More on brain differences between the sexes

Uh, huh. Why do my eyes glaze over when I see 'studies' like this? Usually...no, always, they are merely ad hoc crap designed to drum up some biological justification for bigotry against men.

For starters, there is so much bullshit science out there characterizing what men and women *are* and *are not* that these dimwits are trying to explain behavioural differences that for the most part don't exist.

Secondly, they make a completely unjustified link between greater proportional anatomical size and increased functional activity. For all they know, the relationship could be inverse.

Thirdly, they claim that there may be two kinds of human brains (let's see the stats on how well male and female brains segregate), but I wouldn't be a bit surprised to find that there are a lot more than just 2 kinds of brains.

Didn't Hitler commission these types of studies to justify genocide?

I actually see only one MAIN difference: the female brain is 20% smaller than the male one, and consequently has lower intellectual capabilities.

----------------------------------------------------
Single men is the only social group benefited from feminism.

It's a huge step up from the perpetual feminist gobbledeegook that claims there are no differences and that men simply need to learn to be more like women. Viva le difference'!

Read Moxon's "The Woman Racket" for some fascinating sex differences.

notably the bigoted sexists that are now running most universities in the USA - a result of sex discrimination.

oregon dad

One thing this book's author Steve Moxon mentions, that I don't see reference to in this article, is that women's brains have more connective tissue, i.e. different parts of the brain being "networked", whereas men's brains show separated locales of "high intensity". Moxon goes on to say that this makes sense in light of men's highly-focused thinking and behaviour versus women's social networking. (it also says the two types of tissue are different in color and I think it said different in consistency too. Or at least the color which shows up on imaging, which may be due to it's consistency - do you know Tom? I'm too lazy to go find the book right now.)

Note however: social networking does not mean better workplace cooperation. It's two different animals. In fact, men are better at workplace team-building.

-ax

I know what you mean, Scottie. There is nearly always an unspoken sub-text: "there are differences between male and female brains (and the female brain is better...)"

You see hints of it again in this article. The differences that are highlighted are chosen because they imply (but of course do not prove) some kind of female superiority. And there is a decided pro-female slant to the whole thing.

Then look at who are invited to comment: out of six people, they include Rosie Boycott (a feminist), Philip Hodson (in my view one of the most vicious male-hating manginas on the planet. I have proof); a female body language analyst (oh, yeah), and Natasha Walter (another feminist).

Why can't these studies be reported honestly and objectively? Why does the truth scare them so much?

Civilisation: man's greatest, and most unappreciated, gift to women

Does anyone know when feminist pig Simone de Beauvior died? The reason I ask is because she's the one who said gender is "socially constructed", or at least the female gender: "One is not born a woman - one becomes a woman"

If she died less than say a few decades ago (not going to give my age here), I may during my lifespan have seen us advance from "purely socially constructed" to "born innately different" during my lifetime. Of course that also assumes ev. psych. becomes the accepted paradigm, which I think it eventually will.
-ax

Scottie,

Remember that the writer is popularizing the idea and thus will blow it out of proportion, that is, the idea that the two brains are different. I'm sure the researchers themselves would acknowledge that there are far more similarities than differences.

But yes of course the sub-text you mention is there. And yes, people are already starting to seize on this stuff to push fascist theories about the superiority of women, etc. Here's my take on it: the most influential feminists, i.e. the ones that count, seem to be for the most part holding back to see what happens with ev. psych. On the one hand the natural urge is for them to fight it, since they have been saying gender is socially constructed. On the other hand they realize they can't, in the long run, deny irrefutable scientific evidence, so they are waiting to see if ev. psych. becomes the accepted paradigm and if so, they can use it to push an even more fascist agenda. If at this early stage they loudly discredit the new science,they will seem less credible later if they try to use it to their advantage.

-ax

Ax I think that Moxon spoke of men having considerably more gray matter which had more to do with processing power while women had more white matter which had more to do with infrastructure and connectivity. I wish more people would read that book. It's up there with Farrell and Nathanson/Young. It's a good one. The dominance hierarchy material was worth the price of the book.

Actually a well-informend MRA need only read Nathanson and Young, and Moxon - Moxon covers a lot of the same territory as Farrell. It's still good to read Farrell though, to get the "human touch".

I think if Moxon is right, some of what Farrell and and Jack Kammer say is effectively useless. For example there would probably never be a "gender transition movement" as Farrell describes it. Also it will always be the case that boys ask girls out, at least for the first date, with the reverse rarely ever happening.

-ax

Does anyone knows who said:

After year of research, I concluded that the brain of a man (male) has an average weight aprox. of 1,350 grams.
Meanwhile , the brain of a woman (female) has an average weight of 1,250 grams .
Based on this, I argued that the woman has less intelectual capabilities than man .

Note
When he died ,he donated his brain to science...
The autopsy determined that his brain had a weight of 1,245 grams
Less than the average weight for a standar brain of a woman

besides, what does that prove? On the one hand there is an average of many samples, on the other an individual case. But actually, with your argument, you have painted yourself into a corner - since you seem to be implying that his theory was wrong, one could say that his mistake in thinking was due to his woman-size brain.

-ax

?