Making the Future Female

Posts tagged “male

Different But Equal – SEX AND THE BRAIN


I recently reblogged an article from my friend MADD suspicions about male and female brain types.

Click here to have a go at the fun quiz he found.

Also I’ve been reading, laughing and learning psychology from the witty and suave but spiky PinkAgendistStop by if you enjoy perceptive pieces.

I must also mention Dear Kitty.Some blog, Nonviolentconflict and thefreeorg for their intelligent and radical posts – I’ve learned so much in a short time from all three.

And of course other fine blogs I haven’t time to mention now, but will soon.

We all affect each other.

Their posts led me to think about thinking – always fun but a slightly weird experience  as well.

In my more political posts I’m calling for a paradigm shift in human affairs to move from a male-managed world to a female- and child-friendly future.

With cooperation rather than competition as the guiding principle.

No violence. Local organisation of life. Less people.

Women managing human society and reproduction.

No nation states and therefore no armies, weapons of mass destruction and no National Security.

But for this argument to make sense there must be actual differences between the sexes – not just differences we learn in life – but innate differences.

So yesterday I argued that we are all Equal But Different.

The title of this blog is Different But Equal

Let’s look at some differences now and start with brains.

How often have you heard men say, “I just can’t understand women…” or “My wife doesn’t understand me…”

Do women find men equally difficult to understand, or do they, on average, have more empathy and so can work men out?

Is there such a thing as female thinking or awareness? Can there be a ‘male’ type of thinking?

Are men and women more different or more the same?

And what about the brains of homosexual folk?

All interesting questions.

That’s why the relationship between sex differences in the brain and human behaviour is so controversial in psychology and society generally.

If there are real differences between the sexes then the implications are immense.

Recent studies show there are measurable differences in female and male brains.

For instance, there is a difference between sexes in the transcription of a gene pair involved in brain development unique to Homo sapiens.

Consequently female and male brains show differences in internal structure.

One of the main areas studied is the proportion of white matter relative to gray matter.

Gray matter is made up of neuronal cell bodies. The gray matter includes regions of the brain involved in muscle control, sensory perception such as seeing and hearing, memory, emotions, and speech.

White matter is the tissue through which messages pass between different areas of gray matter within the nervous system.

So the gray matter can be thought of as the processing areas, while the white matter connects.

Blood flow is also different between women and men, with females able to move blood more quickly to the areas needed and not losing functions in old age as much as males.

There are also differences in the structure and size of certain areas in male and female brains.

Studies found men on average to have larger parietal lobes, responsible for sensory input including spatial sense and navigation.

Women usually have larger Wernicke’s and Broca’s areas, regions that are responsible for language processing.

Postmortem and imaging studies over the past two decades have revealed structural differences in both global structures and sexually-related brain structures between heterosexual and homosexual subjects.

Researcher Simon LeVay showed that parts of hypothalamus related to sexual orientation not gender.

The hypothalamus is an area known to be  involved in sex differences in reproductive behaviour, mediating responses in menstrual cycles in women and the back of the hypothalamus regulates male-typical sexual behaviour.

These results were obtained from postmortem analysis of hypothalamic nuclei of known homosexual subjects compared to heterosexual patients.

The size of the brain’s hemispheres is a sexually dimorphic trait in which men tend to show asymmetry in the volumes of their hemispheres while women show more symmetry.

A recent  study found homosexual men showed hemispheric volumes to be symmetric similar to heterosexual women and homosexual women showed asymmetry in hemispheric volumes as heterosexual men do.

However differences in brain physiology between the sexes and sexual preferences do not lead to differences in intellect.

This points to females and males taking different but equally successful routes to achieve the same outcomes.

Evidence for this was found in a 2004 study finding men and women achieve similar IQ results by utilising different brain regions.

So this suggests there is no singular underlying neuro-anatomical structure for general intelligence.

In simple language, different types of brains work equally well.

So, different but equal.

Equal but different.


How Culture and Religion Oppress Women


Gender, religion and culture are foundational social constructs but are not of the same level. Culture is a macroscopic concept and therefore subsumes religion. As Raday argues, religion derives from culture and gender derives from both religion and culture. (2005: 665) The word “culture” has been described as “one of the two or three most complicated in the English language” (Williams 1988: 87). Kuper described it as “a way of talking about collective identities” (cited in Raday: 666) and can be seen as falling into two categories, ideological – what is thought, valued and believed and social culture – how people are organised. Culture is not always homogenous and does not necessarily map one-to-one with the constitutional realm, but can have three levels. There can be ethnic and religious differences, dominant and minority subcultures, a diversity of institutional cultures and an international culture of human rights all overlapping within the same national boundaries (Raday 2005: 667). Raday distinguishes between dynamic and static forms of culture, arguing traditional and patriarchal forms tend to resist change and moves towards gender equality (2005: 667)

Religion is an aspect of culture, although it is not easy to define the concept. Most arguments regarding the clash of gender equality and religion have been made against the three main monotheistic religions, Islam, Christianity and Judaism (Raday 2005: 668). Monotheistic religions are characterised by canonical texts, authoritative interpretations of doctrine and a formal structure to preserve the organisational ideology and ethical rules regulating the lives of individuals and communities. But these fundamental texts are in conflict with the basis of human rights legislation and doctrine which is humancentric and focuses on the responsibility and autonomy of the individual (Raday 2005: 669). Human rights doctrine works from the premise that the state has ultimate authority but must be prevented from abusing individuals. The opposite is true with monotheistic religions which are based on individual subjection to the will of the Supreme Being and transcendental morality.

