Girls Vs. Boys: Brain Differences Might Explain Tech Behaviors

[Macoleco]

Researchers at the University of Zurich looked at how differences in brain functioning can help explain why women tend to be more prosocial—that is, helpful, generous and cooperative—than men. In the 2017 study, they hypothesized that the areas of women’s brains related to reward processing are more active when they share rewards and that those areas in men are more active when receiving selfish rewards. Brain scans conducted on men and women, in which they chose between receiving a monetary reward only for themselves or one that involved sharing money with others, supported their theory.

So they are saying men are inherently more selfish?

Based on observation I would claim the contrary to what the study says regarding women being more generous. I have noticed more selfishness in women than men

[EgoDeath]

Based on observation I would claim the contrary to what the study says regarding women being more generous. I have noticed more selfishness in women than men

I've observed exactly the opposite; women being more caring and generous and men being more cold and out for themselves. Though, that's a vague generalization and only anecdotal. But it's worth nothing, if we're talking about personal observations.

[John 6IX Breezy]

I believe in individual differences more than sex differences. Variations between the sexes may emerge when their behaviors are summed and averaged; but such variations are uninformative, and perhaps nonexistent, when looking at individual males or females.

[EgoDeath]

I believe in individual differences more than sex differences. Variations between the sexes may emerge when their behaviors are summed and averaged; but such variations are uninformative, and perhaps nonexistent, when looking at individual males or females.

I'd tend to agree with the first part of your statement. But the second half simply isn't true. Scientists on the subject are excited about learning more about differences between the sexes because it may help us improve health care for people as a whole and even help cure diseases in the future.

The new concept of evidence-based sex and gender medicine—which includes the fundamental differences of biology and behaviour between women and men—should improve health care for both sexes.

It confuses me why people wish to deny this. This is science. It doesn't mean there aren't exceptions to the rule. It doesn't mean men or women can't be a mix of both masculine and feminine traits... it's simply science. And it's science we shouldn't ignore.

[John 6IX Breezy]

It confuses me why people wish to deny this. This is science. It doesn't mean there aren't exceptions to the rule. It doesn't mean men or women can't be a mix of both masculine and feminine traits... it's simply science. And it's science we shouldn't ignore.

It's more statistics than science in my opinion, and statistics are the death of the individual. In terms of healthcare (which I know nothing about) I think any added benefit provided by studying sex differences emerges as a result of moving one step closer to individual differences.

[EgoDeath]

It's more statistics than science in my opinion, and statistics are the death of the individual. In terms of healthcare (which I know nothing about) I think any added benefit provided by studying sex differences emerges as a result of moving one step closer to individual differences.

Well, it's statistics found through scientific methods of discovery.

Listen, the science on this subject is well established and not really up for debate so far as I'm concerned. If new evidence comes out that somehow contradicts and proves wrong the previous findings, then that's something I'd want to look at. Until then, we know there are inherent differences between the sexes.

But I agree that statistics do not always paint a complete picture. We should be careful in how we use and interpret them.

[John 6IX Breezy]

Well, it's statistics found through scientific methods of discovery.

Listen, the science on this subject is well established and not really up for debate so far as I'm concerned. If new evidence comes out that somehow contradicts and proves wrong the previous findings, then that's something I'd want to look at. Until then, we know there are inherent differences between the sexes.

But I agree that statistics do not always paint a complete picture. We should be careful in how we use and interpret them.

I'll go one step further and say that any differences between the sexes that isn't exclusive, isn't a difference at all. To talk of differences without exclusivity is to set up an artificial wall where nature has not placed one.

[GrandizerII]

It's more statistics than science in my opinion, and statistics are the death of the individual. In terms of healthcare (which I know nothing about) I think any added benefit provided by studying sex differences emerges as a result of moving one step closer to individual differences.

Well, it's statistics found through scientific methods of discovery.

John's right. Statistics say something about groups, if they say anything at all. They say nothing about individuals.

Also, it's important to note the differences between individuals within the same sex group, something that is just as important as differences between the two sex groups.

And differences between the sexes do not mean they are innate. Neuroplasticity strongly suggests that whatever differences there may be at the start between the two brain-sexes is mostly irrelevant since the brain is very very malleable to environmental conditioning, especially at a young age.

Listen, the science on this subject is well established and not really up for debate so far as I'm concerned.

Not really. If by "inherent" you mean "from birth" and "fixed in stone", that is up for debate and is probably wrong and/or a legacy of traditional sexist thinking (neurosexism).

[EgoDeath]

Not really interested in arguing this with you guys, tbh. I was hoping people would want to discuss the article, but apparently not. You trying to turn this into an argument about sex and gender is very telling and I shouldn't be surprised. Trying to label scientific facts as "sexist thinking" is just low man and I'm not playing this game with you. Find someone else to squabble with. I'm busy today.

The science on this subject is well established and not something I feel the need to defend. Study after study after study has shown the differences between the sexes. There are inherent differences in men and women, from birth. The existence of neuroplasticity doesn't negate that fact. Feel free to continue this conversation among yourselves, I'm done.

Ignoring science when it doesn't fit your narrative says nothing about the science itself; it only speaks to your choice to ignore the facts. I'm not going to read the thread any further. Enjoy the last word.

edit: This is like debating evolution with a creationist. I'm just not doing it. Sorry.

[LastPoet]

@EgoDeath Huh? Its a discussion forum, you are bound to de disagreed, interrogated, even insulted. My 2 cents on this is to stop being so sensitive dude. Everyone knows boys dont cry *runs off*