DOCSLIB.ORG

Gender Differences: a Result of Differences in the Brain Or Socialization? Courtney Storms [email protected]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gender Differences: a Result of Differences in the Brain Or Socialization? Courtney Storms Courtneyjstorms@Gmail.Com Locus: The Seton Hall Journal of Undergraduate Research Volume 2 Article 7 September 2019 Gender Differences: A result of differences in the brain or socialization? Courtney Storms [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.shu.edu/locus Recommended Citation Storms, Courtney (2019) "Gender Differences: A result of differences in the brain or socialization?," Locus: The Seton Hall Journal of Undergraduate Research: Vol. 2 , Article 7. Available at: https://scholarship.shu.edu/locus/vol2/iss1/7 Storms: Gender Differences Gender Differences: A result of differences in the brain or socialization? Courtney Storms Seton Hall University Abstract hood play to occupational choices. It is heavily debated as to whether these gender differences are There are obvious differences between males a result of socialization or a result of differences and females observed in society; aside from phys- between the male and female brain. This debate ical features, gender differences are present from is a difficult one to assess because there is ade- infancy through adulthood in virtually all areas quate evidence for both sides of the controversy. from childhood play to occupational choices. It is Those taking the side of socialization use the in- heavily debated as to whether these gender differ- formation to show that the brain is malleable and ences are a result of socialization or a result of dif- is influenced by parents, peers, and the environ- ferences between the male and female brain. This ment, while those taking the side of essential dif- paper will explore both sides of the controversy, ferences between the male and female brain use outlining the evidence offered by Cordelia Fine the information to yield insight into how the brain and Simon Baron-Cohen in their books ”Delu- is organized. sions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Difference” and ”The Essen- Cordelia Fine, author of Delusions of Gender: tial Difference: Male and Female Brains and the How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Cre- Truth About Autism.” Fine defends the argument ate Difference, argues that “What we experience that the brain is malleable and influenced by par- and do create neural activity that can alter the ents, peers, and the environment, while Baron- brain, either directly or through changes in gene Cohen defends the argument that there are essen- expression” (Fine 236). The brain’s neuroplastic- tial differences between how the male and female ity is what allows it to be molded by socializa- brains are organized. Historical evidence, obser- tion. On the other hand, Simon Baron-Cohen, au- vations, and testing are cited by each author to thor of The Essential Difference: Male and Fe- support their stance on the controversy. As greater male Brains and the Truth About Autism, argues technological advancements are made in neuro- that there are innate differences between the male science, scientists can continue to study the brain and female brain. His theory is that “The fe- with greater precision and accuracy, and gain fur- male brain is predominantly hard-wired for empa- ther insight to support or refute a side in this de- thy. The male brain is predominantly hard-wired bate. for understanding and building systems” (Baron- Cohen 1). In other words, on average more fe- There are obvious differences between males males than males have a brain suited for empathiz- and females in society; aside from physical fea- ing and on average more males than females have tures, gender differences are present from infancy a brain suited for systemizing. In his argument, through adulthood in virtually all areas from child- he also theorizes about the prevalence of an ex- Published by eRepository @ Seton Hall, 2019 1 Locus: The Seton Hall Journal of Undergraduate Research, Vol. 2, Iss. 1 [2019], Art. 7 treme male brain with advanced systemizing and the wind, and the stars. Understanding these sys- low empathizing that manifests as autism, and an tems will allow for better navigation and survival extreme female brain with advanced empathizing of harsh conditions (Baron-Cohen 118-119). Psy- and low systemizing which is still an area for fu- chologist Doreen Kimura also highlights the im- ture research. Although Fine and Baron-Cohen, portance of navigational abilities to male repro- are on opposing sides of the controversy, neither ductive success. Males tend to have more sexual author reduces gender differences to one