Physical & Psychological Differences Between Men and Women | Full Talk | Lewis Wolpert 

What do you think of this talk? Leave a comment below You can watch this talk, Physical & Psychological Differences Between Men and Women, in full at iai.tv/video/the-physical-and-psychological-differences-between-men-and-women?RU-vid&

This hardly even scratches the surface of what we who work on the fields that study these things. The psychological findings I have read on my university studies are extremely interesting. It is no question whether or not there are differences between males and females biologically. It is a universal fact across the board that our physical and psychological processes have differences. There is overlapping of course in the grey area and there are exceptions to the rule but then there also is a lot of inherent biological differences between men and women. There is a reason why men can not always understand what women mean. Or why women can not understand why men do not open up to their wives. These are example manifestations of our human biology affecting our human interactions between one another.

Both work and look after their children. Thanks, but I preferred not to work when my children were small so I could raise them, myself, instead of turning them over to a stranger to raise. Hubby was on board with that and was perfectly willing to pay the bills while I was housewife and mother.

There is nothing wrong with the differences between men and women, both are intelligent and they work well together because they are different, they bring different things to the table:) All he was doing was exploring genetic differences and possible reasons for them, I thought it was very interesting:) I just felt the need to say that as some people seem really defensive about this, he wasn't insulting anyone haha

I don’t understand these comments. Everything this guy said in the beginning is through a sense of sarcasm, and he’s actually trying to understand women in an empathetic fashion rather than that of tyrannical. He admits the wrongdoings that have been done towards women throughout history and expresses it with empathy, what do you all want?

He sounds like Stewie. That's pretty cool.

Good talk but I wish the guy would stop pandering to the women in the audience by putting his own gender down. It's pretty embarrassing.

I truly do not see the problem with this video. A lot of commenters below seem to despise this video.

'you women did this and this - week done you. we men did this and this, I'm terribly sorry' - how very scientific

You should watch " WTF Bending A Mans Mind " You would love it!

"I don't think you came to see me, you come to hear about the title" 😆😂

referring to Stephen Hawking saying he spends most of his day thinking about "women" all day really GROSSED me out.

Thank God. I thought I was a loser or defected. I am a woman. Everyone around me talk about one night stands but I can't do it. Sex is Emotional for me. I organism from emotional connection. I thought there was something wrong with me but apparently this is normal for women.

Is this one of the therapists that Matt Damon is required to see in Good Will Hunting?

Opposites attract, which is why men and women are different. Men love the femininity and women love masculinity.

What exactly do you mean by saying "primary roles"? Why taking care of children and making sure they have decent upbringing is not primary? I don't understand who put this label that some roles are primarily and some or not. I do consider children upbringing more important and essential than so called "primary roles".

For people struck by the males being modified females comment, it's a nifty thing to say but it ain't that serious. There are thousands of different types of cells that operate this way at the molecular level, and there are millions upon millions of them inside you right now. It's the same for primary Nerve Cells, Endocrine Cells, Blood Cells, etc. From the moment the cell gets activated by a gene to its purpose (called differentiation) they are absolutely different in goal. This doesn't mean there was a time males were more female like, that second X chromosome is crucial to the normal development of a female. If they are missing it they have what's called turners syndrome. Hardly a healthy, normal female.

the truth should never be feared or controversial.

Stunning! Jees if I had the balls to say how correct he is I'd get barred from every bar in town.

I'm sorry I'm white. I'm sorry I'm male. I'm sorry I'm white. I'm sorry I'm male. I'm sorry I'm white. I'm sorry I'm male.

Why is this guy bashing men and putting women on a pedestal that they don't deserve?

Q: What’s the number one reason why men and women are different? A: Because everybody is different. Conclusion: Because each of us is different; we should all be treated the same; with basic human kindness, dignity, and respect.

9:42

This is just extraverted thinking (being a predominantly frequent personality thought process of men in the population) vs the extraverted feeling that is more frequent in the population for women to have. That doesn't mean that all men use extraverted thinking and all women use extraverted feeling. It just means there are more of them who do then there are vise versa. The correct way to find the right outcome would be to take people who typed very similarly on the personality scale of each gender and then find out whats actually true.

