Imagine your response to picking up a copy of the leading scientific journal Nature and reading the headline: “The myth that evolution applies to humans.” Anyone even vaguely familiar with the advances in neuroscience over the past 15–20 years regarding sex influences on brain function might have a similar response to a recent headline in Nature: “Neurosexism: the myth that men and women have different brains” subtitled “the hunt for male and female distinctions inside the skull is a lesson in bad research practice.”
It’s like seeing Democracy in Chains put up for a prestigious award.
I want to give a big plug to Quillette. It is now the must trustworthy brand in journalism.
Neuroscientists now have their marching orders. Lysenko rules.
The sex-difference deniers are going to be increasingly called anti-science, and false.
It’s amazing, and sad, that the landmark moment only came in 2016:
National Institute of Health on January 25, 2016 adopted a policy (called “Sex as a Biological Variable,” or SABV for short) requiring all of its grantees to seriously incorporate the understanding of females into their research.
I sort of thought most research was handling sex differences, but it seems I was wrong there.
Quillette is great right now: https://quillette.com/
and not yet a club, but they get funding from patron (club members?) or donors.
“Help free thought live by becoming a monthly patron or making a one-time payment.”
In the long article, there is an important part about equality and being the same:
very powerful yet 100 percent false assumption that if women and men are to be considered “equal,” they have to be “the same.” Conversely, the argument goes, if neuroscience shows that women and men are not the same on average, then it somehow shows that they are not equal on average.
This logic comes from the anti-racist logic that blacks and whites “are equal”, therefore “the same” — therefore science is wrong if it thinks there are differences (like Murray’s The Bell Curve).
The article goes on to make the point that, because men and women ARE different, they need different treatment to get the same optimal results.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5286723/
Sex in the brain: hormones and sex differences
————–
Fell free to read the botto9m line, or my summary. Sex hormones make it back to the brain, according to the research cited. Here is a quote:
“The unexpected discovery of cell nuclear receptor sites for glucocorticoids in the hippocampus, not only of rodents but also monkeys with extension to other species,12 pointed to brain regions other than hypothalamus as targets of circulating hormones.”
————-
The direct influence is not measured well but the claim is that the hippocampus has receptors for sex hormones. The chief manager of all the hormone precursors is the hypothalamus, at the bottom of the brain, way below the cortex. It effects hormonal release everywhere, especially the pitituary just blow it. But the debate was whether these sex hormones make it back to cortex, the claim is yes. But theory theory of the mechanism weak and just being discovered.
Neurosexism: the myth that men and women have different brains
One word: shoes
Seriously, what’s with the shoes thing. We have bedroom closets overflowing with shoes. The hall room closet doors won’t close anymore because of all the shoes. I’m tripping over shoes in front of the entrance doors. We have garbage bags full of shoes in the basement. And just yesterday, my wife and daughter went shopping for more shoes.
As for me, I have three pairs of shoes. Sometimes I feel I’m being extravagant because I only ever wear the one.
Just glancing at that Nature headline, most people could instantly recognize the political motivations of the author, and realize that it’s not real science, it’s wrong, and is simply manipulative political advocacy wielding the authority of the leading prestige science journal.
This is telling that science is highly politicized. Certain unreasonable political views have institutional authority and other valid political views do not.
We already knew this. The university system is completely overtly politicized. Why wouldn’t it be? This is just an obvious sign of that.
“Bad” in the quote means morally, not scientifically, bad, as in researching forbidden topics.
He’s reacting to a book review. I read both pieces. Honestly I cant figure out what the problem is.
As always, averages are averages and individuals vary.
https://quillette.com/2019/04/15/scientific-progress-and-the-culture-wars/