The neuroscientist shattering the myth of the gendered brain

submitted by [deleted] from cambridgeindependent.co.uk

all 26 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]anonymale 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Podcast featuring Prof Rippon. UK only.

[–]jet199 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Get a British VPN to view.

[–]OrangeFirefly 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Some people seem to be insinuating Gina Rippon is male. That's not true - she is female and well-known for her work.

[–]ANIKAHirsch 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (25 children)

This is either extremely disingenuous or blatant misinformation.

The differences of male and female brain anatomy are well documented. They are different physically, in their size, composition, and distribution.

"Males and females differ in some aspects of their brains, notably the overall difference in size, with men having larger brains on average (between 8% and 13% larger when not corrected for body size)"

"A 2014 meta-analysis of grey matter in the brain found sexually dimorphic areas of the brain in both volume and density. When synthesized, these differences show that volume increases for males tend to be on the left side of systems, while females generally see greater volume in the right hemisphere."

"A 2017 review of amygdala volume studies found that there was a raw size difference, with males having a 10% larger amygdala"

"Additionally, there are differences in memory skills between males and females which may suggest a difference in the hippocampal volume (HCV). A 2016 meta-analysis of volume differences found a higher HCV in males"

"A 2014 meta-analysis found differences in grey matter levels between the sexes. The findings (where differences were measured) included males having more grey matter volume in both amygdalae, hippocampi, and anterior parahippocampal gyri, among others, while females had more grey matter volume in the right frontal pole, inferior and middle frontal gyrus, anterior cingulate gyrus, and lateral occipital cortex, among others. In terms of density, there were also differences between the sexes. Males tended to have denser left amygdalae, hippocampi, and areas of the right VI lobule of the cerebellum, among other areas, while females tended to have denser left frontal pole.[2]"

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_of_sex_differences#Male_and_female_brain_anatomy)

And that's just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to sex differences of the brain

.

I am, however, noticing the profound squareness of this person's jaw.

[–][deleted] 18 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 0 fun19 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

The differences of male and female brain anatomy are well documented. They are different physically, in their size, composition, and distribution.

"Males and females differ in some aspects of their brains, notably the overall difference in size, with men having larger brains on average (between 8% and 13% larger when not corrected for body size)"

I'm just going off the scientific journalism here.

“If you correct for height weight body mass index, then you find the structural differences you think you found will disappear,” she says. “Men also have bigger hearts, livers and kidneys but we don’t currently have a big industry researching that.”

This article https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00677-x talks about some of your other points while discussing her work.

As Rippon shows, the hunt for proof of women’s inferiority has more recently elided into the hunt for proof of male–female ‘complementarity’. So, this line goes, women are not really less intelligent than men, just ‘different’ in a way that happens to coincide with biblical teachings and the status quo of gender roles. Thus, women’s brains are said to be wired for empathy and intuition, whereas male brains are supposed to be optimized for reason and action.

This was how researchers at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia framed a highly touted 2014 MRI study that seared into the public imagination a picture of men’s and women’s brains as diametrically opposed subway maps: the connections in women are mostly between hemispheres, and those in men within them (M. Ingalhalikar et al. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 823–828; 2014). However, the map omits the vast majority of connections that did not differ between the study’s adolescent participants; nor did it control for puberty-related maturation or, once again, for brain size, all of which reduces apparent male–female difference.

And

Neurosexism

The history of sex-difference research is rife with innumeracy, misinterpretation, publication bias, weak statistical power, inadequate controls and worse. Rippon, a leading voice against the bad neuroscience of sex differences, uncovers so many examples in this ambitious book that she uses a whack-a-mole metaphor to evoke the eternal cycle. A brain study purports to discover a difference between men and women; it is publicized as, ‘At last, the truth!’, taunting political correctness; other researchers expose some hyped extrapolation or fatal design flaw; and, with luck, the faulty claim fades away — until the next post hoc analysis produces another ‘Aha!’ moment and the cycle repeats. As Rippon shows, this hunt for brain differences “has been vigorously pursued down the ages with all the techniques that science could muster”. And it has exploded in the past three decades, since MRI research joined the fray.

