Clearly the differences between the way men and women think are
> partly biological (there is a growing body of scientific evidence,
> such as differences in hormones; differences in the size of the
> connection between the two hemispheres of the brain - larger in
> females, suggesting more communication between the two hemispheres,
actually, women have about one million more neurons running from right to
left hemisphere. The scientist who discovered this (male) said 'oh this
can't be important' and then left it. he was looking for some evidence of
female inferiority. i found this amusing when i was studing intelligence.
Studies that say there are differences should be viewed with caution.
Arthur jenkins in the 1960's sought to prove that black people were a whole
standard deviation less intelligent that caucasions. he did too. others
have since refuted his findings, but some still believe this.
social conditioning plays a huge part in our expressive and thought
differences. We cannot say how much. but the beth and adam study is
thought provoking. one baby was used. Sets of parents were introduced to
this baby as either beth or adam. if the baby was called adam the parents
would coo how strong and big he looked and they would handle him more
roughly. if they were told the baby was beth she was described as small,
petite, pretty and fragile. They were more careful in their handling.
Research like this supports the view that we are socially gendered from the
first question 'is it a boy or a girl'.
> suggesting a reason for greater expansive type thinking in women;
> etc.) and partly social (espec. the way our culture treats females
> as they're growing up). It's hard to sort out. But as time goes
> on, I find myself leaning more toward feminine (not necessarily
> feminist) approaches.
Respectfully,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Interesting: Your people glorified organised violence for 40 centuries,
but you imprison those who employ it privately."
Mr Spock. Star Trek 'Dagger of the Mind'