factor. partners than females, therefore, requiring them Both authors support their views with historical to travel greater distances to mate. This leads evidence, observations, and testing. Kimura to make the argument that navigational The main brain types identified by Baron- differences between men and women emerged Cohen include brain type E or the female brain, due to natural selection for reproductive advan- brain type S or the male brain, and brain type B tage (Kimura 121). Making tools along with hunt- or the balanced brain. He also theorizes the exis- ing, tracking, and navigation require time spent in tence of an extreme male brain (extreme type S) solitude. A systemizing brain, as opposed to an and the extreme female brain (extreme type E); E empathizing brain that likes to socialize, is better represents stronger or more developed empathiz- suited for tolerating the solitude required for those ing, while S represents stronger or more developed aspects of life. Spotting fluctuations in the mar- systemizing (Baron-Cohen 6-7). This paper will ketplace is another form of systemizing that is im- focus on whether or not there are actually criti- portant for trading. The ability to read these buy- cal differences between the male and female brain sell profitable systems, will increase one’s own that impact behavior, or if gender differences in wealth, which will in turn increase social rank, behavior are due to socialization. leading to better reproductive success. In regards Baron-Cohen uses evolutionary theory to ex- to power, one must understand where they are in plain the advantages of the male and female brain the rank, and identify what circumstances would and why they would have evolved. He explains gain rank or cost rank when making decisions. that “traits usually only come under genetic con- Those of higher social rank have better survival trol when they confer some survival and repro- chances because it ensures protection from the ductive advantage to the organism in two battles: group. The reproductive benefit of power is that surviving to reach adulthood, and being selected it creates greater access to females. Darwin’s the- to become a parent” (Baron-Cohen 115). Advan- ory of sexual selection deems females as having tages of the male brain include using and mak- the greater role in selection because their invest- ing tools, hunting and tracking, tolerating solitude, ment of time and energy for producing offspring trading, power, social dominance, expertise, ag- is greater than a male’s. This is why social dom- gression, and leadership. The ability to use and inance is important for men’s fertility. Achiev- make tools increases both the chances of survival ing social dominance brings males more power, and reproductive success. Tools allow one to more which in turn, gives them greater access to fe- efficiently hunt, fight, build, fix, and work which males. Males achieve social dominance not only can increase one’s status in the community. Good through threats or physical force, but also by be- systemizing ability is also important for under- coming an expert in something valued by the cul- standing the natural systems involved in hunting ture; systemizing allows one to do this. Aggres- and tracking. Hunters must be able to not only sion, entailing a lack of empathy, allows males to identify the tracks of specific animals, but also to control the sexual activities of their partners. This create mental maps of the area to avoid getting allows them to be polygynous, giving them ac- lost. Natural systems also include the weather, cess to many females. Finally, in regards to lead- https://scholarship.shu.edu/locus/vol2/iss1/7 2 Storms: Gender Differences ership, those who can view a team as a system brain that allowed these traits to survive. can identify how each individual member func- In their books, both Fine and Baron-Cohen tions in the system while identifying and replac- discuss many of the same topics, like parenting, ing problems within the system. Leaders would toy preferences, hormones, and the brain, but they have more access to resources and higher social fall on opposite sides of the spectrum when dis- rank, which not only leads to greater chances of cussing their origins. When discussing parent- survival, but also greater opportunities for repro- ing, Fine recognizes that gendered expectations duction (Baron-Cohen 118-126). develop even before the birth of a child. Birth an- Baron-Cohen goes on to identify the advan- nouncements, for example, are constructed differ- tages of the female brain which include making ently for boys and girls. In a study of 400 birth friends, mothering, gossip, social mobility, and announcements, “Parents of boys, they found, ex- reading one’s partner. Each of these have both pressed more pride in the news, while parents of survival and reproductive advantages. Making girls expressed greater happiness” because “the friends helps to form social alliances for protec- birth of a girl more powerfully triggers the warm, tion, while also creating networks for childcare. fuzzy feelings relating to attachment, while the It also increases community stability which de- greater pride in a boy stems from an unconscious creases aggression between adults, and increases belief that a boy will enhance standing in the so- chances of survival for female and child commu- cial world” (Fine 194).