Male and Female brains wired differently, scans reveal. - Polidicks

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43054051]but the diversity within a group is important. you don't use outliers to "prove a point", you acknowledge that individual differences seem to be greater than sexual differences. that makes those sexual differences fairly meaningless to base your perceptions, worldview, or, god forbid, legislation/economic organization on.[/QUOTE] That isn't really true. Let us say I have two barrels of apples. One is filled with green and one is filled with red. Let us say both the green and red apples' sizes vary greatly within each group, but the average size of the red apples is larger than the average size of the green apples. It is still meaningful to notice that average difference when making decisions based on the size of the apple when each apple can't be individually inspected. This is assuming you are correct, of course, which I haven't yet seen proven.

[QUOTE=sgman91;43054042]Is there any study you know of that shows the strength diversity in men and women of similar living patterns?[/QUOTE] idk, i'll do a quick search. humans are surprisingly diverse though. i was more using this as an example of how even proven physiological differences between sexes aren't always so simple.

[QUOTE=27X;43054062]Yes, asking for objective proof you have yet to provide other than an incredibly generic link that's only partially germane to the subject sure is aggressive. grr. rawr. I mentioned it because even with greater granularity compared to newer models, it was able to produce objective results which backs up data collated thirty years ago, which again contradicts your generalist folksy wisdom that apparently isn't factually accurate.[/QUOTE] You called him a sperg how is that not aggressive?

[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;43054061]Same issue, same journal. Try reading shit you cite before you cite it, chuckles.[/QUOTE] Can you give a link, I would rather not read 33 studies to find a single quote. As a side note, not reading an entire issue before using a study isn't exactly not "reading shit you cite."

[QUOTE=deadoon;43054063]So because individual differences are so great, sexual differences are meaningless? So comparing the average of two groups is meaningless because the outliers of both groups are extremely different?[/QUOTE] from a scientific standpoint, nothing is meaningless. however, if you are trying to justify policies or perceptions by using sexual dimorphism, it might ultimately be meaningless because it means any assumptions you can make about someone because of their sex is going to be overshadowed by the diversity within the sex. [QUOTE=sgman91;43054068]That isn't really true. Let us say I have two barrels of apples. One is filled with green and one is filled with red. Let us say both the green and red apples' sizes vary greatly within each group, but the average size of the red apples is larger than the average size of the green apples. It is still meaningful to notice that average difference when making decisions based on the size of the apple when each apple can't be individually inspected. This is assuming you are correct, of course, which I haven't yet seen proven.[/QUOTE] yea, i'm not against noticing the difference. but you also can't assume anything about the size of any random apple based purely on the color.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43054092]yea, i'm not against noticing the difference. but you also can't assume anything about the size of any random apple based purely on the color.[/QUOTE] If an assumption MUST be made, like it must often be made in the real world, the information is useful to know. The part that bothers me is when people flat out deny that any difference exists.

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;43054075]You called him a sperg how is that not aggressive?[/QUOTE] Try searching his post history on subjects he considers contentious. Posting does not occur in vacuum.

[QUOTE=sgman91;43054102]If an assumption MUST be made, like it must often be made in the real world, the information is useful to know. The part that bothers me is when people flat out deny that any difference exists.[/QUOTE] I doubt neuroscientific details will matter that much in the real world for most people, eventually it might but not directly. I'm not denying there is a difference I'm just saying the difference is irrelevant to the current society we live in, for now atleast.

[QUOTE=JaegerMonster;43052905]It cannot be entirely something manufactured by society, that would be committing to intellectual dishonesty in the face of science and basic observation. If it was entirely a social construct, then we would not see nearly identical behaviors being carried out across radically different societies by respective members of their sex[/QUOTE] this is a really really old argument that is pretty terrible and shows very little awareness of how modern human societies have been shaped and created the reason almost all modern societies are patriarchal is simple: because modern societies are based on ownership. prior to modern civilisation, ie. agriculture and everything that comes with it, humans were not patriarchal creatures. there are numerous tribes that still exhibit this today. the reason the trend moved toward patriarchy was because we developed the idea of ownership, and ownership facilitated the need for lineage and inheritance. this wasn't possible in the current structure because, to put it bluntly, there was a lot of fucking. there was so much fucking that no male human knew who their kids were. this is still present in a lot of current-day tribes, and in primates, where there is no such concept of a biological father and, in fact, the thing closest to what we consider a father-figure is usually the mother's brother, the uncle, because there is no doubt that the uncle is family but i digress. the idea that "societies all across the world turned out to be massively patriarchal so therefore it's human nature so that makes it okay because it's nature :)" is just wrong. the societies you're citing all come from the same point - ownership - and then on top of that they all come from almost exactly the same religious backdrop

Why the fuck I read it as Male and Female bras

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;43054016]He said he'd pick a tiny man to lift it rather than a woman. There is literally no reason to do that other than sexist bias.[/QUOTE] Can you quote it? What I read was that they didn't care who they picked, but the women didn't want/couldn't do it.

