But It's Only Natural...Biological versus Social Psychological Gender Development

Gender differences have always been a topic of discussion, whether it be with regard to different biological developments, social behavior, professional advancement, and most sex associated discrepancies in different fields.  Many scientists and psychologists argue that the differences that arise between genders are due to an innate and biological influence on neurological development which in turn influences personality and cognitive development.  But aren't men and women just naturally different?  Lise Eliot, though agreeing that there is a biological difference in gender development, argues that the majority of these biological developments cannot be associated with personality and cognitive capacity.

            Felicity Muth writes about the differences between boys and girls, and thinks we can learn a few things from the observation of our monkey friends. In her articles, she says that “girls are more sociable than boys, but prefer to play with just one other person, while boys prefer a larger group to play with.” Lise notes and discusses the same early observations on girl and boy behavior. Girls tend to break up into groups of two or three and bond over sharing their feelings with one another, while boys usually form larger groups and have a chain of command or popularity within their little coalitions. The difference in behavior is as Lise argues “a matter of socialization,” because girls are socially responsive by “confessing vulnerable feelings” but this would not be demonstrated in a group of little boys, which would, on the contrary, be detrimental to their image within the group if they displayed such emotions (pg 254-255).  

            Muth writes that most of the interactions of infant chimpanzees display sex differences that last throughout their entire lives, and the fact that they start so early on is pushing researchers to argue that the difference exhibited by the young chimpanzees is indeed biologically based, and similarly so is that of humans. However, after reading Lise’s book “Pink Brain, Blue Brain,” her argument of it being a more social matter seems more valid. For example, the difference in empathy is quite small among children than between men and women  showing that social factors play an active role in this. From an early age, boys are told to be “tougher” or more “manly” and so they suppress their feelings; in turn, this suppression leads to a loss or failure to develop the ability to be aware of others’ emotional expressions. The statement, “Still, as universal as some of these differences appear, none is as hard-wired as commonly portrayed. Like every other brain function we've considered, the social and emotional differences between boys and girls begin as tiny seeds planted by evolution and nourished by hormones but blossoming only under the hot sun of our highly gendered society” adequately sums up how gender differences in personality and behavior ought to be thought of.  

 The point that both Lise and  Muth can agree on, as well as many other neuroscientists and psychologists, is that nothing is conclusive, and though there seem to be leads in the biological direction, studies need to further analyze these differences in gender. Nonetheless, Lise’s book offers strong evidence of the great social impact on these differences or gaps. Furthermore, she offers ways that might help with gender stereotypes, decreasing such gaps, and “paving a way toward better mental health and personal fulfillment for both sexes” (pg. 253). 

Felicity Muth’s article: “Can Chimpanzees Teach us Anything About Differences Between Boys and Girls?” http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/not-bad-science/2014/01/06/can-chimpanzees-teach-us-anything-about-differences-between-boys-and-girls/          
 Eliot, Lise. Pink Brain, Blue Brain. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company, 2009. Print.