The Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience That Shatters the Myth of the Female Brain

The Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience That Shatters the
    The Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience That Shatters the our brains Drawing on her work as a professor of cognitive neuroimaging, Gina Rippon unpacks the stereotypes that bombard us from our earliest moments and shows how these messages mould our ideas of ourselves and even shape our brains Taking us back through centuries of sexism,The Gendered Brain reveals how science has been misinterpreted or misused to ask the wrong questions Instead of challenging the status quo, we are still bound by outdated stereotypes and assumptions However, by exploring new, cutting edge neuroscience, Rippon urges us to move beyond a binary view of our brains and instead to see these complex organs as highly individualised, profoundly adaptable and full of unbounded potentialRigorous, timely and liberating, The Gendered Brain has huge repercussions for women and men, for parents and children, and for how we identify ourselves."/>
  • Paperback
  • 448
  • The Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience That Shatters the Myth of the Female Brain
  • Gina Rippon
  • 24 March 2019
  • 184792476X

About the Author: Gina Rippon

The Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience That Shatters the gendered pdf, brain: kindle, neuroscience mobile, that mobile, shatters pdf, myth mobile, female book, brain book, The Gendered ebok, Brain: The ebok, The Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience That Shatters the Myth of the Female BrainGendered Brain: The mobile, Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience pdf, The Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience That Shatters the Myth of the Female Brain KindleGina Rippon is professor of Brain: The PDF Å cognitive neuroimaging at the Aston Brain Centre, Aston University, Birmingham Rippon has also sat on the editorial board of the International Journal of PsychophysiologyHer book, Gendered Brain The Gendered PDF \ the new neuroscience that shatters the myth of the female brain, maintains biology plays no core role in differentiating female brains from male brains As a watershed in the history of science, Rippon Gendered Brain: The eBook ´ considers her findings comparable to the idea of the Earth circling around the sunRippon s research involves the application of brain imaging techniques, particularly electroencephalography, EEG and magnetoencephalography MEG using cognitive neuroscience paradigms to studies of normal and abnormal cognitive processes This work has been applied to the study of Autistic Spectrum Disorders and to developmental dyslexiaSource.


The Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience That Shatters the Myth of the Female BrainThe Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience That Shatters the gendered pdf, brain: kindle, neuroscience mobile, that mobile, shatters pdf, myth mobile, female book, brain book, The Gendered ebok, Brain: The ebok, The Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience That Shatters the Myth of the Female BrainGendered Brain: The mobile, Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience pdf, The Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience That Shatters the Myth of the Female Brain KindleA treasure trove of information Brain: The PDF Å and good humour CORDELIA FINE, author of Testosterone RexDo you have a female brain or a male brain Or is that the wrong question Reading maps or The Gendered PDF \ reading emotions Barbie or Lego We live in a gendered world where we are bombarded with messages about sex and gender On a daily basis we face deeply ingrained beliefs that your sex Gendered Brain: The eBook ´ determines your skills and preferences, from toys and colours to career choice and salaries But what does this constant gendering mean for our thoughts, decisions and behaviour And what does it mean for our brains Drawing on her work as a professor of cognitive neuroimaging, Gina Rippon unpacks the stereotypes that bombard us from our earliest moments and shows how these messages mould our ideas of ourselves and even shape our brains Taking us back through centuries of sexism,The Gendered Brain reveals how science has been misinterpreted or misused to ask the wrong questions Instead of challenging the status quo, we are still bound by outdated stereotypes and assumptions However, by exploring new, cutting edge neuroscience, Rippon urges us to move beyond a binary view of our brains and instead to see these complex organs as highly individualised, profoundly adaptable and full of unbounded potentialRigorous, timely and liberating, The Gendered Brain has huge repercussions for women and men, for parents and children, and for how we identify ourselves.

You may also like...

10 thoughts on “The Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience That Shatters the Myth of the Female Brain