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Addiction and the Female Brain by Jeffrey Georgi, M.Div., MAH, LCAS, CGP Consulting Associate Div
    Addiction and the female brain by Jeffrey Georgi, M.Div., MAH, LCAS, CGP Consulting Associate Div. of Addiction Research and Translation Duke University Medical Center Georgi Educational and Counseling Services [email protected] 919-286-1600 and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time TSE © GECS Biological+Psychological+Social+Spiritual Vulnerability Liability Context Bankruptcy plus experience/relationships equals woman © GECS 1 Women’s brains the obvious Women’s brains are part of women’s bodies Women’s bodies are supported by a complex web interconnected relationships Women’s relationships fall within a social and historical context The complexity of the female brain’s neural net and it’s virtually infinite relational and cultural tapestry defies definition Our task this week is inherently reductionistic © GECS Biological+Psychological+Social+Spiritual Vulnerability Liability Context Bankruptcy plus experience/relationships equals Addiction © GECS © GECS 2 © GECS © GECS © GECS 3 X © GECS © GECS 4 © GECS Other Suggestions Disease makes good people make mistakes – they still are good people but need to be held accountable Willpower will not work over time The limbic system is not reasonable Addiction is not a choice Addiction makes almost any psychiatric disorder more difficult and more dangerous © GECS prefrontal cortex orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) © GECS 5 Corpus callosum Anterior cingulate cortex frontal frontal cortex - Nucleus accumbens Hypothalamus Pre Olfactory bulb Amygdala Hippocampus © GECS Women’s brains general principles Structurally the differences between the male and female brain are real but they are subtle and important. Areas where there are differences matter and need to be addressed clinically.
    [Show full text]
  • Information Sheet: Critically Thinking About the Brain and Gender Differences
    Davison, Ryan C. (2012) Critically Thinking About the Brain and Gender Differences. In B. Bogue & E. Cady (Eds.). Apply Research to Practice (ARP) Resources. Retrieved <Month Day, Year> from http://www.engr.psu.edu/AWE/ARPResources.aspx. Information Sheet: Critically Thinking About the Brain and Gender Differences By Ryan C. Davison, American Chemical Society In January 2005 the president of Harvard University, Larry Summers, spoke at the Conference on Diversifying the Science & Engineering Workforce. In this now famous speech, Dr. Summers suggested that the reason fewer women succeed in science and math careers may be due to innate gender differences. Educators were stunned that such a credible and prominent academic authority would make these statements. They could easily imagine a situation where a female grade school student, or her teacher, hears Dr. Summers’ comments and accepts them as true because they come from the president of an Ivy League institution. These remarks demonstrate that well-educated people can be ignorant about fields outside their own and exemplify the need to apply critical thinking to the source of information before considering an idea as valid. Of the many questions that Dr. Summers’ statements provoke, none is more important than asking what scientific data, if any, his claim is based upon. Summers supported his opinion with only anecdotal information, which is a poor scientific practice. In his talk he cited “a woman he worked with at the Treasury Department” who said that only three of the 22 women in her graduate school class were working full time. He also mentioned his twin daughters, who when given trucks to play with pretended the trucks were dolls saying, “Look, the daddy truck is carrying the baby truck.” Additionally, Summers stated that his conclusions were based on “a fair amount of reading the literature and a lot of talking to people.” Obviously, developing a theory based on the behavior of your friends, children, and other acquaintances does not allow generalization to the rest of the population.
