Lecture 6 - Intro to Cognitive Neuroscience of Sex and Gender

Question 1

sex and gender

Answer 1

• sex = biological category based on the combo of bio traits inc chromosomes, hormonal profile, gamete size, genetalia (m or f). socially constructed understanding.
• gender = socially constructed, factors related to sex or personal identification
• sexual dimorphism = things presenting differently depending on if someone is male or female
• straw man fallacy occurs when someone distorts or exaggerates another persons argument and then attacks the distorted version instead of actually engaging.
• many people

Question 2

how has our understanding changed over time

Answer 2

• ancient greece and single sex models: f body as a result of ‘weak sperm’ (hippocrates) or a mutilated kind of male nature (aristotle). seen as incomplete version of m body
• Laquer (1990) - writers in the enlightenment were the first to adopt ‘two-sex’ models i.e. seeing women as distinct from men rather than as a subcategory or version of.
• these were seen as the bio/scientific models at the time

Question 3

how do we define sex now

Answer 3

• most people are assigned either m or f at birth based on anatomy
• there are multiple possible indices:
  > sex chromosomes (XX = f, XY = m)
  > hormone profiles (low T = f, high T = m)
  > gamete production (large gamete - f, small = m)
• bio sex is best conceptualised as a combo of bio traits but these are not always dichotomous (e.g. XXY, XO, XXX, no gamete production, hyperandogenism)

Question 4

intersex

Answer 4

• where there is genital ambiguity/sex characteristics do not fit typical definitions of m and f = 0.018 - 1.7%
• refers to indivs born with any of the several sex-related characteristics that do not fit typical binary notions of m or f body
• may become apparent at puberty

Question 5

gender

Answer 5

• the distinction between biology and behaviour was made in ancient observations. gender as a concept not formalised until 20C. Freud (concept of gendered behaviour in childhood) Money (Gender identity following penectomy) Butler (performative gender created through sociality)
• socially constructed but has a bio component & we assume gender based on appearance of secondary characteristics
• some argue gender ideology refutes the reality of bio sex or sexual difs between m/f. typically rooted in traditional ideologies

Question 6

Being and doing gender

Answer 6

• early psychologists conceptualised gender as a state of being but contributions introduced notion of ‘doing gender’ aka gender performativity
• Butler - gender is something we learn as a performance as imposed upon us
• gender not tied to biological reality but is constructed & open to change. not objective natural thing.
• linked to gender as a social construct idea
• BUT lived exp of trans and non-binaru people tell us ‘being’ gender has a place in the conceptualisation of gender
• Tate et al (2014) being and doing gender should be considered in an integrated way for all
• such narratives from gender experiences refer to a specific point in life realising they were/not a particular gender - being gender is a prerequisite to then doing gender
• trans people report as their sense of self (being) develops, they find gender roles that affect them more strongly (doing) regardless of whether they agreed with them or not

Question 7

are there really only two genders

Answer 7

• no - inc identification with non-binary genders in west.
• not a new idea: indigenous nations of america have more than 2 gender categories, many alt gender expressions
• multiple modern cultures have stable non-binary gender systems e.g. two-spirit people in native american cultures
• there is inc awareness and support for notion that sex and gender are not fixed binary constructs e.g. brain structure, function & cognition not as sexually dimorphic as one thought

Question 8

brief history of sex and gender neuroscience

Answer 8

• notion of sex/gender difs in human brain largely ignored until 20 years ago. often viewed as ‘not fundamental’ and so most studies focussed on men
• some viewed study of sex/gender difs as distasteful. other political motivations to ignore inc the potential for neurosexism (belief in brain sex or gendered m vs f brain that dictates engagement in stereotypically masculine behaviour)

Question 9

sex and gender neuroscience in popular discourse

Answer 9

• neuroscientific results often overinterpreted or misinterpreted in public discourse = sexism.
• e.g. in 2011 it was est that 500 US schools administered single-sex classrooms. underpinned by ‘scientific claims’ of dif brains.
• while areas of brain involved in language and motor skills mature earlier in girls than boys, the brain involved in geometry and spatial relations mature around 4 years earlier in boys than girls -
• Hanlon et al (2009) - cross sectional EEG study of b/g 2m - 16.5y. found dif patterns of cortical maturation in both sexes. the same brain areas showed recurring dev spurts of maturation and pruning in both sexes.

Question 10

why should we continue the study of sex/gender influences

Answer 10

• can be seen at multiple levels of analysis
• may be small but not unimportant
• does not mean there is a m or f brain or that difs are hardwired
• ignoring can lead to implications e.g. bio risks of developing certain conditions, brain ageing, medication dosages, clinical procedures
• also applied to non biological factors e.g. stereotypes
• there are limited consideration for sex/gender related factors that can explain intra and inter individual difs in brain and behaviour better than sex/gender
• yet while the brain is not sexually dimorphic there are small differences. researchers differ in their interpretation of this e.g. not meaninggful or argue that they can be meaningful behavioural consequences

Question 11

sex/gender differences are trivial

Answer 11

• Eliot (2011)
  > sex/gender difs are real and important but often distorted
  > should focus on misappropriation of results and the ways in which gender shapes neural function
  > sex/gender difs in brain are poorly defined and little consensus
  > the role of cultural learning is not adequately studied
• Eliot et al (2021)
  > review of large body of literature - brain is not sexually dimorphic. sex/gender difs are either trivial, negligible, weak or unlikely to be meaningful

Question 12

sex/gender differences are not trivial

Answer 12

• Hirnstein & Hausmann (2021) - argues against point sec/gender difs are not trivial. argues eliot neglects evidence that some sex/gender difs exist and although are not trival this does not mean that a sexual dimorphism exists
  1. importance of balanced phrasing - small but reliable sex/gender difs at pop level presented as not supportive of sex/gender difs
  2. importance of small effect sizes and meta analyses - may have little meaning for indiv but if repeated or at pop level can notice effect
  3. brain-behaviour relationship is unclear - a small sex/gender dif in brain may have meaningful behavioural consequences but relationship between brain and behaviour not clear
  4. clinical disorders and biopsychosocial approach - sex/gender related factors play role in risk factors in aetiology of many mental and neurodevelopmental disorders, both bio and psychosocial factors