  1. BlackOxford says:

    Science Is Messy And Mostly Wrong There are several important conclusions for the layman to be drawn from Rippon s well written and ratherthan merely comprehensive book First, brains are incredibly complex organs which we in fact are only beginning to understand Second, the purported differences in male and female brains are almost entirely mythical though claims about them persist in both professional and popular accounts But for me the most interesting implication of her history o Science Is Messy And Mostly Wrong There are several important conclusions for the layman to be drawn from Rippon s well written and ratherthan merely comprehensive book First, brains are incredibly complex organs which we in fact are only beginning to understand Second, the purported differences in male and female brains are almost entirely mythical though claims about them persist in both professional and popular accounts But for me the most interesting implication of her history of brain research is just how much fake news there is claiming to be science at any given time.The latest scientific results are typically taken as revelatory in brain research Tests, measurements, and experiments correlate with some hypothesis which is considered as scientifically confirmed The results are then reported and cited in various professional journals, thus providing credibility to the confirmation This news then finds its way into the popular press as established scientific findings, and becomes part of a type of scientific folklore Like any other story, this new scientific fact is verified by its sheer ubiquity not just in professional and popular journals, but also on the worldwide web.Yet, when it comes to the brain, the results of almost all research are subsequently shown to be wrong Errors in experimental design, researcher bias, spurious correlations, bogus references, among many other flaws seem almost de riguer in all research into the brain Starting with cranial measurements in the 19th century, but continuing with high tech MRI imaging, it seems that all the errors to be made have probably been made andthan once Sometimes the results of previous research can be re interpreted in light of new findings but, mostly, old research is simply intellectual junk.It might be argued that this is the way of science, and always has been, namely that the process of discovering the truth is necessarily messy, but that ultimately the right answers, or at least better ones, emerge from investigative chaos Perhaps But the problem is that there is a reticence to admit that the issue of junk science is permanently recurring Every generation of scientific investigators believe that their results are closer to the truth than previous generations Yet every previous generation has been shown to be profoundly misguided Scientifically speaking, it seems a good bet that this generation will also shown to less competent than it now thinks it is The vast bulk of its work will also be shown to be well, bunk.In light of Rippon s detailed and informed description of the actual process of science in an area of research which includes not just medicine and physical sciences like chemistry and developmental biology but also softer disciplines like psychology and sociology, I wonder at those who think they have a solution to the problem of fake news in politics or business or technology Most news is fake in the same sense that most scientific results are fake, that is future events will demonstrate that the conclusions we have reached on the information we have are mostly silly Whatever consensus that exists now about what the truth is will be replaced by a different, often contradictory, consensus in the future.Only by convention do we dare term tomorrow s consensus progress Progress is a criterion which means different things to different people Consensus is such only among those who are part of the consensus, a self defining and changeable mob The specific criterion of progress probably changes as frequently as the results of the science involved As indeed does the criterion of truth about the news of the day Conditions change, interests change, economics change, all frequently as a result of what the news is, scientific or otherwise Thus science itself is a sort of free for all in which the rules get made up as we go along The closest relative to science is, perhaps surprisingly, literature In fact science at its best seems to be a cadet branch of literature, modelled on literature in its attempt to describe, interpret and integrate what it sees in imaginative ways Most literature turns out to be junk as well, fake news that ends up in discount shops and the remaindering warehouse The only thing actually better about modern literature over, say, that of Attic Greece is that there is lotsof it Science, like literature, is inherently wasteful But that s what it takes to find out why they are done at all.Postscript 14May20 Here is another piece provided by a GR reader on the character of real science

  2. Emer (A Little Haze) says:

    This book is giving me life It s bashing the patriarchy and associated troubling gendered stereotypes with science, fact, research AND I AM HERE FOR IT LIKE YAAAAAAAASSSSS This review that appeared in Nature describes it far better than I can This book is giving me life It s bashing the patriarchy and associated troubling gendered stereotypes with science, fact, research AND I AM HERE FOR IT LIKE YAAAAAAAASSSSS This review that appeared in Nature describes it far better than I can

  3. Alja says:

    Brains reflect the lives they have lived, not just the sex of their owners Scientists have long tried to prove that men and women are inherently different because we have biologically different brains The author reviews both the history and current state research on sex differences, mainly in the field of neuroscience the author s field of expertise but also endocrinology and psychology What we are now learning is that our brains areplastic than previously thought and are profound Brains reflect the lives they have lived, not just the sex of their owners Scientists have long tried to prove that men and women are inherently different because we have biologically different brains The author reviews both the history and current state research on sex differences, mainly in the field of neuroscience the author s field of expertise but also endocrinology and psychology What we are now learning is that our brains areplastic than previously thought and are profoundly shaped by experiences and messages they are exposed to These findings imply that biological sex is just one of the variables that influence our brains, with the kind of toys we play with or praise we receive as children having a muchcritical role than biology However, what research is showing is that gender stereotypes have a negative influence on performance and self esteem for women, and possibly even mental health The author doesn t dismiss sex differences but instead suggests that it might be time to move beyond the binary categorization of sex and gender which even genetically isn t as binary as we like to think and challenge gender stereotypes to unleash the full potential of all humans.I imagine this book will be a hard pill to swallow for a lot of people, but I appreciated the level of detail and references it provides in terms of reviewing past and current research and theories It also doesn t shy away from asking big questions that challenge our gender stereotypes This book isn t the final destination it s a starting point to a discussion that s still very much needed, even in the 21st century