    [Show full text]
  • Non-Binary Or Genderqueer Genders
    International Review of Psychiatry ISSN: 0954-0261 (Print) 1369-1627 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/iirp20 Non-binary or genderqueer genders Christina Richards, Walter Pierre Bouman, Leighton Seal, Meg John Barker, Timo O. Nieder & Guy T’Sjoen To cite this article: Christina Richards, Walter Pierre Bouman, Leighton Seal, Meg John Barker, Timo O. Nieder & Guy T’Sjoen (2016) Non-binary or genderqueer genders, International Review of Psychiatry, 28:1, 95-102, DOI: 10.3109/09540261.2015.1106446 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/09540261.2015.1106446 Published online: 12 Jan 2016. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 174 View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 1 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=iirp20 Download by: [212.200.65.127] Date: 18 February 2016, At: 12:21 INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF PSYCHIATRY, 2016 VOL. 28, NO. 1, 95–102 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/09540261.2015.1106446 REVIEW ARTICLE Non-binary or genderqueer genders Christina Richardsa,b, Walter Pierre Boumana, Leighton Sealb, Meg John Barkerc, Timo O. Niederd and Guy T’Sjoene aNottingham Centre for Gender Dysphoria, Nottingham, UK; bCharing Cross Gender Identity Clinic, London, UK; cDepartment of Psychology in Social Sciences, Open University, Milton Keynes, UK; dInterdisciplinary Transgender Health Care Centre Hamburg, Department for Sex Research and Forensic Psychiatry, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Germany; eCentre for Sexology and Gender, Department of Endocrinology, Ghent University, Belgium ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY Some people have a gender which is neither male nor female and may identify as both male and Received 29 June 2015 female at one time, as different genders at different times, as no gender at all, or dispute the very Accepted 6 October 2015 idea of only two genders.
    [Show full text]
  • Neuroscience and Sex/Gender
    Neuroethics (2012) 5:211–215 DOI 10.1007/s12152-012-9165-5 EDITORIAL NOTE Neuroscience and Sex/Gender Isabelle Dussauge & Anelis Kaiser Received: 4 September 2012 /Accepted: 13 September 2012 /Published online: 2 October 2012 # Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012 This special issue publishes interdisciplinary scholar- hosts very different epistemological approaches, a ship which aims to map and re-imagine the relations common knowledge of neuroscience and gender between neuroscience and gender studies. studies was a prerequisite for the group’stheoret- ical and methodological exchange. The participants lively debated crucial issues, from current research neuroGenderings: The Network on sex/gender difference in neuropsychology, through the implications of notions of sex/gender, The authors of the present special issue were all par- gender identity and sexuality used in neuroscien- ticipants in the workshop neuroGenderings: Critical tific experimentation, to the social workings of a Studies of the Sexed Brain (Uppsala, 2010). Then co- sexed/gendered brain. organizers, now guest editors, we work in gender More precisely, the neuroGenderings workshop studies, neuroscience, and science and technology achieved an impressive first mapping of the research studies. In 2010, we did not know for a fact that the on sex/gender in neurosciences and the methodological neuroGenderings initiative would grow and develop frames used in those sciences. We discussed, for in- into an international network and conference series. stance, the role assigned to “sexed” regions of the brain, Now we know. by analyzing the relevance of the notion of sexual di- In neuroGenderings, a transdisciplinary and inter- morphism, itself a system of significance that is always national group of researchers from the neurosciences, and solely framed by neuro-logical sexual dichotomy.
    [Show full text]
  • Debating Sex Differences in Cognition: We Can Do Better What I Learnt Teaching Cordelia Fine’S “Delusions of Gender”
    Debating sex differences in cognition: we can do better What I learnt teaching Cordelia Fine’s “Delusions of Gender” Tom Stafford, @tomstafford University of Sheffield The graduate class PSY6316 ‘Current Issues in Cognitive Neuroscience’. MSc course, ~15 people. Stafford, T. (2008), A fire to be lighted: a case-study in enquiry-based learning, Practice and Evidence of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, Vol. 3, No. 1, April 2008, pp.20-42. “There are sex differences in the brain” Fine (Delusions, Introduction, p xxvii) “Anti-sex difference” investigators? Cahill (2014) http://www.dana.org/Cerebrum/2014/Equal_%E2%89%A0_The_Same__Sex_Differences_in_the_Hu man_Brain/ https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2017/01/20/are-male-and-female-brains-absolutely-identical/ Sarah Ditum, The Guardian, 18th January 2017 Not what Fine thinks. Not what Ditum thinks. Headline chosen by subeditor Original: http://web.archive.org/web/20170118081437/www.theguardian.com/books/2017/jan/18/testosterone- rex-review-cordelia-fine Current: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/jan/18/testosterone-rex-review-cordelia-fine We can do better We can quantify the size of differences Interpreting Cohen's d effect size an interactive visualization by Kristoffer Magnusson http://rpsychologist.com/d3/cohend/ Sex differences in cognition are small https://mindhacks.com/2017/02/14/sex-differences-in-cognition-are-small/ The Gender similarities hypothesis “The differences model, which argues that males and females are vastly different psychologically, dominates the popular media. Here, the author advances a very different view, the gender similarities hypothesis, which holds that males and females are similar on most, but not all, psychological variables” Hyde, J.
