'Different but equal' is a popular clarion call nowadays, since pushing the superiority agenda has fallen out of favor. It may be true, however, the interesting thing is how so many people advance it as a non-problematic thing to say i.e. as if it has no consequences and hence shouldn't be controversial. It very much has consequences. You can, for instance, quite readily claim that the female deficit in engineering is a direct consequence of 'different but equal', even without claiming that engineers are superior. But is it? Or is it due to cultural or sociological factors? From the other side, women could claim that the male deficit in nursing (one of the few jobs expected to grow massively in our automated future) is due to men simply being not suited to it. Both claims being 'on average', of course, so as to inure them anecdotal counterclaims. Whether you think 'different but equal' is true or not, and I'm not arguing one way or the other on that, it's important that we accept that it ISN'T some innocuous claim that has no consequences.
@Mendicant Bias I'm not entirely sure, but you seem to be using the phrase 'different but equal' with the meaning of treating people equally even if there is an average difference between the sexes in some ability, which I agree is controversial (the differences-in-abilities part, not the treating-people-equally part). Although, even if there are detectable differences in _average_ ability in the kind of skills required to solve engineering problems, that wouldn't justify excluding anyone from pursuing a career in that field. What I'm actually talking about is something else though. My experience is that most people automatically interpret differences between the sexes as ordinal differences that involve men (on average) being better or worse on some scale than women. Proficiency in the kind of skills required to solve engineering problems would actually be an example of that rather than what I'm talking about, whereas differences in preferences between the sexes that lead them to pursue different kinds of jobs or activities would not be an ordinal difference. Men and women could have exactly the same level of competence in the various skills required to be a good engineer while having different views about whether that would be a fulfilling career. It seems to be true that men are on average more interested in pursuing jobs that are viewed as high-status and women are on average more drawn to jobs that are more social. Personally, the more social option seems like a more fulfilling life because the pursuit of high status often involves working long hours, sacrificing time with friends and family, and dying alone on an expensive sofa, but if men are disproportionately pursuing the high status option, they will always have more power over women (on average), which isn't good either. Excepting this problem, I think the goal we should be striving for is a society where everyone is allowed to pursue, and is encouraged to pursue, whatever they want to do, and that goal could in principle be satisfied without the sexes being equally represented in every field of work (depending on whether there are real differences between the sexes in preferences on average).
cavalrycome, that is probably the most eloquently I have ever seen this opinion expressed and I wish I more people see this the way you do and I wholeheartedly agree with every single point.
I don't understand why brain size is the leading hypothesis for how intelligent a creature is. Wouldn't brain *complexity* be more important? Why is it believed that the *volume* of a brain makes any difference? That's like saying: "My computer is bigger and requires more electricity than yours, therefore it's faster." We have smaller and faster computers than ever before, and they run on electrical signals, much like the brain. It's not a perfect comparison, but I don't see why we haven't learned from this anyway.
Octopus have a large brain to body ratio. They're very clever for sea creatures, but I would hardly put them on the same scale as great apes and humans.
They have lower body to brain ration. Also when you consider inteligence you need to understand that you are looking at it from your human perspective. Octopus intelligence for example could be something different your human brain cannot comprehend.
This is an old comment and I'm no expert but see the thing is, it's like with computers; the more you have to process, the more processing power you need. So if male brains are, on average, slightly bigger than female brains... and male bodies are, on average, slightly bigger than female bodies, that makes sense. Whales don't have bigger brains because they are smarter than us, they have bigger brains because they have much bigger bodies and you need something to manage all of that chonk, there's so much going on inside your body that the brain has to manage. I can't say whether or not there are significant differences in male and female human brains, but based on the information in this video it would totally make sense if our brains functioned more or less the same despite being different sizes, since they are both more or less adjusted to be the same relative to our own body size.
It's a bit like asking _"Are there Male and Female heights?"_ Most of the tallest people are men, and most of the shortest people are women. But around the averages the individual variation outweighs the group trends.
"But around the averages the individual variation outweighs the group trends" - this is a common remark, but it doesn't really mean anything much, beyond reminding us that averaging things clips off the extreme values. But human height is not really a good analogy, if the object is to demonstrate that human sexual dimorphism isn't a thing. Adult women span the range 4' 8" to 6'. There are virtually no women outside that range. Adult men span the range 5' to 6'6". There are virtually no men outside that range. Moreover the average male height is about two standard deviations above the female. Which means that only about 2% of women are taller than the average man. And only about 2% of men are shorter than the average woman. None of this proves anything about the brain of course, but height is not a good trait to show the lack of sexual dimorphism in humans. Using it shows that the standard of "no overlap at all" between the two populations is not a sensible standard. It excludes things - like height - which are plainly dimorphic.
i dont get the individual variation outweighs the group trends around the averages. Wouldn't saying around the averages mean that people would be more generic and similar to each other as thats the average, and the average is the grouping of people with the most similar traits and characteristics. Or am i misinterpreting this?