  4. Lee says:

    In terms of how well it s written, this one star is obviously far too harsh However, this book does not represent the science of the field with accuracy An article that argues such better than I could A book like this is very difficult for someone knowledgeable about the field to review seriously It is so chock full of bias that one keeps wondering why one is bothering with it In terms of how well it s written, this one star is obviously far too harsh However, this book does not represent the science of the field with accuracy An article that argues such better than I could A book like this is very difficult for someone knowledgeable about the field to review seriously It is so chock full of bias that one keeps wondering why one is bothering with it

  5. Alison says:

    It is clear that understanding the social brain could offer us a hugely effective lens to investigate how a gendered world can produce a gendered brain, how gender stereotypes are a very real brain based threat that can divert brains from the endpoint they deserve This book is chock full of information and analysis, covering broad ground in examining the current state of neuroscientific research, and the reporting of it, regarding gender and sex differences in the brain I found the organisati It is clear that understanding the social brain could offer us a hugely effective lens to investigate how a gendered world can produce a gendered brain, how gender stereotypes are a very real brain based threat that can divert brains from the endpoint they deserve This book is chock full of information and analysis, covering broad ground in examining the current state of neuroscientific research, and the reporting of it, regarding gender and sex differences in the brain I found the organisation chaotic and unhelpful for navigation the start of the book hasopinion, less analysis, and many topics are touched upon in multiple places It is worth the effort to persist though, as it is without question the richest book offered on this topic in a decade I ve covered only bits of it here, even in one of my longest reviews.Having said that, I ve been brewing over the review for a while, given that predictably the responses have largely fallen into two camps, depending on where you sit in an old style dichotomy are the gendered differences we see in society the result of our social construction, or do they come from our biology This framing is increasingly frustrating, as it misses the biggest point of current research that it indicates pathways to how we can change ourselves through our social worlds This kind of research, far from simply allowing us to resolve arguments in old ways, gives us new tools to explore who we want to be.Unsurprisingly, perhaps, some of the richest contributions that Rippon makes is in chronicling the social construction of gender We are social beings, whose brain development occurs within a social context and whose sense of self is inextricably tied to where we fit in our social world Our social construction of gender starts very early, at least from birth One of the powerful illustrations Rippon cites is that six month olds react with surprise to an image of a man putting on lipstick Only nine percent of three year old boys in another test expressed a view that their fathers would approve of playing with a doll Sixty four percent of the father had said they would be comfortably buying one Caregivers to children display much stronger gender prejudice than they report Gender prejudices among caregivers are measurably stronger than any behavioural gender differences among young children This matches with research cited by Cordelia Fine that parents will inevitably list the traits that are gender compliant in their children over those which are gender deviant , a kind of confirmation bias We are deeply influenced by stereotypes Stereotype threat is a clearly measurable phenomenon, and impairs performance of women and people of colour in alarming measure If we believe that others think we will fail, chances are, we will Children s developmental process involves using stereotype to determine their own behaviour Children go through a strong gender policing stage possibly strongest around 3 for girls in which they will reject anything that does not fit with their concept of their own gender.The book also critiques at length studies into behavioural differences, variously debunking the difference including by reference to stereotype threat or by placing it within a social explanation it is important to point out that all these reported differences are very small in real world terms, and overlapping, not exclusive For example, gender height difference has had a effect size of 1.5 The strongest gender differences, usually cited as mental rotation skills favouring males and verbal skills favouring females come in at around 0.6 That is, a lot of men are going to beverbal than the woman they are standing next to It isn t enough to make it helpful to make assumptions about someone based solely on their gender So, if you take the much studied phenomenon of mental rotation, Rippon points out Training and practice makes a huge difference Again, a powerful example here is a study of children for which gender differences disappeared when controlled for experience playing Tetris muchcommon among boys The same can be measurable for Lego Tests are often formulated with examples displaying gender bias Another intriguing study showed gender differences disappeared when participants were asked not to rotate images, but to shift their own perspective Other showed better responses when references to vehicles were removed Gender differences don t correlate well with each other So, for example, some of the largest gender differences in behaviour occur around taking baths women prefer and watching boxing But people who take baths are noor to watch boxing than those who don t That is we don t exist as a cluster of gendered traits The correlations are too weak, and our individual diversity too strong.But much of this book, like much of Cordelia Fine s work, is dedicated to debunking studies showing biological differences that are gendered Rippon is a neuroscientist, and the richest material here is looking at brain scans, and how differences by gender can be explained by differences in size That is, smaller brains have differences in organisation to larger brains When this effect is controlled for, gender differences recede Rippon s critics would point out that since women do tend to have smaller brains, this is still a difference.Rippon also seems to be edging towards arguing that there might be a biological basis for girls beingsusceptible to social expectations than boys In the section on the social brain, she talks about the depth of power that social rejection carries manifesting as akin to physical pain in our brain scans Note to self don t volunteer for brain scan research here She tracks tendencies through early childhood, and differences in brain activation in infancy, through to studies that show girls reactingstrongly to the threat of social penalty She certainly suggests that this might be a compounding