Yet, as The Gendered Brain reveals, conclusive findings about sex-linked brain differences have failed to materialize. Beyond the “missing five ounces” of female brain — gloated about since the nineteenth century — modern neuroscientists have identified no decisive, category-defining differences between the brains of men and women. In women’s brains, language-processing is not spread any more evenly across the hemispheres than it is in men’s, as a small 1995 Nature study proclaimed but a large 2008 meta-analysis disproved (B. A. Shaywitz et al. Nature 373, 607–609 (1995) and I. E. Sommer et al. Brain Res. 1206, 76–88; 2008). Brain size increases with body size, and certain features, such as the ratio of grey to white matter or the cross-sectional area of a nerve tract called the corpus callosum, scale slightly non-linearly with brain size. But these are differences in degree, not kind. As Rippon notes, they are not seen when we compare small-headed men to large-headed women, and have no relationship to differences in hobbies or take-home pay.

[–]ANIKAHirsch 3 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 5 fun -  (9 children)

Are men and women different, or not?

Say all you want about the particulars of those differences.

10% is a significant difference in size. Point is, it will show up on a brain scan. As will the differences in composition and distribution. So what this article says is not true.

A doctor would never argue that there are no differences between male and female heart, lungs, or kidneys. It is well accepted that men and women must be treated differently in a medical environment, due to their differences.

Gina Rippon obviously has prior-held beliefs on this subject, and is only doing the research to confirm those. He is not a neutral observer here.

[–][deleted] 21 insightful - 3 fun21 insightful - 2 fun22 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Did you even read the article? It doesn't say that women and men are exactly alike. All she's saying is that the variations found in the brain is due to "the life they have lived, not the sex of their owners." So if there are differences, it's not due to what you think it is. She's saying life changes the brain, and thus a gendered world changes the brain to create the variations you see. Scope is important.

Prof Rippon says her research has shown there are no differences between male and female brains that can be reliably proved in repeated experiments. “One scientific paper will find differences in one structure, the next will find differences in another structure but not in the first one. So there is no consistent part of the brain or network we have currently been able to measure that establishes whether a brain is from a man or a woman. That’s the key thing that surprises people because they assume differences are there.”

“The type of games you play will change your brain. We know that from judo and juggling to violin and keyboard playing. By definition, moving the body differently according to the demands of the skill you are acquiring will change the brain. So not playing football will have a direct effect on the brain. But making sure we are doing the right things to stay part of our social group is also an important driver.

“Our brains are gathering the rules of behaviour and if those rules are gendered, then our brains will make us gendered.

“It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Some research may find differences, but then you say, ‘have you looked at the education level of those participants, have they been at school for the same amount of time, have you looked at the sports they play or their occupation?’ To which the answer is always ‘no’. So how do you know what you are finding is a sex difference and not an excludence difference.”

Prof Rippon says: “There’s nothing which I have found that would allow you to compare two brain images and say, ‘well that’s a man and that’s a woman’. It’s not physically possible to say there is a male or female brain. I have had transgender individuals or individuals wishing to transition asking if we can we scan them – for instance, a man saying can you prove I have a female brain so I have a case for my transition. It doesn’t work at that level. Certain members of the transgender community are made very angry by that.”

[–]just_lesbian_things 17 insightful - 2 fun17 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

10% is a significant difference in size. Point is, it will show up on a brain scan.

Men are taller than women on average, but it doesn't mean everyone under 6 ft is a woman. Men have larger feet but there isn't a given "male foot". I'm sure if I showed you a severed foot, you would struggle to identify the sex of the owner just by looking at it.

[–]luckystar 17 insightful - 2 fun17 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The height analogy always made the most sense to me. Like yes, if somebody is 6 ft tall, they are overwhelmingly likely to be male, but that doesn't mean we need to go schedule the entire WNBA for double mastectomies because "tall bodies are male bodies".

There's also the fact that if there were such a thing as "male brains" and "female brains", the occurrence of men with "female brains" and vice versa would disprove their existence, as they would no longer be "male brains" or "female brains" any more than 6 ft is a "male height".

Then there's the fact that even if somebody's brain did more closely match the opposite sex -- so what? The determination of sex, in terms of biology, which applies to wayyyyyy more organisms than just humans, relates to gamete size, nothing more, nothing less. Brains can have correlations with each sex but they are not any part of determining sex -- there are literally plants that are male or female, and they don't have brains at all. This is the same reason why the "sex is a spectrum" logic is flawed -- you can't be more female or less female: you might have more traits typically associated with producers of large immobile gametes, but having, say, a PCOS beard doesn't mean you're somehow "less female", it just means you have one body trait more commonly found in ejaculators.

