Skip to main content

Gina Rippon - How neuroscience is exploding the myth of male and female brains

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg24132190-100-how-neuroscience-is-exploding-the-myth-of-male-and-female-brains/

In this article, Gina Rippon discusses whether stereotypes men and women face are actually realistic and whether differences found in men and women’s behaviour are due to the brain or other parts of the body. She starts the article by stating common stereotypes faced by men and women. These include ‘men are good at map-reading’ and ‘women can multitask and do empathy and intuition better.’ She also goes on to say that most people believe in these stereotypes as it is not only their sexual characteristics that distinguish men and women, but also their brains, which influences their behaviour.  Many people agree with these stereotypes, including ex Google employee, James Damore who said that ‘women’s high level of empathy and lower interest in coding made them less suited to Google-type work.’ Rippon disagrees with this way of thinking, saying that ‘if you want to know what underpins differences between men and women in ability, behaviour, temperament and even lifestyle choices, you will find the answers in genes, genitals and gonads.’ Rippon believes that as our brains are plastic and have the ability to be moulded, and because of the slow recognition that gender identity and sexual characteristics don’t fit into a binary division, the stereotypical ‘differences’ between men and women are in fact a myth. It is only because these stereotypes are hardwired into our brains throughout life that we start to believe they are true, when in fact newer research conducted proves that there is no such thing, as the differences between men and women’s brains, and therefore in their behaviour, are minimal.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Dan Clayton's Blog - analysing patterns and structures post - summarised

Dan Clayton's blog - Analysing patterns and structures post - summarised https://englishlangsfx.blogspot.com/#!/2019/10/analysing-patterns-and-structures.html In a previous blog post, Dan Clayton looked at what examiners said about pattern and structure in last years A Level exams; they noticed that 'those students who had a clear sense of each of the texts as a whole were far more coherent in their responses' Clayton agrees with this as he says 'it's more useful and interesting to focus textual analysis on structures and patterns than single words or even single sentences' - looking at patterns is also more effective under limited time conditions, like in an exam, and he teaches this to his students. He says that if students wanted to avoid the disjointed one word at a time approach in the exam, they should look for a range of features in each text they have to analyse, including semantic fields and extended metaphors, lexical patterns and repetition, syn...