonance” + “equality”
But did not find anything quickly. I have experienced this kind of situation before when I say something that is grossly obvious to me but leaves some dumbfounded. Explaining the obvious is difficult. Since this is important to me I have decided to do a more in depth investigation. Interestingly, I have met people with PhD degrees who are dumbfounded by some of what I say. Many years ago an old high school classmate who earned a PhD in math from a major university could not believe me when I said that the U. S. government was an oligarchy where both the Democrats and the Republicans were their toadies. Subsequent research has shown I was correct but for me it was intuitively obvious. I am sure there are reputable psycholinguists who have research to prove what I say is correct. I gave it my best shot and clearly you are still dumbfounded. So I won’t be continuing this thread.
you merely asserted the controverted stance, didn't explain anything.
Interesting because your comment seems to contradict itself. Semantics aside, you seem to be advising against rigid categories (in the beginning of your comment) while then also stating that “men and women are fundamentally different.” And that’s where I disagree.
I'm so glad to read this clear summary of the male/female differences are in such important areas. I'm in the middle of questioning all of the advice given to women on goal setting and the default advice for generations seems to tilt towards benefitting men, and I hope that we'll be seeing more and more standard treatments for everything being questioned along gender lines.
what supports the claim that what's measured in adults is 'intrinsic' after years of development in particular cultures?
also if it's not 100% then it's not binary, no? couldn't strictly sort everyone into 2, so it's bimodal. only gamete type is binary. you can 100% reliably distinguish gamete type. if you can't do that with other variables, you shouldn't claim those vary binary discretely.
This is a very nice paper. Very unlikely that this is due to socialization alone because of the short time period where the changes had to occur. Could also be that there is a pre imprinting driven by genetics and early development in the womb which then is triggered by socialization.
Very fascinating subject, especially for our time. Thanks for the analysis and spark!
I have also found in my coaching practice that there is definitely an internalised/externalized difference between men and women. If there is evidence to suggest things like more neurosticism or rumination, could this difference also cause men to be more violent and aggressive? Or to have a stronger drive toward competition over collaboration? What about creativity—isn’t that connected to the DMN? Is it the same in infants and babies?(re: previous comment?).
Great comment at the end on the limitations of the study. Objective and well written
Wondering around any control of variables related to how one’s environment relates to a human’s specific gender presentation and how that relative relatedness or even relationship effects gender specific brain differences, given the brains malleability and adaptivity. Maybe missed something in my reading though. Will read again 🙏