I don't see the issue with this video. But a lot of people bashed it, mostly women. But oh well.

Most of the arguments have no basis but what you think it may be reasonable. that's not necessarily the facts that happened, but what you think it could reasonably happened.

I have a question. How do males and females bond with each other? I don't see how men and women can bond (especially romantically) with each other. Women can build incredible friendships and become very close to each other in a way men can't bond, and science shows that women can bond very well with each other. Generally, women are even more social than men are. After something bad happens, a woman quickly rushes to talk to all of her female friends to get support, whereas a man can isolate himself and grief alone. Women tend to be more emotional, more caring, more empathic, more compassionate, more affectionate, more loyal, more nurturing, more understanding, more sympathetic, more sensitive, more kind hearted, more peaceful, more calmer, more gentle, more expressive, more intuitive, and more outward than men are, and thus bond more with other women in a special way that they can’t with men. Men, on the other hand, are not that emotional, and thus can’t bond with other men in a special way. Women are more comfortable being around with other women than they are with men. They have a type of bond that usually men with women won’t really have, or with men and men. Men are usually much lonelier than women are. Men don't often talk about their personal problems with their male friends like how women do with their female friends. Females produce a lot more oxytocin than males do. And that's a reason why women tend to hug a lot more and be a lot more physically affectionate than men do.

I remember Matriarch societies discovered in Africa and Brazil. Amazonian women are proven to have existed, as well as proof of matriarch societies discovered in African artifacts and artwork. This is the problem with only studying Eurocentric information, you can't cross-check your assumptions.

Ugh. I wish American teachers can be like this. Im pretty much re teaching myself biology at this point since my classes were so politically correct

9:43 car is starting.

This guy is a left wing woke activist. He really knows how to cater to a female audience.

There's a great deal of hypothesis, if not fact that women were treated equally in Ancient Egyptian times, I can't remember the citation of the source, I'll try to find it, but that was about the only time.

Trying to understand in a rigorous way sexual differences to better engage contemporary debates of gender equality through the use of multiple perspectives and for gaining conceptual clarity > Childishly shitting on everything you disagree with (be yourself a feminist troll or an anti-feminist troll). (P.S. I actually haven’t seen any feminist taking a jab at this video, maybe anti-feminist trolls suffer of the same straw manning irrational behavior they attribute to feminists)

He did have to give a speech in front of people and he kept looking at his watch worrying about wasting time, it is easy to get things mixed up when you are giving a speech and worrying about other things, it happens to all of us, give him a break:)

this guy knows wat hes talkin bout

14:56 15:15 starts casting a spell

so, there is no one thing that good about a guys as much as I understand from the presentation.

Yeah the last statement he made will not wash with the majority of men, we cannot make women feel relaxed that is not our job, our job is the job in itself. If they want to feel comfortable in whatever environment they Place themselves in, who's stopping them. We should not have that responsibility of catering to mature adults, we do not have a gun to their head to do what they feel is needed.

It's strange how the slightest "Insult" to men (ex.men are more selfish) get such a big negative reaction from them, when the main difference between the two sexes are that men are "modified versions of women". Women have basically grown up with the feeling of just being plain inferior with very few of our positive abilities seen or encouraged. (except for maybe empathy or caring abilities.) But that's not very often enough. Imagine being in that seat, then maybe it isn't such a big deal being called selfish.

Thank you. It's feels better to hear scientific facts for a change. Especially nowadays.