factor with stereotype threat of pushing women out of male dominated fields.Where I think Rippon is weakest is in discussions around hormonal differences This is particularly frustrating because Cordelia Fine s Testosterone Rex did a fine heh job of debunking the connection between testosterone and risk taking, but left alone the farrobustly established link between testosterone and aggression Rippon acknowledges many of the human studies into testosterone, and at times this gave the book a disjointed feel, as some of her arguments in some sections were not necessarily borne out by others.At the start of the book, Rippon quickly dismisses hormonal research by saying that Recent work by Sari van Anders, a neuroscientist at the University of Michigan, and others shows that in the twenty first century the link between hormones and behaviour, particularly with respect to the supposed potency of testosterone in determining male aggression and competitiveness, is undergoing a radical rethink This caught my attention, as I would not have described an Anders work that way Rippon then follows up, IMHOaccurately, with Just as we are seeing the power of society and its expectations as brain changing variables, it is clear that the same effect is evident with respect to hormones It is a shame she did not discuss Van Anders workextensively Van Anders is not at all arguing that testosterone is unconnected to aggression What she is demonstrating is the way that our social world influences the production of testosterone Specifically, that way competition participation and behaviours modulate the production of testosterone This is similar to work that indicates that caring for children can inhibit testosterone production That is our social construction can determine our biology.Which brings me back to why I find this topic so exciting all our current research points us to the power that we have to create the kind of people we want to be This won t be achieved by ignoring our biology, but neither will it be achieved by viewing our biology as nothingthan explaining our social construction Only by understanding how we have evolved to create societies, which then create people, which create societies can we understand the power of our socially negotiated beliefs, values and social roles We can be better than we are our innate biases, prejudices are not inevitable, although neither are they quickly changed.Also, to state the obvious, parents are not in control of the gender construction of their children Parenting is a hard gig And yes, research does suggest that gender stereotyping your kids is not a good thing, no matter how much they seem to be clusters of gendered traits at times But none of this happens in a vacuum our society creates our genders in interaction with biology , not individual parents unless, of course, you want to lock your kids in a vault and never let them interact with any people or representations of people other than you Gender then will be the least of their problems.One of the things that the various scientists involved in this debate tend not to emphasise is the role that feminism, sexism and genderqueer liberation movements have on framing this debate But scientists don t live in a vacuum We live in a profoundly gender divided society How does biology intersect with social construction to create this Are women simply better geared to be carers, explaining why they perform the vast majority of the world s domestic unpaid work Are men simply better engineers because their testosterone makes it so Perhaps, as some scientists argue, sexist discrimination is actually made worse by assuming that women s brains are just like men s, leading to a devaluing of empathy and other skills testosterone minimises Many scientists argue that views on the social nature of women impact negatively on their work Gina Rippon and others point out that deep sexist assumptions permeate the field, leading science to justify explain existing inequities, not to challenge them Others argue that feminist critiques create an atmosphere in which results can t be widely discussed.It is important, and helpful, to acknowledge that social changes impact on how we do science, and what we see in our results A good example is referred to by Rippon here, in the understand of Intersex conditions She catalogues the rapid changes in the early millenium regarding both research and medical practice into gender, towards an acknowledgement ofthan two categories, and perhaps most importantly, away from a deviance model that assumes intersex to be a medical condition and towards a variance model that embraces diversity This has revolutionised the advice given to parents of Intersex infants Neurobiologist Professor Art Arnold has shown that you can separate out the influence of chromosomes from gonads and that these can vary independently, with quite different effects on physical characteristics and on behaviour.9 Hormone levels can fluctuate widely within as well as between groups, and as a function of different contexts and different lifestyles Genitals, even where clearly identifiable as labia or penises, can present in a startling variety of forms There is a wonderfully illustrated Scientific American article on the extraordinary complexity of sex determination that makes you wonder that we ever arrived at an end product that looks even remotely classifiable into just two categories This has not, however, been generated by new research it has been driven by the activism and courage of Intersex and transgender people Researchers have known forthan a century that around 1% of the population is Intersex the difference comes from how we decide to approach that, based on developing understanding of human experience, which has come from the public presence of people with that experience.It is implied that Rippon struggles to integrate the transgender experience Her language is respectful an odd use of transsexual aside , and she correctly genders trans individuals She expresses a hope that transgendered individuals would benefit from a world with less rigid gendered stereotyping, an assumption I think we would all share This got me thinking, however, about some of the ways feminism is evolving alongside the science Understanding that gender is socially constructed doesn t minimise the power of that construction and understanding how early it starts certainly suggests that some fundamentals are unlikely to be reset as we change I do believe that a different society will produce different people, including differing concepts of gender That is likely to affect all of us Maybe a society with less correlation between expected behaviours and genital structures would result in less people wanting bodily modification maybe it would bepeople What is irrefutable is that the embrace of diversity that is advocated by LGBTI activists of all stripes has a beautiful mirror in the advances in biological sciences that understand the dizzying variety of human skills, cognitive patterns and ways of working It is young genderqueer activists I see pushing back against a binary, and in the process, empowering science to take us to new places