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

Yes. It's called bimodal distribution.

[–]anonymale 14 insightful - 5 fun14 insightful - 4 fun15 insightful - 5 fun -  (3 children)

Gina Rippon obviously has prior-held beliefs on this subject, and is only doing the research to confirm those. He is not a neutral observer here.

He? I don’t think it’s Prof Rippon’s prior-held beliefs on display here. This is the kind of stupid shit that got you banned from Reddit.

Even r/BareFootAndPregnant and r/MRAMemes got tired of you.

[–]Vari4 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Fuck wikipedia can be biased sometimes:

Transgender studies on brain anatomy

Early postmortem studies of transsexual neurological differentiation was focused on the hypothalamic and amygdala regions of the brain. Using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), some trans women were found to have female-typical putamina that were larger in size than those of cisgender males.[11] Some trans women have also shown a female-typical central part of the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BSTc) and interstitial nucleus of the anterior hypothalamus number 3 (INAH-3), looking at the number of neurons found within each.[12]

Notice how they say "some TiM's have the lady brain" - sounds just as true to say some don't.

Anyway; for those interested Cordelia Fine's book Testosterone Rex does a really good job challanging the scientific orthodoxy on neurological sex differences between male and female brains.

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

cordelia fine is my shero

[–]ANIKAHirsch 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

Yeah. I didn't say everything in the article was true.

I haven't read the book. Can you quote it?

In my opinion: to say men and women don't have different brains, you may as well say we don't have different bodies.

[–]Vari4 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Sorry it's been a while since i read it. Can't quote it at any length.

IIRC one of the main arguments she made was that there was a pretty substantial publication bias in favour of articles that found neuro sex differences vs articles that did not.

I remember she has done some fairly good presentations of her work.

Found this one: not sure if it covers this topic - https://youtu.be/ZgE8p6n9Z7o?t=746

[–]ANIKAHirsch 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Could the publication bias be due to the academic rigor of those findings? I expect the truth to be more published.

Do you think arguing that men and women are the same does women any favors?

Or are we completely different in every part of our bodies, except for our brains, which are identical?

Sorry, I'm not buying it.

Men and women do act differently. They have different interests, and excel at different subjects.

What is the reason for that?

There is ample evidence that all our differences have their basis in our biology.

If only we could stop spreading this ridiculous notion: "There's no difference! Men and women are the same!"

[–]BewitchedSam 12 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Hi so the reason that studies that find differences are more likely to be published is because those results are often considered more interesting. Thus publishers will likely sell more articles and make more money. This is a big problem in the social science community often referred to as the file drawer effect. It can lead to researchers manipulating their data by dropping outliers or participants to manipulate results. This is called p-hacking and has caused some publishers to change how articles are submitted. All researchers have bias. And often this affects methodology and interpretations of results as well.

There are size differences between male and female brains but this has always been found to correlate with body size (smaller woman = smaller hands, feet, heart, brains...larger man = larger hands, feet, heart, brains). There are also size differences in structures but again when controlling for overall size of the brain or person they disappear. It would be like me saying I measured pinky toes and found men's pinky toes were significantly bigger. Like duh men are bigger and have bigger feet.

It's not so much they are "identical brains" as much as it is being argued that neuroplasticy causes brains to develop/change based on use and environment. Brains are kind of like muscles in a sense because the more you use a part of the brain the more neuropathways develop in that area. In a sense what you're saying is true, men and women typically have different interest and hobbies but can be contributed to differences in social roles as well as other biological factors like muscle mass and hormones. But these differences in interest can affect where the brains develop.

The big problem with assuming they are inherently different is that historically brain science has been used as evidence to support sexist and racist ideas. Another problem with many of these studies is sampling. Most research is conducted on what we refer to as W.E.I.R.D. or White/western, educated, industrialized, rich, democratic societies. Cross cultural research has been finding that a lot of research conducted in western societies often only apply to those who were studied aka the W.E.I.R.D. people.