After I started hormones I feel differently but don't think differently. I still have the same likes and dislikes. What has changed is how I act in any given situation because how I feel about the situation. I'm sure my brain will be different in 5 years then it would be if I didn't start hormones.
Kristi Marie thank you for your insight, this is what i assumend, i guess you agree that the hormones won't change your sexual preference right? So what do you think where this oreference is if not in the hormones or (as the video claimed) the brain?
I don't think hormones will change your sexual preference. It might make you more comfortable accepting who you like. So, from the outside it could look like your sexual preferences changed but I don't feel like there are any fundamental changes to who you are attracted. There may be differences in the brain between males and females but I think it's more complicated then that. I feel like society plays a huge roles. I'm treated much more delicate now, men take time to help me with things that never would of happened when I was still a dude. It makes me wonder if I would be as independent as I am now, since I never would of needed to be in the 1st place. I really wonder about newborns brains, are they the same at birth and devlop differently as they get older due to society or is it because of what is predetermined by ones sex? Sorry kinda ranblmed at the end.
I hate people saying that he's trying to be politically correct, when it seems to me he's just trying to be clear and logical, and explain this science from the data that's been collected in an accurate way.
I know. Like, saying "We don't know yet" isn't exactly a crazy stance to take when it comes to neuroscience as we understand it so far. Very young field of study.
I feel like he was bouncing around his own questions because the answer doesn't fit the current social climate, else he would've said "Are male and female brains different: Yes, yes they are and we've known that for decades." But that's not something you can say these days even though it's true. Today the truth isn't as important as people's opinions and safe space and that's regrettable.
What data has been gathered on traits shows a significant overlap between sexes, so though females and males averages may have differences in certain traits, the differences found within groups so far are so large that even if the difference reaches statistical difference, those traits in a *random individual* can't be comfortably predicted just based on sex.
"every brain is unique"? Err...did you watch the same video? He specifically mentioned throughout the whole vid that there are differences between the sexes on average. We just aren't sure what causes them or what to make of them yet.
The part about how women are more often diagnosed with depression and anixety made me wonder how the study was concluded. Mainly because it's common to not socialize men into admitting mental health problems so I'm wondering if that has any bias.
And in women's lives, there is a lots of subconcious worry about sexual/physical safety which men generally do not need to feel. And level of it depends of the enviroment and influences that you are born in. That could explain how women are more prone to anxiety. (And I am sure that this is not full reason (it is just a theory) and I am sure that many people will be eager to deny that this has anything to do with it, but sometimes the reason could be the most simple one. It is not THAT long ago that women were property of a man and could been sold by their husband in England. Not legally. But that did not stop it happening.)
@@haroldlemar5569 just because men are socialized to not show weakness and therefore don't admit to any problems they may be having doesn't mean a women's problem is lesser or a joke, both can be equally true, it's not a competition. What's up with the 'feeling anxiety once a month thing' dude? Also women do actually live in a world where they are more at risk for danger and (mostly physical) harm
mmm whatcha say That’s the point I’m trying to make, they are equal. The obvious problem is that men’s mental state isn’t taking seriously. I’m not saying all women do this, but I’m talking about the ones that only do it for attention and overreact
I still don’t get why people are so angry about this? Are people mad because they are running out of excuses to be sexist? We are very alike; many of our differences are due to socialization.
Men and Women's brains are different, it has been shown by scientists. Our differences do not stop at the neck. In gender equalitarian countries the gap between genders in jobs, crimes, , personality, e.t.c has been shown to be higher than in non equalitarian
Moral Solution: Judge people as individuals, and not as representatives of their sex. You'll get more accurate results about someone if you do! Keep going science. You'll get there, but until then, let's just treat each other right and not worry about it.
Wish I could do that, but some people force their gender onto you. Idc what your gender is, if you're nice I'll be nice and try to respect your pronouns, but if you're mean why should I try to be nice and use words outside of my normal vocabulary. I know I SHOULD be nice but so SHOULD they, right? Why is the burden on me to accommodate them if they cant accommodate me? And I dont mean accommodate them by recognizing their gender identity as part of who they are, I mean accomodate their wishes for me to respect them. You cannot demand my respect or kindness, especially if you are not respectful or kind.
Bro true. Like my sexuality is based on many many things and not necessarily gender. I think we all have cultural compulsions to create gendered dichotomies in the way we think and perceive things
@Praise The Masculine Flames That would probably come from both society and the fact that people tend to see their group as more diverse and generalize the other. So, you, being a man, most likely interacts more with other men, and thus knows their nuances better than you know women's.
That would still put men ahead, so that's not gonna happen. They considered doing the same thing with gray matter, but the results didn't really agree with current year dogma so they're not widely publicized. The only reason size was ever even discussed was because it was so physically obvious.