  6. Niall says:

    A must read for anyone living in a gendered world aka 21st century Earth It s a book every parent, guardian and teacher should read as we are doingharm than good gendering children at such early ages by three years old, a child has usually confirmed their gender I also loved how Gina proves children are the biggest gender police, as it is so important for them to know, especially for navigating school and the playground For children, performing gender is like self survival Also, it A must read for anyone living in a gendered world aka 21st century Earth It s a book every parent, guardian and teacher should read as we are doingharm than good gendering children at such early ages by three years old, a child has usually confirmed their gender I also loved how Gina proves children are the biggest gender police, as it is so important for them to know, especially for navigating school and the playground For children, performing gender is like self survival Also, it s astonishing how scientists go along believing gender has a biological basis and not investigate it fully Probably for the reason, as Gina suggests, it benefits this predominantly male sector that is the sciences, or STEM Science, Technology, Engineering, Medicine , a reality aptly described as neurosexism Gina also asserts the early 21st first century isgendered than ever and, while a fascinating opinion, I wished she providedevidence for this assertion Finally, be aware of the audiobook Although well read, I feel I missed out on a lot of important figures, graphs, photos, scans etc Also, it can be, at times, very scientific for an audiobook and it would be better to have the scientific terms acronyms spelt out on paper so I could look them up Technical issues aside, though, it s a must read for everyone

  7. Lona says:

    Stereotypes could be straitjackening our flexible, plastic brains So, yes, challenging them does matter Gina Rippon Gina Rippon is a neuroscientist and wants to debunk the myth of the female brain with her book She wants to make people aware of what neurosexism is and how it developed, why we should check sources of information better and what neurotrash is books like Why Men Don t Listen and Women Can t Read Maps She points out, how some of the evidences that female male brains Stereotypes could be straitjackening our flexible, plastic brains So, yes, challenging them does matter Gina Rippon Gina Rippon is a neuroscientist and wants to debunk the myth of the female brain with her book She wants to make people aware of what neurosexism is and how it developed, why we should check sources of information better and what neurotrash is books like Why Men Don t Listen and Women Can t Read Maps She points out, how some of the evidences that female male brains exist where debunked long ago and how they appear again all the time, like in the game Whack a Mole as facts That the science in this field is like an iceberg All the outcomes that proof the female brain are the top The rest will be less publicised or cited by the media, even if it s the bigger part of the iceberg, that s invisible She does not deny certain differences in general, but she shows us, that stereotypes can be toxic and that nurture and education is a big issue Some people may ask why it s so important It s mostly about how to rise your child that toys matter, for example Lego is a better training for a brain than a doll People often tell girls very early, that they will be less good in logical thinking and mathematics, that they should focus on being good naturred empaths, because their brain is made for being a carer mother whatever They won t be raised for being scientists, their environment makes them believe that they aren t even interested, because being nice, beautiful and social is, what a girls brain wants And that s one of the reasons why women are underrepresented in certain occupational groups and that society clings to their stereotypes Depression is one of many things that can result from the problem I just can say, that my own mother wanted me to be a nice little girl When I got home from school with a plastered arm one of her good advices was to actlike a girl , act like I d beinterested in beauty than in science or books For some people violence against girls is justified, if they don t act like girls For some people in general violence against others who don t fit in stereotypes or binaries seems to be totally okay And that s just another sad result of the whole thing about the gendered brain And maybe for some children, girl, boy or enby it s not violence, but not being able to fulfill their dreams, not being able to be who they want to be It doesn t matter it s an important and interesting topic and I would absolutely recommend that book to everyone who wants to break out of the status quo and ask themselves if we couldn t just move on as science does in oh so modern 2019