Again you are correct there are many biological differences that explain the difference in behavior and abilities between men and women. However, the brain structure seems to be more subject to individual and environmental differences than sex differences. Most behavioral differences can largely be attributed to hormones.

Your final statement about getting rid of the notion that there is no difference strikes me as odd. Most libfems would argue that men and women are mostly the same and there's no difference. Radfems usually argue that men and women are greatly different thus why they don't believe men can know what its like to be women. I think most radfems don't support the idea of sexed brains because it's often used to enforce stereotypes, gender roles and discrimination against women. We're not big on sexist stereotypes and gender roles here. And I'm sure you can imagine how we feel about discrimination.

[–]ANIKAHirsch 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I'm not a libfem or a radfem.

I'm Gender-Critical and I'm a Liberal Feminist.

[–]BewitchedSam 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Libfem is short hand for Liberal Feminist. My understanding is that Gender critical is a radfem (radical feminist) movement. So most are radfem or share radfem veiws.

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

I don't identify with the term "libfem" as I find the community that associates itself with that term to be incredibly toxic, and not sharing my values.

I recognize that the Gender Critical movement was born out of Radical Feminism.

[–]Vari4 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Could the publication bias be due to the academic rigor of those findings? I expect the truth to be more published.

By definition, a publication bias is not the result of academic rigor or truth. Bias is something that works against accuracy of findings.

Do you think arguing that men and women are the same [biologically] does women any favours?

The truth of the matter is indifferent to weather or not it does us any favours. Facts about the root cause of difference between men and women (biological properties or social circumstances) are indifferent to our political desires. Believing things because they do us favours merely causes us to act on false information, endorse ineffective policies, and wate our time and effort.

However to answer your questions, yes it does.

Arguing that the differences between men and women are inherent to men and women (grounded in biology) is often used to justify gender inequality and discrimination. Part of the reason women are underrepresented in STEM is that many men and women believe that women are less capable of thriving in this sector.

Arguing that the differences between men and women are caused by environmental differences causes us to be conscious of these differences and address them.

Or are we completely different in every part of our bodies, except for our brains, which are identical?

Are the differences between male and female kidneys and earlobes so dramatic? Sure, there are differences in every cell (XX - XY) But these differences often don't play a role in the best explanation of how these parts of us function. The same may be true of the brain - sure every neuron has an XX or XY chromosome in it - there may even be a few robust differences that exist between the male and female brains. However the significance these differences have is entirely up for grabs.

I don't think there is any good reason to believe that men are disposed to treat women poorly because if you take a look inside one of their neurons you'll see something that looks like a 'XY' if you squint at it.

Sorry, I'm not buying it.

No apologies necessary. You don't have to believe anything that you don't desire to.

Men and women do act differently. They have different interests and excel at different subjects. What is the reason for that? There is ample evidence that all our differences have their basis in our biology.

Actual behavioural biologists do not believe that all human behaviour and differences between groups are determined by biology. (stanford uni has a very good course on human behavioural biology availiable for free on youtube if you want to do more research on this topic)

The radical feminist philosophy argues that we can explain many of these differences (especially the differences we are most interested in politically) by referring to the fact that we live in a culture where male babies and female babies are separated at birth, treated differently, trained to behave differently, and trained to treat each other differently.

Even though it may never be possible to precisely measure the impact that sociology has on us compared to the impact biology has on us - we will still have good reasons to believe that the way we are treated from birth will have significant impacts on our interests and aptitudes.

More interestingly, I think this plays a significant role in the explanation of (i) why men treat women so poorly, and (ii) why it is not possible for a man to become a woman even if he were to change his biology in such a way as to be indistinguishable from a real woman.

If only we could stop spreading this ridiculous notion: "There's no difference! Men and women are the same!"

Men and women are not the same. If they were the same there would be no concept of ‘man’ or ‘woman’. It is the cause of these differences that are disputed.

Women are not born liking the colour pink.

[–]Eurowoman24 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

literally studied this and my PHD - Neuroscientist professor said there have been minor differences found in terms of structure (pretty sure that was the only thing) but not enough conclusive results have been found which is why it's considered gender neutral.

[–]ANIKAHirsch 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

What was the topic of your thesis?

[–]Eurowoman24 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I was reffering to my PHD accredited professor.

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

I see. What is your accreditation?