|
on the left posted:Are any feminists at odds with the strong assertion that women and men's brains are fundamentally different? goatse.cx posted:If some self-proclaimed 'feminist' deny the empirical fact of sexual dimorphism on some dumbass political ground then they're probably not worth listening to. What exactly is a "fundamental" difference? How large does a difference in brain structure have to be to be counted as "fundamental", and must it be present from birth, or can it develop as a child is socialized into society? I'm not aware of any feminists who would deny the empirical fact of dimorphism,* but to say that this difference is "fundamental" implies a value judgment about its importance. Some feminists might say that the empirical differences are too small to be considered "fundamental". Some feminists might say that the differences are large enough to be considered, but are the product of socialization and are thus transient and changeable rather than "fundamental". Some feminists might say that sexual dimorphism in brain structures is "fundamental", and that society should recognize and account for these differences. I am not a neuroscientist, so I am not sure which of these models most accurately reflects reality. But I think it's worth remembering that earlier generations of racists made strong assertions about fundamental difference between races, based on the empirical fact of difference in skin color, hair texture, and so on. It turns out that these people were letting their political ideas about white supremacy cloud their scientific judgment. The empirical differences they saw were (A) totally unimportant and/or (B) the result of societal factors, rather than fundamental biological ones. As I said, I don't really know the brain science, and I'm not saying it's inherently sexist to speculate about this stuff. I just think we need to be especially careful about avoiding the same error that previous generations made. Fake edit: actually, I think many feminists would conceptualize biological sex as a continuum rather than a dichotomy. "Male" and "female" are not closed boxes, but two poles around which most individuals cluster. There are various kinds of intersex person living in the middle - what does "sexual dimorphism" mean to someone with an XXY makeup? But I don't think any feminists would deny that most individuals have most of the characteristics of either "male" brain structure or "female" brain structure, which seems like the spirit of your question. (Again, not a neuroscientist, if someone is please correct me.)
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2014 08:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 18:18 |
|
|
Pussy Cartel posted:Neuroscience time! Thank you for that! I feel like there's so much theory and social science that's going to be completely upended in a generation or two when we understand the brain better
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2014 05:06
|
|