Research shows male/female brain differences

[hexaemeron]

link removed

 

See, ladies (and gay boys)! Can't blame your man! It's biology.

[Seraphim]

I have always known we were different. How can we NOT be? Differing hormones in different amount,etc etc, yes we ARE going to be a little different. However we are made to compliment each other.

[FathomFear]

The article, like most, is incredibly heterosexist.

 

"If testosterone were beer, a 9-year-old boy would be getting the equivalent of a cup a day. But a 15-year-old would be getting the equivalent of nearly two gallons a day. This fuels their sexual engines and makes it impossible for them to stop thinking about female body parts and sex."

 

"All that testosterone drives the "Man Trance"-- that glazed-eye look a man gets when he sees breasts. As a woman who was among the ranks of the early feminists, I wish I could say that men can stop themselves from entering this trance. But the truth is, they can't. Their visual brain circuits are always on the lookout for fertile mates. Whether or not they intend to pursue a visual enticement, they have to check out the goods."

 

This is really nothing more than pseudo-science to justify stupid behavior.

[yeawutever]

Thank you for sharing that article because it does makes sense....

[Day_Walker]

I do not think that this is actually Pseudo-Science instead I it is clear that the article is written from a heterosexual standpoint. That standpoint does not refute the information contained within the article. The article is clearly explaining to non-scientific person the conclusions from the research on the male and female brain.

[hexaemeron]

The article, like most, is incredibly heterosexist.

 

"If testosterone were beer, a 9-year-old boy would be getting the equivalent of a cup a day. But a 15-year-old would be getting the equivalent of nearly two gallons a day. This fuels their sexual engines and makes it impossible for them to stop thinking about female body parts and sex."

 

"All that testosterone drives the "Man Trance"-- that glazed-eye look a man gets when he sees breasts. As a woman who was among the ranks of the early feminists, I wish I could say that men can stop themselves from entering this trance. But the truth is, they can't. Their visual brain circuits are always on the lookout for fertile mates. Whether or not they intend to pursue a visual enticement, they have to check out the goods."

 

This is really nothing more than pseudo-science to justify stupid behavior.

 

She's a research fellow at the University of California at San Francisco. I am pretty sure she's not being overtly heterocentrist. She's just writing for the majority of readers. In homosexual brains, the desire for the same sex is the same as the desire for the opposite sex in heteros. No biggie.

[Seraphim]

She's a research fellow at the University of California at San Francisco. I am pretty sure she's not being overtly heterocentrist. She's just writing for the majority of readers. In homosexual brains, the desire for the same sex is the same as the desire for the opposite sex in heteros. No biggie.

 

Yes.........

[Night Pumpkin]

It has been my experience that women are the more sexual ones, just that they are better at hiding it. I have never overtly made sexual moves on a lady (I am committed to not having sex until marriage) but I have had an endless number of ladies make over sexual moves on me.

 

Maybe women just hide it better...

[MD Geist]

I think its biaist.

[hexaemeron]

I think its biaist.

 

What do you think it's biased? The study? Her presentation of the study's conclusions?

[Timebandit]

Be careful trusting the conclusions of Louann Brizendine too much.

 

In a peer rev iew in the esteemed magazine Nature regarding her book "The Female Brain" it was among other things said:

 

 

• "the book fails to meet even the most basic standards of scientific accuracy and balance"
   
  
• "is riddled with scientific errors", and "is misleading about the processes of brain development, the neuroendocrine system, and the nature of sex differences in general"
  

The review generally concludes that:

 

 

 

In Seed Magazine some of the author quote in her book says:

 

• My data don't speak at all to whether or not girls are compelled from an early age to attend to faces" (Erin McClure)
  
• "There is nothing in my study that seems to warrant this reference" (Ron Stoop).
  

She had a dubious claim on her book about how many words women spoke more than men. She had to remove this as she had no source for this claim (it did in fact contradict other research).

 

I am not saying, that all her claims are wrong. I just don't at all think she is a trustworthy source of such claims.

 

So please be more sceptic about hers (and other peoples) research in this area, as it is highly charged.

[hexaemeron]

Oh wow. I had no idea. Yes, in light of this, a healthy dose of pragmatic skepticism is definitely warranted. Thank you, TB, for doing the homework *I* should have done.

[Timebandit]

Be careful trusting the conclusions of Louann Brizendine too much.

 

In a peer rev iew in the esteemed magazine Nature regarding her book "The Female Brain" it was among other things said:

 

 

• "the book fails to meet even the most basic standards of scientific accuracy and balance"
   
  
• "is riddled with scientific errors", and "is misleading about the processes of brain development, the neuroendocrine system, and the nature of sex differences in general"
  

The review generally concludes that:

 

Like other popular books on the biology of human nature,

The Female Brain

has a rigid plot line: the foil of 'political correctness' against which the author wages a struggle for truth. We are told that the media, feminists, pointy-headed intellectuals and a vaguely specified 'culture' dogmatically insist that gender or racial differences in personality and behaviour are entirely cultural, an observation that is hard to reconcile with the volume and tone of media attention to the biology of gender and sexuality. [...]

 

 

Ultimately, this book, like others in its genre, is a melodrama. Common beliefs are recast as imperilled and then saved. Stark, predictable protagonists (an initial "cast of neuro-hormone characters" that reads like a guide to astrological signs) interact linearly with foreseeable results. The melodrama obscures how biology matters; neither hormones nor brains are pink or blue. Our attempts to understand the biology of human behaviour cannot move forward until we try to explain things as they are, not as we would like them to be.

 

 

In Seed Magazine some of the authors she quote in her book told the interviewer:

 

• My data don't speak at all to whether or not girls are compelled from an early age to attend to faces" (Erin McClure)
  
• "There is nothing in my study that seems to warrant this reference" (Ron Stoop).
  

She had a dubious claim on her book about how many words women spoke more than men. She had to remove this as she had no source for this claim (it did in fact contradict other research).

 

To sum up, I don't at all think she is a trustworthy source of gender research.

 

So please be more sceptic about hers (and other peoples) research in this area, as it is highly charged.

[thejigsup]

This explains a lot! I always wondered why men were so weird!

[Cognitive_Canine]

This is the author of the "Female Brain"?!?!

 

I hated that book and it is far from scientific. I knew that there was something not right with this article.

 

However, I did laugh at "Man trance" because I've gotten that from my boyfriend and it is a good phrase for it. But, I get that way too with him.

[pinkelephant]

Old news. Have you heard of the one where the gay male brain is more similar to the female brain than a straight man's brain? That's old news too but I'm not sure what to make of it. Maybe it means gay men are smarter, hah. Kidding.

[greywolf]

I don't agree with the article. Women take glances at other men just as much as men glance at women. The difference is that women are more discreet.

 

And I don't really think that men think about sex more often than women do. I read some statistics on a kinsey survey once that said 54% of men think of sex every day or several times a day, and my first thought was, "only 54%??" I don't know any women that don't think about sex everyday.

[Cognitive_Canine]

I don't agree with the article. Women take glances at other men just as much as men glance at women. The difference is that women are more discreet.

 

And I don't really think that men think about sex more often than women do. I read some statistics on a kinsey survey once that said 54% of men think of sex every day or several times a day, and my first thought was, "only 54%??" I don't know any women that don't think about sex everyday.

 

54%?

 

If I think about sex between 9-5...I'm done. I can't get anything done today. I'm a brick wall. I zone out and have a hard time concentrating.

 

I think about sex most days. And, when I do, I think about it multiple times through the day and it's typically in the back of my mind during that time.