  8. Ben says:

    This is a tough one to rate for me because, whilst whole heartedly agreeing with it s message and outlook, I didn t realise that s what it was getting at for the majority of the book It got off to a bad start when in the introduction it says that because, traditionally, the default pronoun to refer to someone of indeterminate gender in a study for example had always been he or s he at best, then the author was going to redress the balance by using she where possible When there s perfectly go This is a tough one to rate for me because, whilst whole heartedly agreeing with it s message and outlook, I didn t realise that s what it was getting at for the majority of the book It got off to a bad start when in the introduction it says that because, traditionally, the default pronoun to refer to someone of indeterminate gender in a study for example had always been he or s he at best, then the author was going to redress the balance by using she where possible When there s perfectly good gender neutral pronouns out there like they them, this came across as either ignorant, petty, or as biased as previous studies none of which you want tainting your serious academic information This isn t helped by 80% of the book seemingly treating gender as a binary and devoting most of its time to proving that there isn t a scientific difference between male and female brains It came as a genuine shock that in the conclusion the author finally suggests that gender might actually be a spectrum not a binary, and emphasises the danger of a gendered world in reinforcing that For a message this important to only occur at the end of quite a long book, after being masked under a lot of writing that came across very us vs them, it does it a real disservice Partly it s my own fault for not paying enough attention to the subtitle of the book, and for having too high an expectation that a book on gender in 2019 would start where this one leaves off rather than take 400 pages to get there It s a shame, because all of that aside, the book is really well written and eloquently conveys a lot of information to thoroughly debunk the female brain myth and the centuries of bias that accompany it Maybe my real problem with it is that it s still necessary to retread all of this stuff in a supposedly modern world, but then again looking around in 2019 there s definitely a resurrgence of outdated, unfounded, dangerous ideas That said, if it managed to make someone who agreed with it s message entirely think it was heavily biased and potentially untrustworthy before revealing its hand, then I don t see it winning over anyone who strongly disagrees with the sentiment Ultimately I think it probably comes down to the circles you roll in how much you ll get out of it If you re still surrounded by people who think men and women are genetically unequal then this book is important and a great resource to gather strength from to demonstrate how maybe they re wrong If, however, you reached this conclusion a long time ago and are interested in knowingabout the full range of gender and any modern science related to it then is a lot of pages with little reward

  9. Jane says:

    Oh, to be able to cull through research, make sense of it all, pull together the themes and the best practices and the drivel, and with a touch of humor and a ton of fantastic writing, turn it into a beach read um, caveat that I also read War and Peace on the beaches of Malta one summer everything closed at 1 PM so we could only really work on our research projects in the mornings Bottom line Instead of a binary notion of brain differences, the differences exist along continuum s with con Oh, to be able to cull through research, make sense of it all, pull together the themes and the best practices and the drivel, and with a touch of humor and a ton of fantastic writing, turn it into a beach read um, caveat that I also read War and Peace on the beaches of Malta one summer everything closed at 1 PM so we could only really work on our research projects in the mornings Bottom line Instead of a binary notion of brain differences, the differences exist along continuum s with considerable gender overlap Only about 6% of us have stereotypical male or female brains The rest of us are a mosaic Early reports from brain imaging of differences in areas such as spatial manipulation of objects or verbal skills seem to disappear when you control for who spends the most time gaming or which babies mothers speak most to.Neuroplasticity is a fact Our brains respond to our environments and the stereotypes around us This book is a clarion call to bring to light how the status quo benefits from pink brain, blue brain stereotyping and how those of all genders lose finding their paths to full potential I found nothing, on the other hand, that contradicted Carl Jung s framework of two preference patterns in criteria for decisions There is evidence that some of us arelogical, someempathetic However, the differences don t sort to gender

  10. Frances says:

    Well that was Illuminating