It's not brains (and the other stuff you listed) that makes the differences between men and women apparent. Apart from the obvious, (boobs and bits) its how each individual is treated by members of the opposite sex. If you knew a 20 year old female, you would act a certain way around her. Lets say, that female then left town and you didn't see them for six years. By the time they returned to town, they had changed into a male (by dress or by surgery, you choose). You would automatically treat them differently because of the way you have been brought up to treat men and women differently. @Swiveltaffy nature vs nurture argument. Right this very moment, I can honestly say nature wins every time, but that doesn't mean it's always right or good.
I'd say that they both play a significant role, however, I'd probably put more stock in nurture, on average at least, unless one suggests that the nature of nurture is reliant on nature, which seems fair.
OK, I'll explain from my point because I also think a lot depends on age. I adopted two kids. Half brother/sister. One was 6, one was 22 month. They are now 15 and 12. They were in a drug filled environment until they were 4 and 10 weeks, they then went into care for just under 2 years, then they came to me and hubs. By the time they came to me and hubs, nature had already instilled in the 6 year old, how life was 'supposed' to be. The baby, we managed to get to him just in time to change the nature of his upbringing although half of his mind had already been "hardwired". It also didn't help that he had been born as high as a kite due to being on drugs while he was in his birth mother's tummy. After 10 years of nurturing with us, that's a hell of a lot longer time than either of them have been with anyone else, the eldest is an absolute nightmare. She is like a carbon copy of her birth mother. There has already been a number of incidents over the past two years that have cost me more than sleepless nights and I can definitely see some kind of addiction to drugs or alcohol on the horizon, even though that's not been part of her life for at least 12 years. Nature did the damage in those first 4 years of life and (according to various professionals) there's not a single thing I can do about it. Laddo, on the other hand, stands a chance as he came to us when he was 22 month old. He has no memory of his birth-parents or his life in care, but the same professionals have said he might go the same way. Nature wins. Not always good and not always for the better, but nature wins.
Yes, I'd say that nature can win; however, I think nature is what is utterly uncontrollable by the individual. Essentially, once a baby is born, from this point out, it's all nurture. This is how I've understood it, at least. Nature is genetics and things such. For instance, the 4-10 weeks of drug-filled-environment -- this, I'd think, would be considered nurture. I could be wrong, and if I've misrepresented what you've said, correct me.
Apologies, one was 4 years and one was 10 weeks. But yes, I understand what you mean. Yes those drug filled first years could have been attributed to nurture but then, surely, the following 12 years of good nurturing would dismiss the bad nurturing and the child would be fine ... That's why I mentioned the ages. There is a stage, between being born and about 3 years old, where our brains wire themselves up and will stay wired that way for the rest of our lives. Obviously, things change over time as we grow and develop our understanding of our world but the basic subconscious issues, the necessities are ingrained at that age and the way they are wired, is in response to our environment at that time (regardless of whether it's good or bad).
Yeah, I completely agree. The effects of early nurturing can have profound affects on us. This really gets into a question about how much authority we have over our "selves." Early experiences are paramount, though. The worst part is never knowing what will affect someone the most. A life-changing experience can happen from a simple one-sentence exchange; you just never know. It's tough.
Absolutely! At the time the children came to us, we were told that with good nurturing in a loving, safe environment, the eldest (a girl) would be absolutely fine. After ten years, I've now just been told that she will probably never be able to form meaningful relationships and will carry her anger issues and attachment issues to name but a few, with her for the rest of her life. I was also told that no one could predict an outcome for laddo, (he was the one born high) except to say that if he was ever out with a group of friends (post 18yrs) and they decided to try smoking a joint, he would be the most likely one of the group to smoke another one which would then lead to cocaine and heroine use as his body would remember the sensation from when he was constantly high between birth and 10 weeks old. (she breast fed him. He went into care at 10 week and then started cold turkey at 11 week old) As laddo is only 12 at the minute, I'm sincerely hoping he never gets the chance to dabble in weed (or anything else). He has all his fingers and toes and is extremely intelligent from an acedemic POV and regularly hacked into the internet at primary school, although he's rubbish at art and his handwriting skills are worse that a Doctors. On the plus side, I never have trouble getting medication down him!
Thanks. I hope not too but then, I'm not the first person in this kind of situation and I know I won't be the last. xxx
I have trouble talking about my feelings and I'm a woman. I wasn't encouraged to express them as a child. Kids picked on me and if I cried, it got worse. I learned not to cry.