    [Show full text]
  • Investigating the Existence, Cognitive Attributes and Potential Pathological Consequences of the Extreme Female Brain
    INVESTIGATING THE EXISTENCE, COGNITIVE ATTRIBUTES AND POTENTIAL PATHOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE EXTREME FEMALE BRAIN Sarah Louise JONES Submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Division of Psychology Faculty of Social Sciences University of Bradford 2 0 1 6 Abstract INVESTIGATING THE EXISTENCE, COGNITIVE ATTRIBUTES AND POTENTIAL PATHOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE EXTREME FEMALE BRAIN Sarah Louise Jones Key words: extreme female brain, empathising, systemising, sex differences, autism, schizophrenia, memory, cognition, gene imprinting, paranoid ideation The ‘extreme female brain’ (EFB) is derived from the empathising - systemising theory (E-S) which hypothesises that sex differences in cognition exist on a continuum, based on abilities in ‘empathising’ and ‘systemising’ (Baron-Cohen, 2003). The EFB profile; extreme empathising alongside deficient systemising, has received little attention in social cognitive neuroscience research, compared to the extreme male brain, which has advanced the knowledge of sex differences in the expression of autism. Currently, there is no solid evidence of a clinical pathology relating to the EFB nor a marker of cognition associated with a person’s ‘place’ on the E-S continuum. Here, an episodic memory paradigm with social and non-social conditions was given to participants along with measures of empathising and systemising. Scores on the social condition predicted where a person lies on the E-S continuum. The thesis then investigated the hypothesis that schizophrenia is expressed in the feminised profile (Badcock & Crepsi, 2006) i and the presumption that empathising and systemising demonstrate a trade­ off. Elements of paranoia were associated with an empathising bias. However, a bias in systemising ability was associated with schizotypy along with a significant overlap in the expression of autistic traits and schizotypy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Female Brain Conceptual Advances in Brain Research a Series of Books Focusing on Brain Dynamics and Information Processing Systems of the Brain
    The Female Brain Conceptual Advances in Brain Research A series of books focusing on brain dynamics and information processing systems of the brain. Edited by Robert Miller, Otago Centre for Theoretical Studies in Psychiatry and Neuro- science, New Zealand (Editor-in-chief), Günther Palm, University of Ulm, Germany and Gordon Shaw, University of California at Irvine, USA. Volume 1 Brain Dynamics and the Striatal Complex edited by R. Miller and J.R. Wickens Volume 2 Complex Brain Functions: Conceptual Advances in Russian Neuroscience edited by R. Miller, A.M. Ivanitsky and P.M. Balaban Volume 3 Time and the Brain edited by R. Miller Volume 4 Sex Differences in Lateralization in the Animal Brain by V.L. Bianki and E.B. Filippova Volume 5 Cortical Areas: Unity and Diversity edited by A. Schüz and R. Miller Volume 6 The Female Brain by C. Darlington This book is part of a series. The publisher will accept continuation orders which may be cancelled at any time and which provide for automatic billing and shipping of each title in the series upon publication. Please write for details. The Female Brain Cynthia Darlington University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand London and New York First published 2002 by Taylor & Francis 11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Taylor & Francis Inc, 29 West 35th Street, New York, NY 10001 Taylor & Francis is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2003. © 2002 Taylor & Francis All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
    [Show full text]
  • Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Difference
    P a g e | 145 Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Difference Author: Cordelia Fine, 2010, Published by W. W. Norton & Company Book review by Sorana-Alexandra CONSTANTINESCU Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania [email protected] This book is an alternative to the vast literature that aims to show us why women are from Venus and men are from Mars. As pretentions it might sound, I consider this book to be a must read for everybody, not only for academics or researchers. Gender myth perpetuation can be in some proportion stopped by educating people about the various biases that can interfere with the outcome of studies on sex and gender, and the factors that can favor or inhibit their popularization outside academia, which could, in the long run, lead to a