When all the biological, and social imperatives are accounted for, whatever remains, leads inexorably to answers for this and many other questions regarding the history and future of the human saga. Which are what? What remains is Mind, Consciousness and intelligence which, if defined and described as universal constants applies to every entity (biological or otherwise) with the capacity for higher cognitive existential states. Using current psychological frames of reference any differences and similarities between the sexes are, to say the least superficial. Both may have some merit which anthropology as an academic discipline but the account thereof is merely arbitrary in terms of time and geographical location. Or put simply, styles and trends have varied over time as do cultural norms vary from nation to nation. The scientific and academic communities in this regard have traditionally concerned themselves with studying what they can see and those things which fall into the realms of the familiar. What is quite literally of greater interest and importance are those things which are beyond such limiting constraints. These are the questions, as a high functioning autodidact, I have studied and examined independently for over four decades in the context of multidisciplinary exploration. What resulted is the most prolific expression of originality in existence today which I say unapologetically and without reservation. I am now in a position whereby I can state with absolute confidence and certainty that I stand as the most prolific producer of original thought on the planet with (unfortunately) no peers to evaluate my body of work or conclusions which can be drawn from it (I would have expressed this particular statement thusly "of the conclusions drawn therefrom but people struggle enough with correct grammar which is a dire indictment of the time in which we find ourselves). I would add that I am not particularly or overly distressed by that fact as my max opus is all but concluded with no beneficiary. I believe the Americans say "That sounds like a you problem"!

Other than the discussion of the foetal development, where was the discussion about biology? This was merely information about… anthropology and evolution? I was looking for information about how the brain functions, how their bodies are different… sure evolutionary information plays into that and is interesting, but there was hardly any actual scientific information here.

why do you disagree with what he says? and what specifically do u disagree with?

+TheEnglishVillage, or +Michael Bark (I have no idea how I reply to your comment... the reply option is not there...) You should take a look at “Delusions of Gender”, it might put this into perspective.

I think that there is an instinct of comparison, a kind of pathological need. What is that?

3:09 adam got punished for blaming a women, eve was punished for seducing man.

Too much butt-hurt people in the comments. Just shows how bias and sensitivity can cause detest to even science with an objective approach. Understanding biology is important, and shouldn't be reformed to fit some 'egalitarian' rhetoric. Be socially more inclusive, and at the same time let biology be.

Where this lecture was recorded? If same one may help?

How does he know that women invented pots? Makes no sense. Pots were invented and reinvented independently by many human communities

Biology vs learned behavior ... we are a combination of each knowing where we obtain our traits is science. From the comments people don't know how science works and are pleading to authority.

Same here :) and from my experience the vast majority of guys don't mind if they have women bosses either so it seems to be a feminist issue about men being bosses (*sigh*). P.S. Data was my favourite character in Star Trek :P

Women are absolutely more vindictive and sociopathic, so how does that go with empathy?

This professor is gold :D

Testosterone is the reason men are more ambitious, more risk prone (this higher rewards), and more strong... let's just get over the bullshit and accept science as it is.

interesting

He "quotes" studies of MRI showing differences in the laterality and connectivity, but a meta-study done on the subject has shown no real difference can be observed. Genes do make a difference, but no sex related difference was yet to be reliably found. So I'd have to say that Cordelia Fine, even though she "doesn't know biology", is more right than he is.

Who is here after cowane’s comment on Harry styles ?

True story.... Many years ago, on the opposite side of my cubicle, I heard one of the cutey-faced, petite admin girls talking to her friend about a guy who had asked her out- cutey-face tells her friend she will not go out with the guy because he ". . . always has a food stain on his shirt," and, she "thinks one of his back teeth is missing." She never went out with the guy... Lo and behold, about 3-to-4 months later, cutey-face's friend tells me cutey-face did, however, end up dating a different guy from the office AND had sex with him on a section of cardboard in a secluded area of a public part where all the homeless men piss and poo. So, someone please explain the logic?

I wish he had more time... I wanted to learn more of the differences about the CAH and also the health aspect. Great information though.

OR you are just upset because you don't agree with what he was saying. But the good news is you don't have to listen, instead go to google scholar and find research studies and interpret the date yourself. They show you the evidence that has been collected to suggest these things- never just take someones word:)

Testes!! I like the way he says....Testes! 4:10

Overstates mating between first cousins. Probability not very significant of increase in genetic problems. This is largely religious in outlook. Inbreeding is not necessarily deleterious as many biologists have noted. In breeding does NOT cause inimical recessive genes. It only increases the probability of sharing if they are there. The myth is very strong so you will probably disagree.