Well, I guess I was getting at "How does one settle the nature v. nurture debate?" Is nature the winner? Is nurture the winner? A blend? Can we know? My vagueness wins again.
lol, you are really totally wrong read a book actually done by a psychologist using research from real experiments Why Gender Matters: What Parents and Teachers Need to Know about the Emerging Science of Sex Differences it has over 130 reviews and 4.5 stars so i think it is both good an reliable by the reviews then after you read this and get educated on the point i was making we can discuss it then toodles
lol, um, okay., again do some research. having different brains, ears and eyes is a huge part, along with hormones and along with how we are raised. Why Gender Matters: What Parents and Teachers Need to Know about the Emerging Science of Sex Differences
If I may, I would like to interject with a comment about how the topic of this thread was handled by Woman’s Day magazine where I worked as an editor for near two years. The company had several staff writers and editors who would be assigned varying assignments to either screen certain topics or solicit submissions. The men and women editors often came to brick wall stand offs when they were assigned to the same assignment. It goes without saying that a magazine issue has a limit restriction of how many words an article or writing assignment can use. In the end, it got to the point where our managing editor would have to step in and breakup the stand off. Typically, our female editors favoured the more emotional style of wordy writing where, and this included myself, had a tendency to strive to get to the point as quickly as possible, with little excessive wording obstruction to slow down the process. What eventually happened was that the editing jobs at Woman’s Day were changed to follow a rule where only a male –or- a female editor could edit submissions or writing assignments, but not as a male/female team. Today, there are no male editors at Woman’s Day (as far as I know at this time). In fact, this can be said for most female targeted magazines or periodicals. There is indeed a marked difference of how a woman will view, decipher and describe a situation or a scene compared to a male’s POV. A man’s brain is wired to be direct and deal with a situation with limited emotion. Thankfully, a woman balances this out by her emotional viewpoint to give the world a balanced summary of our lives. Is a man's and a women's brain wired differently? Most definitely and I am great believer that these two counter imbalances work together to balance each other.
Guess the men and women in my family all got the wrong plumbing then. At our ages, don't think surgery looks too appealing. Dang...
This certainly appears to be true of the women that Woman's Day hired or that sought employment at Woman's Day, versus the men that Woman's Day hired or that sought employment at Woman's Day. I don't think that you can assume that it's universal. It does appear that more women than men were prepared to tolerate the emotional style of writing demanded by the magazine, but that's not the same as saying that that's the style that they preferred or would choose to write if it were not demanded.
Since you claim to be educated on the point you were making, can you tell us why we should believe him when he himself has noted that some of his methods have no scientific merit? Link: http://web.archive.org/web/20110511195545/http://www.whygendermatters.com/ Perhaps you can also answer this critique that his use of brain imaging was also invalid. Link: http://fora.tv/2010/10/02/Cordelia_Fine_Delusions_of_Gender
I haven't read the book you linked to. However, gender is a medical topic, and I'm a doctor, so I have a lot of knowledge and experience in this matter and my opinion stated above is in keeping with the official stance of my profession. Our profession is evidence-based and strongly ethics driven and there's little place for unsubstantiated claims. So we do our best to consider all perspectives, before reaching a reasonably unified view that is the basis for best medical practice we guarantee patients. We regularly revise our views, as new evidence comes in and is evaluated. Not all evidence is created equal, as I offered above. I appreciate you feel that I am wrong, that is your right.
I don't need to because on this, I speak from experience. Most of what I say is based on experience, not theories or someone else's theories and if I don't have experience, then I'll keep my mouth shut.
Mr. Spock, not Dr. Spock, mind you, had a profound reply which is apt for this thread. Kirk had asked how Spock's cadets would respond to real duty. Spock's reply is still one of my favourite quotes. "As with all things, each according to their gifts." There is no hard and fast way to define male or female writing. With so many exceptions to the rule, how can one even define the rule? People are too diverse, no two identical, more unique than even fingerprints and DNA. Archetypes of writing styles are the closest one can come to defining writing. Gender and environment play a role in syntax and vocabulary, but a large part is driven by the personality of the individual. To assume a writer's gender leaves one staring into a crevasse, the diversity can be that great even within families. My older sister is a vet and her style is akin to Hemingway and C. S. Lewis, very stark. I got my degrees in English and my style is colloquial, roundabout, and emotive, all given traits of female writing, yet until recently, some folks in the forum thought I was male just because of my screen name. How much do we attribute to the look of a book, an author's name, or lack thereof, even before we begin to read? The brain is given to almost instantaneous assumptions about the surrounding environs and mediums. In the abstract construct of the written word, the brain reaches for identifying characteristics in order to classify the voice. Without visual cues, it resorts to a primal and elementally simplistic tool, male or female. It is a coping mechanism that allows us to connect with the writer, an attempt at empathy, so to speak. Some folks view the world in a linear pattern, some are lateral, and still others are just plain literal. There are countless ways a single sentence can be interpreted, dozens of nuances to the same word. Every perspective will be different. There will, of course, be similarities in observations, but this is a given; inherent classification is a primal instinct hardwired into the brain. One looks for the traits, comparing and contrasting with their own experiences, concepts, and expectations. Yet the question remains: How do you define the incorporeal? The brain's answer male or female. Personally, I believe writing is defined by the individual, not their gender, it shouldn't be a battle.
I may be repetetive on this one but as regards women-writers' brevity, Ursula K. Le Guin does a remarkably good job in avoiding over-describing and lengthy dialogues. But again this is my experience with the author, a fantasy one, for that matter. Another one would be Carol Berg, who wrote an Ich-form fantasy trilogy with a male MC. The woman-writer insights into that MC male slave were very impressive; what's interesting, come to think of that, is that in her books the main protagonists are mostly men, women being in minority but with some very influential characters among their ranks.
Excellent new book by a writer and psychologist Cordelia Fine called 'Delusions of Gender', in which she is de-bunking pseudoscientific myths regarding 'big inborn differences between male and female brains'.