discrediting or at least a critical reception of the wealth of pseudo- scientific claims of biologically inherent differences in the psychological and social construction of men and women. Emphasis in writings that explain that there are hard-wired differences between men and women is placed upon the fine-tuned emotional skills of women, as opposed to their emotionally helpless male counterpart, to sugarcoat the inherently misogynistic message at the core of these studies: it is due to the very nature of our species that women are underrepresented in the hard sciences and mathematics, in leadership etc., not due to historical systemic oppression. While the history of sexism is not explicitly denied, it is provided with an implicit excuse in an appeal to nature, and the active role of excluding women from the political, economic and academic spheres is thus minimized, and passed off as being in a large part due to women being, on average, naturally deficient in the necessary skills required to be involved in these activities.
    [Show full text]
  • How Men and Women Lead Differently
    How Men and Women Lead Differently For much of the twentieth century, most scientists assumed that women were essentially small men, neurologically and in every other sense except for their reproductive functions. That assumption has been at the heart of enduring misunderstandings. When you look a little deeper into the brain differences, they reveal what makes women, women and men, men. —Louann Brizendine, M.D., author of The Female Brain Female Leaders Male Leaders Interactive Transactional Participative Hierarchal Collaborate connectively Collaborate competitively Group problem solve Personally problem solve Inductive in problem solving Deductive in problem solving Define themselves by being relationally literate Define themselves through accomplishments Prefer to be recognized Ask to be recognized Ascertains the exact needs of each team member Cares more about larger structural needs Emphasize complex and multi-tasking activities Single task orientation and completion Helps others express emotions Downplays emotions Directly empathizes Promotes independent resolution Cognizant of the specific needs of many at once Cognizant of the needs of the organization Verbally encourages and praises Encourages less feeling and more action Resolves emotional conflicts to reduce stress Denies emotional vulnerability to reduce stress Female leaders: Tend to be more interactive, wanting to keep interactions extended and vital until the interaction has worked through its emotional content. Tend more toward participative teams—to find ways in which colleagues are complementary. It is probable that higher oxytocin levels affect this leadership quality—the more support women build around them, the lower their stress level, and the more effective they may be as leaders. Tend to collaborate connectively by seeking possible connections between each person’s different ideas—and try to find developmental elements in the connectivity.
    [Show full text]
  • The Gendered Brain©
    The Gendered Brain© Student Manual Version 3 – January 2012 Course Designers Gail Hooker & Amy Lewis 1 The Brain at Ease, Energized & Wired 2 Ice Breakers Some ice breakers promote and “nurture empathy by offering children an opportunity to practice taking care of others.” They often give the teacher the chance to “teach skills…of social interest through sharing, listening, inclusion, participation and dialogue,” as well as, “to merge social, emotional, and intellectual learning” (Responsive Classroom, 2003). Some involve movement, giving student the opportunity to reenergize and maintain focus throughout the school day. It is crucial to provide time in school for students to bond with each other and with the teacher. Chemicals released in the brain during such activities aid in promoting calm and maintaining focus. “They need the encouragement and validation that comes from our best attention to their efforts. They need the safety that comes from the belief that their teacher sees them, knows them. Mutual trust grows from this security.” -Ruth Sidney Charney, author of Teaching Children to Care “Covering the curriculum is the death of education.” – John Dewey “I never let my education get in the way of my learning.” - Mark Twain 3 Puzzle Making 1. In teams, instruct students to select one colored crayon to use as they contribute to a team picture. Instruct them to keep the pictures simple each adding a line or two as they circulate the paper taking turns until you tell them to stop. Then have them cut the picture into as many pieces as there are teammates (ie. four teammates = four puzzle pieces).