@Rockstar Games Launcher Yup. Thing is, differences in brain structures imply differences in learning styles and methods to acquire knowledge. It's not like there aren't intelligent people with learning difficulties who accomplished much more than those without.
Peanutbudda A few problems: 1. Math has no relation to reality, 2: Science tries to use math to approximate reality, but will likely never perfectly describe reality.
Why are people so bitter in the comment section? Psychology and studies about nutritional biology are pretty similar in the way that each individual has their own differences, but generalizations can be made and more accurate conclusions can be drawn should we look into a person's individual characteristics more. It's just one variable isnt enough to draw conclusions about a person, but getting more of the puzzle pieces, the information, really help in analyzing a person.
Grew up with teachers constantly saying math and science were for boys and making me feel guilty for knowing all the answers. Made me hate my class. Umm still good at it and never got less than a B on math classes and was the only woman to pass the AP tests in my HS but I hate math class. It's sad.
Males in general tend to be better at tasks that involve mathematical abilities and spatial awareness,it's just a statistic,that's the main reason why men are generally more represented in jobs that require physical activity such as construction work for example.
@@Seageass01 , no , they aren't. They just happen to already have those jobs while women have been taught to go for jobs with the roles of care takers like nurses, teachers, social workers, etc. Not because they are statistically better at jobs with emotional labor for being women but because what society told them made them chose those careers that then show up in statistics as "preferred" by women and then people create the correlation that they must be at those jobs more because they are better at it than men... Which is not true. The same applies to men and math and spatial awareness.
@@Norimarisu : If there are mostly men working in technical fields I assure you there must be an underlying reason which is linked to anatomy and brain wiring,your statement does not have a point.
@@Norimarisu : I'm not saying that women lack technical competence but,looking at the big picture,it's undeniable that technology has always been,for the most part,a male domain,of course there are women engineers but they are a minority compared to the amount of men who are involved in this sector,try to visit a building site and see how many women are present.
@@Seageass01 , there reason is society, not biology. They thought the same things about most jobs before men were sent to war and women had to take their place in the workforce. They thought the same things about black people and jobs that weren't manual jobs For centuries women could not have jobs, houses under their name, loans, etc. so when they could finally have jobs they were only allowed the less threatening ones that would not deviate from their roles as care takers. They could not be doctors, they had to be nurses. They could not be lawyers , they had to be secretaries. Schools would not even admit them so how could they? Now we can all apply to the university of our choosing but it wasn't always like that. And it doesn't help that until recently boys grew up with the cool toys about building castles and doing slime while girls grew up taking care of dolls. The things that are taught to you growing up have a long lasting effect. Also, up until the 60s the tech field was full of women before men took over like they did with comic books and video games for like 40 years.
bigger is better if the reason one gets big is because of muscles; the strongest punch recorded was done by francis nganouu and he was a heavyweight fighter in ufc
I'm gonna agree with the fact that males and females are more alike than different, from a common sensical perspective and the statistics that this guy laid out for us. For the common sense part, I'm referring to sociology. If you're tought growing up that you're a boy, and because you're a boy, you have to be violent and like cars, then of course you're going to believe that and live by that. I'm a straight male, yet I can't go two second without telling my friends "I love you" or "you're a sweetie pie." The truth is, if men had different brains, I wouldn't be acting like that. If you just look in regular society, with your friends, they're all different and not roppes into one category of interests or behavior because they are female. At the end of the day, we are all human with different personalities and interests. How we got those is shaped by the world around us, growing up in specific ways, there's literally no other way to explain it. We are not a bunch of copy and paste droids, we are people with sentients and emotions all differing from person to person.
@Gao Zhan I don't think theres much evidence that prehistorical societies predominantly had matriarchies, while there is evidence some did I think mostly it was more patriarchal or didn't really have a clear leader. I dont think its impossible to just celebrate our diversity and what it contributed instead of hating on it, after all weve been getting so much better at it over time, and while I'm sure setbacks are bound to happen that general trend seems likes its continuing.
And beyond that, the rates of diagnosis. Men are pretty strongly disincentivised socially from admitting to emotion or vulnerability, as well as seeking help.
In a nutshell, males and females are more alike than they are different. But when most people think about how they're different, they think of the extreme outliers. There are plenty of women stronger than most men, but if you compare the strongest of men to the strongest of women, you'll see many more men. And this is what people think of when they compare differences. Not how most people are different, but how the most extreme of people are different.
"There are plenty of women stronger than most men" - it depends what you mean by "plenty." Obviously on a planet of 7 billion people, there will be millions of women stronger than some men. But in terms of percentages, other than number of testes, strength is just about the worst trait you could have picked to demonstrate overlap between the sexes. There's much much less overlap than for height. A recent study measured hand grip strength and classified by hand, sex and age. For all age groups the male average was at least 50% stronger than the female average. The average for males over 70 was still higher than the average for females aged 20-29. Almost all men are stronger than almost all women. If you wish to demonstrate that humans are not really very sexually dimorphic, you need to pick a different trait.
I mean they answer erything, they talk bout ladies having regions which are more thick and they also talk bout males having larger brains. And how basically these differences are pretty much insignificant once scaled to size and insignificant when tryna predict behavior. So differences exist but are very small. Not large enough to have complete certainty in every brain 🧠 but maybe large enough to invest money into it 👀.
"There are clear specific male and female characteristics, but most people are a collage of both" So in other words "there are no clear specificic male or female characteristics"
There are characteristics that they find MOST OFTEN in one sex's brain than another. However, if you look at hormones, males ALSO make estrogen, and females ALSO make testosterone, it's just that one sex tends to make more than the other. Like this: the midsaggittal plane of the corpus callosum TENDS to be larger in females than males. About 4x larger in comparison to the rest of the brain. Like he said, it could be because female brains are compensating for smaller size. However, they've found similar ratios in transgender people. Transwomen's tend to be comparatively larger, and transmen's tend to be comparatively smaller. All that being said, we still don't fully understand the brain yet, or how it all works to create individual personalities. We've barely scratched the surface.
@Robert what about your lie experience? you never see any actual life difference. men are doing the important stuff. eg, military, building and inventing. we havent seen any women doing much inventing since the last 4 decades women entered the workfield
What if certain brain processes make the male/female brain develop differently. Girls and boys grow and treated differently as well as put into roles that might change how their brain develops.
It does , Men have larger brains so their brain cells are far from each other , and women's are close together , This lead me to conclusion why Women may be more stubborn
Everyone is assuming that he's trying to avoid offending by giving vague answers, but has anyone considered that maybe the answer really is simply "We don't know."?
I think number of connections between neurons might be more important than size of the brain. So I think it might have more to do with synapses, which are actually a gap where neurotransmitters are released to and where they are received.
@ axons and dendrites don't require a lot of space. New neurites or new connections between existing ones form when we learn something. There is a saying: "neurons that fire together wire together" This 'wiring together' of neurons might be more important to intelligence than large brain size. Even if there were more neurons in a larger brain, which is not necessarily true, if they could not form connections, intelligence might be less in such a hypothetical larger brain.
SciShow you're all fantastic I feel like you explained the answer to this question very well! I'm sorry you have to deal with such a hellish comment section.
It's almost like everyone's DNA are 99.9% similar and biology has effects on psychology 🤔 who'd imagine that like every other animal humans have a psychological difference between sexes that even though it's just a slight one can make a difference on how we act... Hm beats me
@@joaogarcia6170 maybe you should actually listen to scientists instead of pretending your an expert for ones in your life. Social conditioning is not natural. And "evolutionary psychology" only exists to explain away what is already believed.
Also, women are more likely to report psychological symptoms and seek medical treatment for anything than men which is why the wellness industry markets predominantly to women. It isn't that women have more depression or anxiety, necessarily, it's that the practice of getting help is more acceptable for women.
Females are more likely to have depression VS males commit the most homicides. Why didn’t he mention this?? Interesting..... Meaning females internalize our emotions, vs Males externalize their emotions.
@@loveself6396 I agree on a large scale, but I think research shows that has more to do with gender roles and expectations than cerebral structure. I really hope we can get more work done on brain imagery to better study things like that, though! It's a pertinent observation you made!
If "gender" isn't synonymous with "biological sex" then please answer the following questions: 1. Sex Discrimination vs Gender Discrimination - what's the difference? 2. Gender Bias vs Sex Bias - what's the difference? 3. Sex Determination vs Gender Determination - what's the difference? 4. What's the word "gender" referring to in "Gender Pay Gap"?
Gender by definition is how one self-identifies, but the US still finds ways to twist that. Like state issued IDs have a "gender marker", which the government still thinks means sex.
@@polyesterShark _________ The process of saying "I 'identify' as a _________ . " is not gender. The 4 examples i gave are just normal every-day usages of the words, nothing about them is twisted into something they're not. Please explain what you have an issue with and why. 1 - 4. Better yet, have your Gender Studies or Sociology "professors" try to explain them for you and watch them squirm in their chairs.
We have to consider that certain life conditions during your development affect the development of your brain areas, and there are a lot of conditions in which only women typically grow in and certain conditions that only men typically grow in because of society's gender roles and expectations. So the differences may not be because of the sexual cromossomes, but because of the experience pattern during your development and what your environment requested of you.
@@RoddyPipersCorneas No , You know what I think? Environment, genes, personality, hormones, habits and mother tongue All determine your brain , Environment and nature are friends in our formation journey! Don't make them enemies
Francesca Neibel-Spruill Definitely! Why say something so shallow and simple as "-ish" or "sort of," when you can say the same thing in ten or more words, and sound like you mean anything significant at all! Scientific writing is an art form that specializes in expansive, technical jargon that has been stripped of emotionality and imbued with the existential angst to sound "knowledgeable" above all else.
The patient's family gathered to hear what the specialists had to say. "Things don't look good. The only chance is a brain transplant. This is an experimental procedure. It might work, but the bad news is that brains are very expensive, and you will have to pay the costs yourselves." "Well, how much does a brain cost?" asked the relatives. "For a male brain, $50,000, For a female brain, $2,000." Some of the younger male relatives tried to look shocked, but the men nodded in understanding, and a few actually smirked. Then the patient's daughter asked, "Why the difference in price between male brains and female brains?" "Oh, that's just a standard practice," said the head of the team. "Used brains cost less."
I once heard one of my my female coworkers tell this joke at a staff meeting: Why are men's brains so small? So they can fit into their penises. To which I said, "So by that logic, women have no brains at all." My boss (a woman) excused me from attending meetings for the rest of the year.
So true you can tell hes being careful cause if somethin like there are only two genders was said, all hell would break loose. Oh god the world we live in these days!!!
I thought women had more connections between the 2 hemispheres of the brain leading to a better grasp of emotional impact on logical thought & behaviour. If you ask a guy how he feels & he says “I don’t know”, it may be because he honestly can’t tell what he’s feeling
This statement is pretty biased,there are males who are good at discussing feelings and emotions and females who,on the contrary,come across as very blunt and unemotional,it really depends on the individual.
Another conclusion is that extremes of sizes of certain areas (very thin or thick) can be attributed to one Gender with very high probability, at least according to the graphs at 4:10 . This is in accordance with many findings on extreme behaviors in some directions by females and males. Correlations might be interesting :)
i can recommend the book "Testosterone rex" and "gender delusions" by Cordelia Fine! Really good scientific books debunking a lot of the myths we have about gender and so called "natural" differences.
Far left propaganda? There are differences between men and women and I really wish you dumbasses would just accept that. I'm not saying either of the 2 genders (yes, 2) are better than the other but acting like there aren't natural differences is stupid. Compare male humans to female humans and you will see the differences in how their brains function. Hell, compare a male animal to a female animal and you can clearly see they function differently.
I have two dogs, a female and a male. Their behaviours are pretty different cause of their hormones. My male dog is very aggressive to other male dogs, my female dog never fight with other dogs.. Then, the conclusion is that hormones really matter in males and females behaviour.
@@Rrrrahhhh You can take the whole of the animal kingdom if you wanted to, this is the result you'll get most of the time, and as of now, there's no reason to think that we're any different.
So what I don't understand is, how can you say there are only minute differences that may or may not be there, then say we have a mix of "female and male brains." If there is no pattern when you account for relative size, how would you say one brain is more female and one is more male?
they found certain key things that females are more likely to have, and found key things that men are more likely to have. most people on average have a mix of these, so we have bi-gendered brains.
That's actually how almost all characteristics work regarding almost any attempt to form categories of things. It's a messy problem that is easier to just gloss over. Basically, there are some traits where the mean is higher for males than females. So we assign a higher value to be more "male" and lower values to be more "female". But that's just the mean value. If you made ranges around those means that captured 95% of all people, there would be substantial overlap in observed values in males and females. So there are plenty of females that have higher values than males on a trait even though we label high values on that trait as more masculine. In fact, if the traits are not bound together by some underlying csusal link, it fairly quickly becomes unlikely that anyone will have all of their values in one trait correspond with the way that their sex indicates is more likely.
LOL An excellent example of how "ideology" trumps actual "science" in today's academia. Although he is technically correct in the matters he mentioned, he completely avoided mentioning differences that occur with the different sex-steroid hormones that influence male and female cognition and the different neural pathways in the brain affected by each. For a more detailed understanding reference actual neurobiologic studies on thje matter.
This is a well presented overview given the stickiness of the topic. There is a very real fear that investigations like these are really about trying to read the social created of differences into biology or politicizing the existence of differences as justification for oppression. It's a well based fear: even the most cursory history of science as a discipline shows that science has been instrumentalized this way for centuries, right up to the present. Basically my rule of thumb is if you are using contested differences to explain and justify inequality and oppression, odds are you are no longer in the realm of rationally objective science, but are in the domain of biased ideology instead. To view it otherwise is to take a eugenicist approach that believes there is indeed a biological causation and natural logic to hierarchy.
yes, but you can be as sceptical about everyone, who tells you, that everything is just the result of cultural influence. (btw even if so, the act to deconstruct those "traits" and to stigma anyone affected by it, is also not very tolerant and pretty discriminating, just fyi) also to mention: you can see that by all those gaussian curvatures of the spread of samples, there are always overlaps, but sometimes the not overlapping regions are bigger than the overlapping ones, which leads me to the following: it's assumably better to treat anyone as an individual and watch for theirs individualities, but when doing broader approaches and you don't factor in the significant differences for a whole group of a distinct sex, then your approach mistreats a whole lot more of people than those few individuals, which fall in between.
Literally just a bunch of people getting triggered and raging over feminists that don't even exist. Can't wait till they find one comment and start unleashing all their bigotry lol.
The best way I've always heard this described is that there is a statistical difference between the two groups, but that the variation within each group is wider than the differences between the groups. So women, as a whole, might be more X than men but there will be millions of men who are more X than millions of women.
Maybe in an upcoming episode you guys can dig into fMRI analysis of biological male and female brains in action. My understanding is that there does seem to be, on average, mild variations in how the brains operate between the sexes.
That would be an extremely rough video that makes this one seem tame and politically neutral. You don't have to dig far to find results that even the scientists who found them flinch at. I also don't want to have to see more suffering and confliction from the hosts at cognitive dissonance. Why live unhappy when you only live once?
Yes but they don’t necessarily prove male and female brains. There have been studies that have shown that behaviour can change brain’s activity. And behaviours aren’t static.
The issue with this is mostly that brains aren't static, hormones influence mood which in turn influence brain activity, and that different gender-based socialization would also affect which regions of the brain are more developed/used more, so while you might be able to find certain similar trends between sexes, it would be hard to isolate their exact cause. The plasticity of the brain is fascinating, but it also makes attempting to categorize specific things quite difficult
I think hormones themselves have a much larger role in governing behavior than brain structure. Mood, thought, personality, literally everything about a person can change because of different balances of chemicals in the brain. I think that has a larger impact than physical structure. They're so powerful, in fact, that they even govern physical development! Our mind - hormone interaction is so remarkably (and fascinatingly) complicated. I just love this field of research! If there's any data for this, please guide me in the direction to find it. People mock you for using the internet to do research these days, so I would like physical sources. Books and publications, etc. I think it's destructive and toxic to use equality as a front to push a forced expectation of *sameness.* We are not the *same* we are different and *that* is beautiful. We should celebrate our differences and use our strengths to bolster each other's weaknesses. Alas, that seems only possible in a fairy tale.
Helen Fischer hormone personality theory. It appears to be sound explanation for myers Briggs Personality typing in my opinion. Dr dario nardi told me about her. He is a psychologist and he has linked her analysis to myers Briggs. Hormones causing 4 out of 8 personality traits. Introvert/Extrovert Intuitive/Sensor Thinker/Feeler Judger/Perceiver Are linked to the hormones Testosterone, Estrogen, Oxytocin, Dopamine, and Serotonin
For some mental conditions men might want to just push through it (really?) and not ask for help. Thus, less men are diagnosed with depression and anxiety less than women
From what I've heard, the number of neurones doesn't really result in any increase in intelligence or anything like that - we are born with not a huge amount off the number of neurones we'll have as a full grown adult - the difference is in myelineation, basically how we form pathways representing skills or whatever. Myelin is an insulator which is white in colour (hence, white matter) and say we are learning to ride a bike, as we practice, the sequence of processes in the brain becomes more familiar, transforming the grey matter in the area to white and increasing our aptitude at cycling through practice. Anyway, the relevance of this being that I've heard that at birth there is no difference, however there ARE differences in fully grown adult males or females. The issue being whether you believe institutional gender oppression exists, as, as I just explained, the structure of the brain is essentially altered by what skills you practice, and if you are a woman in a society where sexism exists, your brain might then look different, right? It'd be super interesting to see a study comparing male and female brains between patriarchal and matriarchal societies to see the difference, if there is any.
There are TWO cadaver studies on transgender people & controls, but both were small number. Amazingly both had 100% mid size basal striatum. Both had 100% match with the estrogen/testosterone receptor site ratios for identified gender. It was amazing bc seldom in science is there 100% matches!
Women are more empathic than men Women produce 4 times more oxytocin than men Men can't bond through sex, but women can Women value long-term relationships Men value casual sex over LTR Men are incapable of making strongs bonds with their partners or offspring
@jael This argument ignores one very big point, is that society had to actually develop. At one point in our history, society wasn't really a thing, according to your argument, how did men and women who at one point did not have gender roles eventually get them if you suppose they just did what they always did? I'd say that the answer is still, deeply rooted in biology. We are society after all, men are more powerful, but also more expendable, so they hunt, and because of this, developed spacial skills better than their female counterparts, and because they took more risk, they often had to consider and calculate to not get themselfs killed. Women on the other hand are very valuable in an ancient world, and are soft and weaker, so they stayed at home to do less risky things, and had more time to socialize and make connections, through out history, women often dominated courts, this might explain it. Overall, this is just a theory, we don't know if it's true or not.😅
@jael You did not understand my point, I did not make the connection between hunting and being better at math, I said that because men had more uses for math in their daily life they developed better math skills to live their life better, like merchants, did you know that around 15% of them died at sea? Almost all of them were male, traders, they traveled across continents and as a result got injured very often, even most accountants back in the day were male because all the women were busy in their courts, do you get it now? It's an evolutionary trait, not some social treatment. There is no discrimination in any math course or STEM field right now, if a woman wants to and have the capability she can get a degree and that field, infact women actually have special treatment when it comes to acceptance because the schools want to get rid of their 'sexism' (By BEING SEXIST), guess what, no women are showing up still. But there are actually more women than men in Biology fields, a decent amount in medical fields,... You should know why.