[QUOTE=Juniez;43052717]a possible suggestion might be that the brains are strengthening connections based on the conformed social roles/tasks instead of a genetic predisposition[/QUOTE] Or, you know, hormones? Seriously guys.

[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;43054886]Or, you know, hormones? Seriously guys.[/QUOTE] No it's society you white male pig

[QUOTE=Venezuelan;43053920]So if you're actually taking time to evaluate each individual you're not basing it on the grounds of sex and it's not the efficient streamlined process you make it out to be because you yourself are consciously aware of and testing for outliers in the system at all times[/QUOTE] But almost every individual (with an exception of some of the males) at my work is fairly 'average' at a glance, so the assumption is made that the average men are stronger than the average women (not an incorrect assumption) and work is given out that way. You don't NEED to take time to evaluate each individual because they're all almost entirely average. If a woman is obviously ripped (or at least reasonably strong compared to the people around her) then she'd probably be told to work heavier items, but none of the women I work with are, so the men are given the heavier items. [editline]4th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=thisispain;43053980]no they arent different, their nervous systems are the same and any neurologist worth their salt would tell you that ^_^ this was a study done with MRI's. [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_MRI[/URL] if their nervous systems were different the MRI wouldnt work because they wouldnt be able to map things out lol. what is different is the diffusion of water in certain places, and why this happens is a mystery. but certain the neural networks are the same. it's a huge difference. to use the article's analogy, the roads aren't different, but the traffic seems to be im such a sperg you sure got me. [editline]3rd December 2013[/editline] article failed to say this but ill say it yeah. MRI's measure the excitation of water, nothing else.[/QUOTE] Are you sure they're not 'build' differently? Has it not been established for a LONG time that women have a MUCH higher proportion of 'white matter' in their brain to men, and that men have a higher proportion of 'grey matter' in their brain than women? That seems like a pretty important point to me. Also, from memory, a woman's brain is denser and more tightly packed which means more neurons in a smaller volume which is obviously a pretty big benefit. The fact that a woman's brain has far more 'roads' in it seems like a fairly important thing.

The gender debate on FP makes my blood boil more than anything else. I've probably stated several times that gender equality =/= gender differences. It's like people are afraid that saying men and and women are different because brings on sexism or something. Women are badass and men are badass, but there are differences that go beyond just having a dick/vag. Just because women never have the same athletic performance as men doesn't mean society is causing that, it's actually how we are built. I've seen people go as far to say that women get worse training than men, or "don't bulk up as much" due to social pressure. This couldn't be more wrong; I know women who have had the best training and work just as hard as male athletic counterparts. However, they won't be able to achieve the same performance. Why is this? Social injustice? Gender roles? Dammit no. Does this make them weak compared to men? Not at all. They have tons of abilities men don't have, obviously the most apparent is carrying a child. and of course there is a high variety between individual to individual. As soon as we start throwing away our recognition of what makes each sex special, we will lose a beautiful ying-yang type relationship that makes humans great. So yes, we're all equal, but being equal with our rights and respects doesn't mean we can just forget that men and women are different in positive ways. *deep breath*

I can definitely see this, but it isn't too much of a difference when it comes to daily life. I'll just stick to the belief that women are men with nicer tits and who like dick jokes much less [QUOTE=Glitchman;43055703]The gender debate on FP makes my blood boil more than anything else. I've probably stated several times that gender equality =/= gender differences. It's like people are afraid that saying men and and women are different because brings on sexism or something. Women are badass and men are badass, but there are differences that go beyond just having a dick/vag. Just because women never have the same athletic performance as men doesn't mean society is causing that, it's actually how we are built. I've seen people go as far to say that women get worse training than men, or "don't bulk up as much" due to social pressure. This couldn't be more wrong; I know women who have had the best training and work just as hard as male athletic counterparts. However, they won't be able to achieve the same performance. Why is this? Social injustice? Gender roles? Dammit no. Does this make them weak compared to men? Not at all. They have tons of abilities men don't have, obviously the most apparent is carrying a child. and of course there is a high variety between individual to individual. As soon as we start throwing away our recognition of what makes each sex special, we will lose a beautiful ying-yang type relationship that makes humans great. So yes, we're all equal, but being equal with our rights and respects doesn't mean we can just forget that men and women are different in positive ways. *deep breath*[/QUOTE] May wanna stay away from any threads about either gender, good for your sanity!