    [Show full text]
  • Women, Cycling, and the Public Sphere: How Discursive and Community Practices Affect Engagement
    Michigan Technological University Digital Commons @ Michigan Tech Dissertations, Master's Theses and Master's Dissertations, Master's Theses and Master's Reports - Open Reports 2015 WOMEN, CYCLING, AND THE PUBLIC SPHERE: HOW DISCURSIVE AND COMMUNITY PRACTICES AFFECT ENGAGEMENT Elsa L. Roberts Michigan Technological University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/etds Part of the Linguistics Commons, and the Women's Studies Commons Copyright 2015 Elsa L. Roberts Recommended Citation Roberts, Elsa L., "WOMEN, CYCLING, AND THE PUBLIC SPHERE: HOW DISCURSIVE AND COMMUNITY PRACTICES AFFECT ENGAGEMENT", Master's Thesis, Michigan Technological University, 2015. https://doi.org/10.37099/mtu.dc.etds/915 Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/etds Part of the Linguistics Commons, and the Women's Studies Commons WOMEN, CYCLING, AND THE PUBLIC SPHERE: HOW DISCURSIVE AND COMMUNITY PRACTICES AFFECT ENGAGEMENT By Elsa L. Roberts A THESIS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE In Rhetoric and Technical Communication MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY 2015 © 2015 Elsa L. Roberts This thesis has been approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Rhetoric and Technical Communication. Department of Humanities Thesis Advisor: Victoria L. Bergvall Committee Member: Lauren M. Bowen Committee Member: M. Ann Brady Committee Member: Donald J. Lafreniere Department Chair: Ronald Strickland To my grandmother, who believed in me when no one else did. To my partner and best friend, who has been by my side since I was 18. And to my other best friend who is the Jake to my Finn, together we inhabit the struggle.
    [Show full text]
  • Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Difference. by CORDELIA FINE. New York: W. W. Norton Comp
    INVITED REVIEW ESSAY Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Difference. By CORDELIA FINE. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2010. Brain Storm: The Flaws in the Science of Sex Differences.ByREBECCAM. JORDAN-YOUNG. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2010. Letitia Meynell “…we’re only trying to find the biological roots to gender inequality, so why be fussy, right?” (Fine, 108). That the search for dimorphic cognitive, affective, and behavioral sex differences con- tinues is no doubt a source of anxiety for those who have long embraced a feminist or progressive ideal of equality for all postnatal humans, regardless of their sex/gender (or other) identities. Indeed, the prevalence of media reports and best-selling accounts of scientific findings of fundamental neurological, psychological, and behavioral sex dif- ferences, in addition to the studies themselves, may give the most ardent feminists among us occasion to suspect that there might just be something to it: Putting aside the many queer, trans, and intersexed exceptions—for which some biological explana- tion must also, presumably, exist—a rational consideration of the mountain of evi- dence surely suggests that our natural history really has produced two fundamentally different types of people: men and women. Or so one might suppose. Feminists strug- gling with this haunting doubt would do well to take a look at Cordelia Fine’s Delu- sions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Difference and Rebecca Jordan-Young’s Brain Storm: The Flaws in the Science of Sex Differences as effective remedies. These recent books join a now extensive literature by feminist aca- demics, both within and outside the biological and mind sciences, that meticulously and critically dissect empirical claims about human sex differences as they pertain to cognition, emotions, and behavior.
    [Show full text]