About the video thumbnail: hair seems to be the defining characteristic of the female, whereas for the male it is not. Just shows that cultural signifiers are necessary to emphasize the difference between the sexes. Highly simptomatic. The dude might as well have a beard. It's a bigger and more certain difference. Men can grow long hair on their heads too. Beards in women appear, but are not as common.

Women need a reason to have sex,men just need a place-Billy Crystal

I really wanted to like this, learn something from this but the intro was off putting(ass kissing the audience) and the seminar itself didn't really come off confident. A lot of talking theoretically, maybe, but not as much in concrete facts, by the "expert's" own admission. Too much bias, not enough substance.

Historical Fact: Woman have NOT been discriminated by men throughout human history. Yes, the vast majority of history woman have been discriminated against. If we flashback to hunter gatherer societies (the paleolithic age of human history) we see that genders were equal. Both genders equally contributed to food supplies. It was not until agriculture was fully developed, did we witness a difference in social status between men and women. Might makes right? (Men were physically stronger at this point in human hominid evolution) Maybe the transition to a neolithic life style was not the best....

There are many models in anthropology on the development of agriculture, women doing it is just one. I must say this guys does have some bias.

You ever start to question we are different because together we work better? It would be stupid to have both sexes psychically strong ect. And saying things like "I have never" - do some research and expand your mind. WHY are men and women different? Why do you think that is a bad thing? If women acted like men did all those years ago they would have left their babies to die and just looked after themselves and where would we be now? But you know what, stay in your box.

Can someone clarify the idea of "males are modifies females" and is it not possible to say vice versa sincenot

9:42-9:46 Starting up a lawn mower

I think that women can be acknowledged and respected without all of the simping like this gentleman does. We all have our roles, and we benefit both. By the way he said testes and testosterone, you might think that he is ashamed to be a man and of his own masculinity, or perhaps a lack thereof.

male body or female body according to nature has 4vbasic things... eat, sleep, mate, defend... female body has the womb for fetus for procreation..., therefore female body has the breasts for the milk in primarily sustaining newly born offsprings until weaning... the female body has soft hands for to hold the newborn/infant.. opposite to the male body that holds the sperms for procreation... female bodies for procreation has monthly menstrual cycle where in mood is affected... as opposed to the male body... as to any other matter, it is according to situations & circumstances.... this is why, no matter how gays & lesbians try to dominate, they lack one thing: procreation... there is no gay or lesbians in the world if male & female bodies dont have affection to mate(marriage)... as to how a person wants to act is own choice, its a matter of limitations of female or male body...

Very true, all anyone can do is to work towards it at an individual level. My take on things is that at least the MRAs are okay with a duality while the loudest feminists want to get rid or silence the other side completely. May I ask what you thought of GWWs take on the Fempocalypse? Likely, unlikely, flaws in her argument etc. Sorry to be pedantic but I find it disturbingly fascinating (not in a good way) and value other peoples opinions on it.

Just a thought; in not to distant history the medical world didn't think babies could feel pain when born and in the early advancement of surgery would perform surgeries on babies without pain medicine or anesthesia. Point being; not all science's conclusions are accurate especially not easily understood. However I'm sure most of the studies are factual

Couldn't empathy be systematized? Everything is a thing afterall. When things we call "empathy" play themselves out each frame by frame must by definition be made up of certain parts which may vary from other things we'd distinguish as "empathy" but that variation can't be infinite or else the word "empathy" would be meaningless. So empathy like everything else can be systematized. So then why is there any difference unless somehow people are dissuaded from applying systemizing to empathy?

Our purpose is to make people realize that we are all divided within ourselves not just in society But we are actually separate from ourself. We have separated ourselves off from ourselves. (The I and not I) The being you are now is divided from the being you ACTUALLY are. Love is the highest form of intelligence in the universe. because it has no cause, do you see how love has no cause? (same as what we call god, source, energy) That also has no cause. Everything that has a cause has an effect and the effect becomes the cause. it's a circle. If you say there is a god then there is a cause lol. How can that be? Then what caused god? lol... (hate to use that word) but god has no cause. But hate has a cause... That is why love can effect hate, but hate cannot effect love. Where there is love hate cannot be what so ever. But where there is hate love can be. Hate cannot effect love. Because love has no cause at all. Isn't that so beautiful? Nothing can cause love, but that nothing is everything. Isn't that immense? You can't cultivate love or create love, all you can do is negate what love is not! Once you start seeing what love is not. It's not conspiracy, it's absolutely not sacred knowledge, or any form of knowledge, it's not pleasure, it's not joy or enjoyment, it's not desire or ambition, it's not sex or attachment to another person, it's not seeing something or reaching a state of mind... So on and so on... it's not finding your soul or balancing your chakras, or astral traveling to crazy levels of consciousness, or channeling your separate self which will lead to many illusions, it's not meditating a certain way or breathing a certain way, love is not responsibility or care, it's not compassion or passion. So what is love? If you have ever truly came upon that question and asked yourself that, meaning naturally come upon a question. If you naturally come upon a question by yourself you already have the answer. Because the real answer is in the very question. If one really inquires into a psychological question which is much more important than knowledge. If one really asks what is love and after seeing everything it's not he is left with nothing right? Because I see everything love is not. There is nothing left. In that nothing there is love, that is love. Nothing and therefor everything. You cannot create love you can only negate hate. That is the act of love.

WTF ? Im a top scientist Mathematician-Statistician. This guy is throwing his career throughout the window. He is not an expert in history and it is not serious making huge claims in a topic you dont know. Having different roles is not a perverse discrimination . It is actually normal and more efficient to divide work given the biological differences. Sex roles allowed home sapiens to survive neardentals. Who says women roles are less valuable ? , that statement is sexist. A scientist can not make moral statements specially if he is not an expert in the topic (History). Anyone that knows history knows men and womend willfully collaborated having roles in order to survive harsh conditions. Just trying to be political correct and pleasing the audience and not sticking to the facts. This is a shame of a scientist.

This guy is such a feminist panderer. I was expecting a scientific talk not messaging the ego of feminists for 30minutes.

Like many alpha males this creep has internalised a lot of misandry. His agenda was plain within only 3 minutes: I can only speak for myself, but at no point in my life have I been itching to oppress women. I don't know any man like that. Why don't they get a sexologist or a personality psychologist to do this talk? Oh that's right, the message has to conform to the orthodox psychotic narrative of the great feminist fairy tale: girls good, boys bad. It's pathetic, and so damaging. I bet he writes for the Guardian, providing confirmation bias for the faithful woke.

Oh well, as long as I'm successful and fulfilled in my life I couldn't give 2 shits about my gender. 😂

That critic is easy. If the differences are biological, we would need to end the biological existance of men. For the reason alone already this simply can not be real. Then almost anything of it has changed in attributes, except that men hurt and try to insitutionalize power over woman. There still are or have been matiracires too however. Horse riding, clothes, etc. There is socities where woman are more then men interrested in math etc. So in the end you have no biological basis, only the physical ones. That ofc influences socities.

well when im looking for a relationship...most women arent...he says women are looking for relationships and man is looking for sex...i think its the other way around!!

Yo. Everyone. Thumb up this guy. Srsly, do it!

Some things he said caused me to think, such as his comments about Evolution not giving a dam about anything other that reproduction. I don't know, all that comes from a kind of invisible world, doesn't it, as to what Life Itself "wants" from us or to occur. Perhaps we don't know it, but evolution may be beyond the physical, and have "goals/a purpose" we haven't discovered or thought about. Does life have any other meaning or desire than this? I think that is pretty obvious. I think it has an influence, strongly, but there is more. Otherwise, although pro feminist and kind to both men and women, he does not give us enough credit as individuals. Men are not only driven by the need for sex, esp. after a certain age, and nor women by relationship. We are people first, more in common than we are different, I think. I know a lot of men that want love, and respect in their sexual relationships, desperately. They care just as much about it as women do. I know a lot of women driven by desire to bring their talents into the world, more than relationships.