[QUOTE=danharibo;43053131]Which doesn't conflict with this, of course.[/QUOTE] You fell for my trap

[QUOTE=Vasili;43056737]You feel for my trap[/QUOTE] shiiiiiiit

[quote] Maps of neural circuitry show women's brains are designed for [b]social skills[/b] and memory, men's for perception and co-ordination[/quote] Who would have thought?

[QUOTE=sltungle;43055622]But almost every individual (with an exception of some of the males) at my work is fairly 'average' at a glance, so the assumption is made that the average men are stronger than the average women (not an incorrect assumption) and work is given out that way. You don't NEED to take time to evaluate each individual because they're all almost entirely average. If a woman is obviously ripped (or at least reasonably strong compared to the people around her) then she'd probably be told to work heavier items, but none of the women I work with are, so the men are given the heavier items.[/QUOTE] yeah but my point is to see they're average or ripped you're subconsciously sizing them all up, which is in itself a fair, unbiased method of choosing based on individuals. You're making an assumption and scanning everyone for exceptions. That's no different from making no assumption in the beginning and then scanning everyone. The only difference is the latter is less likely to include bias.

[QUOTE=Venezuelan;43056878]yeah but my point is to see they're average or ripped you're subconsciously sizing them all up, which is in itself a fair, unbiased method of choosing based on individuals. You're making an assumption and scanning everyone for exceptions. That's no different from making no assumption in the beginning and then scanning everyone. The only difference is the latter is less likely to include bias.[/QUOTE] The assumption that the average male is stronger than the average female is still being made, though.

[QUOTE=sltungle;43056975]The assumption that the average male is stronger than the average female is still being made, though.[/QUOTE] but there is not point to the assumption if you put as much work looking for exceptions as you would put just sizing everyone up with no assumption

[QUOTE=Venezuelan;43057027]but there is not point to the assumption if you put as much work looking for exceptions as you would put just sizing everyone up with no assumption[/QUOTE] But you don't put effort into seeing the exceptions as the exceptions are blatantly obvious. The fact that 90% of the staff at my work are average is obvious. The fact that 10% are quite buff (all males at that) is just as obvious. You don't need to take any longer than a millisecond to assess them to come to that conclusion.

yeah and you don't need any longer than a millisecond to go "she's small she's small she's small he's big" whereas you're going "is she big? no. is she big? no. is she big? no. is he small? no." for all practical purposes it's the exact same thing

[QUOTE=Juniez;43052717]a possible suggestion might be that the brains are strengthening connections based on the conformed social roles/tasks instead of a genetic predisposition[/QUOTE] Possibly, I wish this study included transgender people

It is always the society, society, society. Society is evil, society does terrible things, society is this beast that mankind has to fight to get rid of gender roles. I think people don´t seem to question how society became the thing it is, the history of it. It certainly wasn´t created by an interdimensional being slapping the earth accidently creating mankind. So how do you think society was created? What was the process that led to the society we know today?

[QUOTE=SuddenImpact;43057626]It is always the society, society, society. Society is evil, society does terrible things, society is this beast that mankind has to fight to get rid of gender roles. I think people don´t seem to question how society became the thing it is, the history of it. It certainly wasn´t created by an interdimensional being slapping the earth accidently creating mankind. So how do you think society was created? What was the process that led to the society we know today?[/QUOTE] The transition from nomadic to sedentary civilization is likely the turning point you are looking for.

[QUOTE=SuddenImpact;43057626]It is always the society, society, society. Society is evil, society does terrible things, society is this beast that mankind has to fight to get rid of gender roles. I think people don´t seem to question how society became the thing it is, the history of it. It certainly wasn´t created by an interdimensional being slapping the earth accidently creating mankind. So how do you think society was created? What was the process that led to the society we know today?[/QUOTE] yes thank you nobody thinks society is a sentient mystical being

[QUOTE=Glitchman;43055703] As soon as we start throwing away our recognition of what makes each sex special, we will lose a beautiful ying-yang type relationship that makes humans great. [/QUOTE] Oh yeah that beautiful relationship that caused women to be oppressed in many areas of the world for centuries. Whether there is any genetic basis for the differences, they should be treated as though there was almost no difference at all.

[QUOTE=SuddenImpact;43057626]It is always the society, society, society. Society is evil, society does terrible things, society is this beast that mankind has to fight to get rid of gender roles. I think people don´t seem to question how society became the thing it is, the history of it. It certainly wasn´t created by an interdimensional being slapping the earth accidently creating mankind. So how do you think society was created? What was the process that led to the society we know today?[/QUOTE] Society is the (by most standards) best thing that happened to mankind but it's far from perfect, it doesn't matter how it was created or why, what matters is that it could be better :v: