GENDER TROUBLE
Feminists and gender experts usually argue for the absolute ‘plasticity’ of gender; that is to say that all gender behaviour is socially and culturally imposed, and can therefore be changed. One of the strongest advocates of this has been Judith Butler the title of whose most famous book we borrow for this section.
However others would disagree saying that there are preferences and proclivities hard-wired into the male and female brains which have a massive effect on that individual’s behaviour i.e. arguing that some “gender” characteristics are innate and not culturally determined. A couple of years ago the President of Harvard University, Larry Summers had to resign his post after he suggested that women might not be intellectually equipped to become top scientists and mathematicians.
Professor Summers gave the following reasons for the paucity of women scientists and mathematicians: women might not be as interested as men in making the sacrifices required by highly paid jobs men may have more “intrinsic aptitude” for high level science and last and least, that women might be victims of old- fashioned discrimination Summers might have added that in most societies in the world women still bear the most of the family responsibilities, even when they also work full-time. One might in fact say, relative to his first ‘reason’, that women already make the sacrifices so that their men can have the highly paid jobs?
President Summers seemed to discount the fact that if men dominate the top jobs in this field they are almost certainly dominating recruitment panels. Are men looking for a better gender balance by actively searching for top female scientists to join their ranks? I don’t think so. Harvard itself seems to have a poor record on that score.
To be fair to Professor Summers some of the women present during this debate seemed almost to vindicate his views. Nancy Hopkins, Professor of Biology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) was so disgusted that she felt compelled to leave the room in a hurry. ‘I felt I was going to be sick’ she explained.’ My heart was pounding and my breath was shallow……I would have either blacked out or thrown up’. This cannot by any stretch of the imagination be seen as a constructive response to the debate.
It is now well- recognized that the architecture of male and female brains is different. There is also evidence that they mature at different rates which supports the arguments for single-sex schooling. Boys normally do better at maths and girls at languages. Boys are more likely to be hyperactive, dyslexic and autistic.
Research shows also that the sensory perceptions of males and females differ, in that women can see colours and textures which men cannot see. Similarly women are thought to have more acute sense of hearing and smell. As the senses are the gateways or the portals to the brain it seems likely that different sensory aptitudes would affect brain development.
This having been said there are more areas of similarity and overlap between women and men than there are differences…. most people fall in the mid-range of aptitudes in maths and languages for example rather than excelling at one or the other; and probably also most of us occupy a middle sensory range, though most women feel that men have a higher tolerance of noise and bad smells than they do themselves!
There may be innate differences between male and female bodies and brains but from birth those differences interact with complex forces of socialization. What we don’t yet understand is how important or otherwise those innate differences are and how to make sure that Nurture does not impose limitations rather than opening up potentials. It is clear from many studies that girls are often streamed out of scientific and technical areas including IT at an early age on the grounds of its not being an area of their competence. Similarly boys are not encouraged into activities which might develop their nurturing and caring skills.
What does seem clear is that we are all the result of a complex interplay between genetic inheritance and social context. It is not Nature OR Nurture but Nature AND Nurture or as one eminent (male) scientist (Matt Ridley) has said Nature via Nurture.
A question which does not appear to have occurred to Larry Summer’s seminar at Harvard was the following. Why are activities traditionally dominated by men accorded the highest values….financial and other? Why is it more important to be a top scientist than a brilliant primary school teacher? If the value of brilliant primary school teacher was recognized would men be falling over themselves to get those jobs?
Further Reading Sexual Paradox: Men, Women, and the Real Gender Gap By Susan Pinkner, Atlantic Books, 2008