There have been cultures where men were the servants of woman. Though there aren't many that I know of, I've learned that of all that I have, the woman had harems. They also, from Africa, sold slaves knowing that they would be slaves. Cleopatra, and the Queen of Hawaii( I think) both had known sex drives. Women would likely be like the queen bee if they were in control. No forgiveness slavers with great sex drives. But what do I know. I'm a guy. A virgin at that. And women, still unknown.

Very interesting and informative! Though, I always have that thing happen during sex and I'm female. I have it happen more than once many times as well. I wouldn't bother with sex if I didn't, is that selfish? : ) I can't say if I would or I wouldn't if sex were forced on me so there could be a difference in that sense but it would be a societal difference as well as biological in my opinion. I have also heard that in primitive societies in which the possibility exists that men do not know they contribute to the pregnancy, women are and/or were often treated better. So when they learned about the birds and the bees, or that women needed the men to create life and weren't so special after all, is when the discrimination began.

girls were so much unconscious about their behaviour in depths. if there is an girl big in family everyone rest younger would be so learning initiated , if she will got her right to promote self with her own thoughts and believes. what believers know about yoga its something internal and essential element unknown by self .

I used to call myself a feminist because I believed in the true equality definition of it, but nowadays the feminists have gone crazy. I mean sure men and women are biologically different...hell even different races are biologically different. But that does not mean we need to be assholes to each other. We don't need to be physically identical to get the same equal opportunities in life. We need to stop pointing fingers. Its not productive

I love how every comment below cries out feminism.. they probably don't even know what feminism is. Hint: it's not favoring women over men.

He said less gray matter and less white matter are in woman but then says woman haves more gray matter. I stopped watching it from there on.

Believe it or not, the physical/Biológical differences alone are very strong, thats why women cant just sight something based on how it looks socially And do the same thing as a Biológical man

Autism is much more common in MEN! Like 1/10 autistic people only are women.

Could higher intensity of interest explain the math difference? That is men who are into math are likely to be very into it and men who aren't very not into it. Higher intensity of interest also goes along with autism which is higher in men.

This is literally the first youtube comment I've ever read about feminism that was accurate.

Women percieve things socially, men Will have an instinctual sense like in the wild

I am very sorry but from observing myself I really have to disagree with what's said here. It every women wants children or gives damn about them, it's a fact that the more educated a woman becomes the less the chances of her having children. And as we are all able to witness within our modern rich countries, the birth rates are slowing shrinking a lot. Also women in development countries that have the chance to be educated, behave a lot different than their uneducated counterparts. Well certainly genetics somewhat determines us, but we have a conciseness that in the end decides on how we act and how not. As an example: Humans have the ability to digest meat. This makes as genetically determined to eat meat, but we are able to decide on our own if we want to eat meat or not. In my view this whole genetically determination subject that is also supposed to explain our conciseness is a dangerous tera. These thesis are indeed quite interesting, but only to a certain degree, typically darwinistic pride, that is prone to leave no room for anything else. To state a thesis as promenently as it has been done here is in my eyes, putting one's head above the parapet. But it is for everyone on their own to decide what they chose to be their reality in life.

im zoning out

Interesting and informative, I like.

Women are also more vulnerable to having low levels of calcium.

Already, three minutes into the video, this "biologist's" credibility has been undermined by his ridiculous statement, pandering immediately to women and feminists, that "There has never been a time when men didn't discriminate against women." That already undermines his claim to be a scientist who focuses on the biological differences, rather than putting his ideologies and opinions into the mix. He wanted blunt criticism, and that's my initial impression... a scientist who's full of shit/unbalanced on social issues, and making sweeping evolutionary assumptions that border on hatred of men, because he's been well indoctrinated and brainwashed by the popular feminist culture. It appears he's on a social engineering mission... not to mention the fact that kissing up to women will help his book sales, since women buy more books than men do. All of that said, I agree with some of his points, but his editorializing makes him more of an ideologue and an entertainer to me, rather than a scientist.