Women and men: exploring the "wo".

[Samuel De Mazarin]

Unpacking the science of sex difference. - By Amanda Schaffer - Slate Magazine

Edge: THE SCIENCE OF GENDER AND SCIENCE

Read and discuss?

Alors, nous commencons!

[colmena]

One of my favourite pieces of media in existence is the BBC series, "Child of our Time." The program follows a group of children from birth to adulthood and pretty much discovers why we are who we are.

The latest series explored gender roles. Many of the children conformed to stereotype, but one child, Nathan, broke the mold. He had been brought up the same as his sister, consciously with as little gender stereotyping as possible. As a result, in one of the tests, Nathan made the same decisions as the girls, rather than the boys. These were decisions associated with the reality of happiness instead of superficial happiness.

The first episode looks at the gender divide. At eight, the children are struggling to make sense of gender roles. In the home they see their parents striving for equality. But increasingly they are looking to the outside world for their role models. So in a culture dominated by sex, celebrity and consumerism, what are they learning? And is the divide of the sexes growing?
Nathan's parents have gone all out to make sure their children grow up in a home with no stereotypes. Mum Ruth goes out to work and Dad Richard stays home and does most of the childcare. They hope their children will grow up with no preconceptions about gender roles. But will it work? And can the vision for the family survive their parents' separation and the death of Nathan's beloved grandmother?

"The Divide of the Sexes"

The test comprised of large yellow blocks with words on them and the children asked which were the most important to them. While the girls threw away words like "money," and kept words like "intelligence" and "friendship," the boys did the exact opposite. All except for Nathan.

---

One thing I soon learn from watching a lot of programs on indigenous cultures, is that they often conform to stereotypical gender roles. But I think this is often out of the sheer physiological practicality for men to hunt, and the time it takes forces women to do everything else.

In our developed societies, I don't think gender should make any difference. I'd say it's mostly nurture here.

[colmena]

You should be able to watch episodes from Child of our Time here:
BBC - Parenting - Video - Parenting Video On Demand
(connecting - http://www.bbc.co.uk/parenting/tv_and_radio/child_of_our_time/ )

A Child of our Time video on gender stereotype target marketing:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=JDjquwVArMg

Some more reading here:
BBC/OU Open2.net - Family & Child Development - Gender development

[Jennifer]

It depends on what aspects we're looking at and testing for.

(e.g., I don't think it's too hard to train a child of either gender to choose or reject things like money, intelligence, or friendship depending on the parents' preferences.)

Normally when we talk about gender differences we're discussing less overt things and more just underlying tendencies or frameworks to stimuli.

[colmena]

Originally Posted by Jennifer

It depends on what aspects we're looking at and testing for.

(e.g., I don't think it's too hard to train a child of either gender to choose or reject things like money, intelligence, or friendship depending on the parents' preferences.)

Normally when we talk about gender differences we're discussing less overt things and more just underlying tendencies or frameworks to stimuli.

I take your point, but I was just trying to bring something to the thread.

I'd discuss SDM's second link, but I'd rather stab the guy in the debate:

his statement would imply that the extreme nurture position on gender differences is more conclusive than, say the evidence that the sun is at the center of the solar system, for the laws of thermodynamics, for the theory of evolution, for plate tectonics, and so on.

I wish they'd keep their intellectual wankery out of interesting discussion.

[Orangey]

That slate article was rather poor. The author uses worn-down rhetoric (*evangelists*) and goes through an overview of the two scientist's positions, never really telling us why we should come to a different conclusion than the ones they have presented. All she really says is "well there are differences between the male and female sexes, but they're not that big!"