@jael You use a STEM degree to get a job, not to do the job, they don't promote any kind of gender role, they're just a male dominated space, that's it, if the women don't like being near men they can choose other fields but if they want to pursue STEM there's nothing to suggest that they're just inherently sexist towards women. Because societies must develop for gender roles to become 'socially acceptable', you see? They must start from somewhere, we as humans didn't always lived in societies, but rather in small groups of familiars, they know nothing of what we know today, yet they still accepted some things we don't even know is true or not. Even in matriachal societies, the men still did the scientific work, it's just that the women had control of diplomatic relations and internal policies, like the Confederation of Iroquois, this is a pattern we've seen across history, the difference between matriarchal and patriarchal societies is the ones in power, not gender roles, women are still caretakers and mothers, men are still miners, soldiers, hunters, and researchers in matriarachal societies. The reason for gender roles might be biology, or it might just be something else we haven't thought of yet, we don't know, but it is definitely not social, we're not advanced enough to tell the difference between male and female brains yet, but we are advanced enough to ask a simple 'Why?' to the question of gender roles, to which the people supporting them have no answer, which is why we decided that it is not true, there's a flaw in their logic. The believe that gender roles only became what they are because of society is false, even if we don't really know what caused them but to say that women only became care takers because society enforced that idea is not only stupid, it also doesn't take into account the opinions of women who actually wanted to do such jobs, which there are alot of, even for animals. Men and women have entirely different beliefs, they may be equal, but they are not the same, even from birth.
@jael I'm not making stuff up, just look it up, in every field the percentage of women accepted to rejected compared to men is always higher, that is just fact, some schools don't even want to show this percentage because it might seem sexist. And as for black people, it is because of their circumstance, black people are poor because their parents weren't rich either, if you start later in a race it is not a surprise that you end up losing, that is their situation, and that leads to worse performance in school. Asian parents are very education minded, and you may not know it but only the best of Asians ever leave their country, abroad Asians always do better than their counterparts in the home country, it's that simple. Who is the best cook in the world? Many would say Gordon Ramsey, and I can see why. Men were not discouraged by society not to cook, they just didn't have time for it, and believe it or not single men cook for themselves, the fact that Ramsey is the best chef has more to do with his perfectionism and hard work than being of a certain gender, but on average, men **are** worse cooks, why? Because of natural selection. Men who are good cooks didn't always reproduce, being a cook is a lowly job, and that comes with being poor, only the best of cooks ever got to live comfortably, meanwhile women who can cook are almost always already married in ancient societies. There's alot in cooking, but some people just had better characteristics for it than other people, and if they are actively desired, they get to pass on their genes, you might not know this, but most of us humans have almost completely identical DNA, it is only a tiny fraction that define who we are in society, and in that, daughters are more likely to adopt more of the mother's gene than the father's, likewise, the opposite is true, and if men who aren't good at cooking are the boy's father which is more than likely, they will likely be worse than their sisters at cooking. Ancient cooking was literally hanging food on a stick on top of a fire, modern cooking as we know it only started around 3000 years ago.
This is a piece of art! 6,50 minutes of talking without saying anything than: There is almost no difference, and if there is a difference is small, and even if it were bigger, it still wouldn't mean anything... ok! Well, read the work of Richard Flynn and Nyborg about peer reviewed studies about differences in IQ across countries, or read The Bell Curve which also talks about the wider male variability in cognitive abilities and then please rethink of your last sentence at 6:31 and question the honesty of your position. You will also maybe realize that the most naive position is actually to think that it really could be possible that nature made one quality to be spread perfectly evenly across different categories when all the rest resemble anything but diversity.
If they are different, it literally doesn't even matter because they are so similar that it's not noticeable... and even if it was noticeable, exceptions exist.
I couldn't help noticing that Mister Green left out the rather large and overwhelming data collected from fMRI and PET scans of male and female brains in action that seem to conclude that yes, male and female brains exist and operate differently in many ways when performing the same tasks (use of mirror neurons, functioning of the anterior cingulate gyrus in pain regulation and emotional communication between the amygdala and the executive areas. Hell, male and female brains even process music using completely different brain areas for crying out loud!)
