Meet the neuroscientist shattering the myth of the gendered brain

submitted by DR373737 from (theguardian.com)

all 11 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Aquadog 20 insightful - 1 fun20 insightful - 0 fun21 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

The one "gender" study on brains that I know of for TiMs used a sample size of 26 people and only looked at MRI imaging. MRI imaging is very unreliable when predicting behaviours, yet people are acting like it's the holy grail of "gendered brain" testing.

[–]jet199 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Oh yes, it's complete snake oil.

We all know the brain operates on a microscopic level with millions of different connections controlling behaviour. The idea you can see this from a big picture of the whole thing is laughable.

[–]GConly 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

There have been about a dozen studies. Hundreds of participants overall.

MRI imaging is very unreliable when predicting behaviours

But it's good at looking at the structures. I've had one myself. An MRI can pick out differences in structure to the mm. It's how drs keep track of tumor growth.

The structures correlate well to physical sex and when they don't it's almost always because the subject is gay.

The later MRI studies don't support the wrong sex brain theory anyway, but they do support homosexuality as being innate. If you trash them you're just damaging the argument for accepting being gay as something you can't change and ignoring research that's showing brain sex development is not what is behind being trans.

And being gay and not wanting to have sex with TIMs is kind of a thing here. The brain sex is real/sexual orientation isn't a choice because of brain development supports the lesbians not wanting to sleep with TIMs etc.

[–]Aquadog 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not totally trashing them, but they are unreliable as markers for a lot of things-mental illness included. For example, people with schizophrenia may have some structures that are under developed, while other people might have brains that look totally healthy and normal. They can show bursts of activity when not much might be happening at all: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27357684/

There's also been evidence that the software used as benchmark to analyze these fMRIs may show false positive rates up to 70%. While fMRIs are a good tool, they are not gold standard for predicting behaviours.

[–]spinningIntelligence 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Lesbians not wanting to have sex with TIMs doesn't need approval from an MRI machine. Even if it were proven tomorrow that homosexuality is 100% a conscious choice (it's not), that wouldn't make it any more permissable for men to pressure lesbians into sex.

Homosexuality isn't okay because it's innate, it's okay because it doesn't harm anyone. And there's also a 0% chance of accidental pregnancy.

[–]Sun_bear 15 insightful - 2 fun15 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I'm a lot younger than her but I know so many women that I went to school with who were pushed away from maths/physics, despite a very strong academic record in these areas. It's so limiting, these notions that women must do x, while men must do (the inherently higher valued y).

That being said I don't like how the author of the piece keeps talking about the gender binary. I don't see how you can unify the idea of a genderless brain with the current TRA nonsense.

[–][deleted] 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

“The idea of the male brain and the female brain suggests that each is a characteristically homogenous thing and that whoever has got a male brain, say, will have the same kind of aptitudes, preferences and personalities as everyone else with that ‘type’ of brain. We now know that is not the case. We are at the point where we need to say, ‘Forget the male and female brain; it’s a distraction, it’s inaccurate.’ It’s possibly harmful, too, because it’s used as a hook to say, well, there’s no point girls doing science because they haven’t got a science brain, or boys shouldn’t be emotional or should want to lead.”

[–]sudd3nclar1ty 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

On sympathy for males, “If they are being driven down a route that leads to self-harm or even suicide or violence, what is taking them there?”

Since it's obviously not a female brain. Her argument about the socialization impact on a highly plastic brain makes sense as well.

With all due respect to my gay bros, while I have no doubts about your inherent same-sex attractions, society has been trying to force people into gender buckets for too long and I want my children to have as many options available as possible.

[–]GConly 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I know this post means well.

But you can tell if a brain belongs to a man or woman about 95% of the time even using Joel's rather limited comparison.

I'm only going into this here because the brains of gay people make up the small percentage that can't be reliably IDd, they have abnormally developed brains. This proves sexual orientation is innate, one of the things gay rights activists have been using as major leverage against the religious conservative groups.

If you push 'no such thing as brain sex,' which is very much not the opinion of most neurobiologists, you damage a major supporting argument for gay rights.

You are also using fringe science not supported by the mainstream and that just doesn't look good to outsiders reading this.

[–]Aquadog 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I would be interested to see if any of these studies were factoring in changes based on other factors like personality disorders, early life trauma, etc.

[–]spinningIntelligence 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

After a lifetime of socialization, I'd be more surprised if you couldn't tell the difference. There being a difference doesn't say anything about the cause of that difference.

How about we support LGB rights because it doesn't harm anyone and there's no reason not to? Just because something is inborn doesn't mean it's good, and just because something isn't doesn't mean it's bad. The cause of homosexuality and bisexuality are irrelevant to the validity of gay rights.

If you think saying "no such thing as brain sex" damages support for gay rights, then you'd also have to argue that the "born this way" arguement supports things like pedophilia. Because the pedophile movement does compare itself to the gay rights movement in this way. And to preempt any knee-jerk responses, no, I am not comparing pedophilia to homosexuality.

And so what if it's fringe? The mainstream accepts a lot of nonsensical bullshit about women, and it isn't right just because it's mainstream. There are lots of things that don't look good to outsiders (like being against gender identity, for example), that doesn't mean we shouldn't say them.