RE: The 70-year Cognitive Puzzle That Still Divides The Sexes
As usual, an interesting post. While as a group one gender may outperform or under-perform another in a specific area, that information is meaningless when it comes to an individual. As soon as policy or judgment is formulated based on perceived group metrics, mistakes are going to be made. To make it personal (as ruth-girl did, I'll follow her lead): I have very poor spatial visualization skills. Not for a guy, or girl--but for anyone. However, I had a natural talent for geometry in high school. The proofs were self-evident to me. I actually corrected the text book. Given my very poor spatial visualization skills, no one ever would have predicted this.
As an individual, I surprise. That's my point about gender neutrality. Whatever distinctions may be perceived between groups, how does that advance our understanding of the individual? What does this tell us that we can use, in a practical sense? Making predictions about behavior based on gender imposes expectations on individuals. That doesn't work to the advantage of the individual or society. Forget about gender. It won't help you to know anything about me, that's for sure.
Again, an interesting post got me looking up articles on the relationship between geometry and spatial visualization. Yep--there is supposed to be a relationship. Go figure.
I'm one of those people who value research for its own sake. Often called 'basic research', you never know what practical benefit might come out of it. I give an example of how a gender difference might be helpful in this post, in the 'Blood and Brains' section (the relevant paragraph starts with "The fact that estrogen levels influence female brains, and all that this implies, would create unfair treatment if left unacknowledged.", but the whole section must be read to be understood.)
Personally, I don't want anyone compensating for a possible deficit due to hormone fluctuations that may or may not occur. I think women's cycles have been over-studied because these cycles are so conspicuous. There are long-standing religious taboos associated with these cycles, because some of the physical effects can be intrusive. But, as a woman who doesn't want special consideration for anything, I ask everyone, please ignore hormone fluctuations. We all have issues unique to our lives that we have to deal with. Men have cycles too, but we don't know much about them because there isn't a long history of socioreligious significance associated with these fluctuations. And they're not highly visible (although men's behavior may be affected by them).
I love to know about the brain and hormones. I like to understand myself and the people around me, because understanding is good and it does help us to deal with each other. What I don't think is helpful is any sort of compensatory treatment, assessment, evaluation, etc. based on hormone fluctuations, for men or women.
As I became a productive member of society (that is, I went to work), one of the things I noticed that divided me from my male colleagues was their perception that I would somehow receive special consideration. I had to work hard to prove that I neither expected nor would accept any sort of accommodation because of my gender. This was a physically challenging work environment, but my attitude was, if I can't do the job, I don't belong in it. This was the only way for me to be considered "equal" by my colleagues.
What I did notice was that drawing attention to my gender compromised acceptance.
Science is wonderful. Knowledge is important. But in the real world, emphasizing the difference between men and women as a group just makes things harder for women. At least that's my experience. And I bring that to your discussion.
I can see that drawing attention to gender differences could lead to more discrimination against women in the workplace. Spatial ability is relatively easy to conceptualize and measure, which can help to create super clear results like in the water level experiment. It’s much more difficult to assess more subjective skills that woman might be better at, like some aspects of communication.
From what I’ve read, spatial skills are likely to get less and less important in the workplace, as more and more physical work gets automated.
I agree, some important qualities cannot be measured as easily as spatial visualization. Resilience, for example, is a trait women overall tend to have in greater abundance (or so the studies seem to show) than men. While this has been considered with reference to longevity, it is a quality that affects adaptation in all environments. That's just one example of something unquantifiable that can affect performance in everyday life. I think the brain is a new frontier...we're just on the threshold of understanding its complexity. I look to the work of pioneer neuroscientists such as Thomas Insel to lead the way toward understanding the relationship between the brain and behavior. Fascinating subject. That's why I keep reading and commenting :)
Don't know if this relates to resilience per se, but men do commit suicide 4-5 times more than women. I think they might just generally take things to heart more easily/deeply (unlike the stereotype would have it), and have extreme reactions, e.g. violence, be it against others or against oneself.
Never thought of it that way... certainly could be a reflection of resilience. Men also don't handle loss as well as women--death of a long-time partner and break-up of long-term relationships. May be another reflection of resilience (statistically).
Yup, I know that first-hand!
You know I'll be looking up articles on the fluctuation of male hormones... :)
It's true, there's even a best time of the day to exercise (for men)! Around 4 or 5 PM I think.
You have an amazingly balanced perspective...it keeps me reading. Thanks :)
Hey @agmoore
Here's a tip for your valuable feedback! @Utopian-io loves and incentivises informative comments.
Contributing on Utopian
Learn how to contribute on our website.
Want to chat? Join us on Discord https://discord.gg/h52nFrV.
Vote for Utopian Witness!
Thank you for appreciating my comment. I joined Utopian-io on discord but don't code, so can't contribute much. I've been reading posts, because much of it is interesting.
I will go to the website. If I can contribute I will. My science information is mostly driven by curiosity and persistent research. It is gratifying to be acknowledged by your community. Makes me want to work harder. Thank you, again.