@@fabianojeda3078 Possibly (in case you weren't ironic.) It works in the sense that trans people have the brain structure of their gender, which is known fact now, but we can't know if forcing the brain structure of the opposite sex to a baby create enough deterministic inputs while evolving in an environment, to make them trans^^
I had something really freaky happen recently. So everyone knows that if you stand up too quickly from a resting position you can temporarily lose vision. Normally how it happens by my vision just graying out before returning, but this time, I swear I saw a kaleidoscope-like image of the room I was standing in. It was like the room had shrunk by a scale factor of 200 and that images of that size were plastered all over my vision in random orientations without any pattern. It was really disturbing. It's like my retinas were still functioning perfectly fine, but the optical nerves were freaking out with the input and outputting total nonsense to my brain.
Makes sense. I believe we develop the same way until a certain gestation period. By which I mean we all start as being both/neither gender. And we are all hormonally bi-sexual. So it makes sense brains would change later on in development and so appear to be a patchwork of male and female.
I once heard that the size of the brain doesn’t matter but what matters is the brain to body ration and both males and females have the same ration (on average)
Good video, however I studied under a neuropsychologist as part of an internship for about four years while earning my bachelors degree. Sex differences do generally exist between male and female brains: females tend to have thicker corpys callosums, and therefor are more readily able to share information between their lobes, while men do not, hence their information is generally not shared between lobes to the same degree. Men are also consistently more skilled at spacial tasks than women (evolutionary adaptation/advantage of being the primary hunter of the sexes) while women tend to be more skilled at tasks that require dexterity.
Sadly that's no longer the case. Now it's just a bunch of alt-right/conservative jerks who can't fathom someone else experiencing their gender identity differently or having their sex be in between male and female, so they whine about how transgender people don't exist. They also get offended every time trans people are mentioned. Unempathetic idiots, basically. If they don't experience gender dysphoria themselves it doesn't mean it's not real. IMO they're the real "snowflakes."
@@BitchChill Just because you don't personally experience gender dysphoria doesn't mean that it's not real. It might not be real to you personally, but the world doesn't revolve around you and other people who are like you. Stop getting so offended when transgender people are validated. Stay in your place and don't talk about what you don't know, snowflake.
@@green--apple It's seems like you're the snowfalke that's getting offended. All I said was "Transgender don't exist", while you went on a 2 paragraph tangent about conservative people and making false assumptions about me
Despite the disclaimer about this being to do with sex and not gender, I see an awful lot of trans people who vehemently insist that trans-ness comes from having opposite "brain sex", and call you a bigot if you're not convinced that brain sex is definitely a thing. Strikes me as the same kind of maladaptive defensiveness that the "born that way" mantra about orientation comes from (when in reality I'd bet both orientation and gender identity are caused by a complex mix of nature and nurture): you can't be accused of having done something wrong if you didn't have any choice in the matter. The real solution, of course, is to deny that there's anything being done wrong, and let the science investigate as it will as to what causes the things-that-aren't-wrong.
Thank you so very much for a politically neutral take on the current state of research. That's very hard to manage these days and some other science shows have gotten it very wrong.
All I know is if transgender is optional, why would anyone choose to be discriminated against? Not that they'd get any judgement from me, but generally speaking, the transgender community does unfortunately encounter tons of discrimination. So why in the hell would they make that choice? That's why I think there must be some underlying biological mechanism in the brain that distinguishes male and female.
This assumption is correct. Trans people, that being people who experience gender dysphoria, have differences in how their brains work. Which is why I despise all these "transtrenders" we see nowadays. They act like a condition that legit makes people suffer is some fun glamorous thing, treating gender like something you can pick and choose like your clothes in the morning. It goes to show how ignorant and disrespectful they are towards true trans people. And how entitled they are that they can think they can get some kind of attention and glory out of appropriating the suffering of others.
hello, trans-male here and i agree. i think there's a part of the brain that develops and says "you should have a penis/be growing facial hair etc" but i think that's the limit of male-female brains. i think we have mosaic brains.
How I (a questioning but definitely not cis person) look at it is, which is probably wrong: There was a misunderstanding in development. As the child develops, the body is told that it is one sex (so it develops as such) and the brain is told that it is the other. I don't think the brain itself is necessarily male or female, just that the brain believes the body is going to develop as the sex it was told that it would. When it isn't, the brain knows something is wrong, and inducing gender dysphoria. I bet this made NO sense, but I tried
Yeah!!!! Thanks for defining gender vs biological sex! I've been preaching this for a while and like no one believes me. Note: your gender is your identity, and your bio sex is only your doctor's business. Because pills effect the body differently based off of your hormone levels. And your doctor needs to know what's going on in your body to make an educated decision.