Although culture and religion are often treated as different concepts, Raday argues that they have a lot in common when contrasted with human rights (2005: 670). But it is the leading global religions as opposed to cultures which codify custom and practice into texts which are then claimed to be outside history and culture. Raday cites the examples of the Vatican and the Organisation of Islamic Conferences as religious groups with a great deal of temporal power (2005: 669). Gender has been described as denoting the historical, cultural and social distinctions between women and men (Curthoys 2005: 140) Gender identity develops from normalised behaviour imposed on women and men by religion and culture. The history of gender in religion and traditional culture is of subordination of women to men and women’s exclusion from the public sphere (Raday 2005: 669). Although cultural and religious practices can be separated academically, in practice they usually interact. Patriarchal relations exist within culture and religion and there is a correlation between some cultural practices and the religious situations in which they are found (Raday 2005: 676). Raday gives the example of the cultural police in the Islamic Republic of Iran, who in an attempt to develop a culture of chastity, forced women to wear the veil in public places even though there is no clear religious command to do so. 676 The clash is between international human rights law and norms of culture and religion which promote and reinforce patriarchal values and fall back on the claim of religious freedom or cultural tradition. Giving it into any of these claims could result in an “infringement of woman’s right to a quality” (Raday 2005: 676).

So-called cultural practices which preserve patriarchy and discriminate against women include; female genital mutilation, the sale and forced marriage of daughters, the dowry system, preference for male children, female infanticide, polygamy, the power of husbands to discipline wives, marital rape, honour killings, witch-hunting, gendered division of food and restrictive dress codes (Raday 2005: 667). Examples of cultural issues found in signatories to CEDAW which conflict with human rights doctrine gender equality include: the elimination of polygamy in Algeria, polygamy, forced marriage and female genital mutilation in Cameroon, food issues for rural women in the Democratic Republic of Congo, domestic violence and discriminatory religious and cultural practices in Uganda, dowry, sati and devadsi practices in India, illegal sex selective abortions and family planning in China and laws discriminating against women in family and marriage matters in Indonesia.

Some feminists have argued that religion is a major source of female oppression and inequality and that most if not all religions are gendered and oppress women. In Christianity, the Supreme Deity is considered to be male. Several of the early church fathers such as Tertullian, Jerome, Ambrose and Augustine made misogynist writings which served to reinforce stereotypical gender roles (Skeptics Annotated Bible 2011). The story of the Virgin Birth promotes the idea that a woman’s body is a dirty and sinful thing and is not a proper origin for a spiritual being. The Roman Catholic Church does not ordain women and excommunicates those who attempt to become priests. It opposes family planning and birth control and does not believe in a woman’s rights to decide on abortion (Skeptics Annotated Bible 2011). Many protestant churches do not ordain women either and many believe in the wife’s submitting to the husband. In addition, many protestant churches teach that women should dress modestly but do not impose the same values on men. Other Christian denominations such as The Church of the Latter Day Saints, commonly known as the Mormons, formally allowed polygamy and still have not had condemned the practice. The Mormons do not ordain women and teach that a husband is master in the home (Skeptics Annotated Bible 2011).

In the Hindu religion, the Supreme Being is also considered to be male. In cultural practices dating back many thousands of years, widows are shunned as bringing bad luck and forced to live on the edge of society, alone (Skeptics Annotated Bible 2011). Widows were also supposed to shave their heads and never remarry. In the religious practice of Sati, windows were burnt alive on the funeral pyres of their husbands (Bowker 1997: 430). In Devadsi, girls are dedicated to a deity or temple and forced to become religious prostitutes for Upper caste members.

In Islam, menstruation is considered to make women unclean (similar conditions pertain to Christianity). Muslim women are expected in many societies to wear a veil due to the command in Sura 24 of the Koran for women to dress modestly (Skeptics Annotated Bible 2011). Honour killings are also traditionally carried out by adherents of this faith, where women are murdered after being raped or assaulted because they are considered to bring dishonour  on the family. Also the practice of female genital mutilation is associated with Islamic culture although it is not mentioned in the Koran. Under Shari’a law, a man can divorce his wife by repeating the phrase “I divorce you” three times, although this cannot happen the other way round (Skeptics Annotated Bible 2011). As a woman’s testimony is worth only half that of a man’s (Koran Sura 2) allegations of rape can only be proved if four male eye witnesses testified the assault occurred. The Prophet Mohammed, according to the Hadith (sayings and traditions of the prophet) married Aisha bint Abu Bakr – a prepubescent girl of nine years according to some accounts. This is considered important as 25% of all the Yemeni females marry under the age of 15 and several other Arab countries have not signed CEDAW (Skeptics Annotated Bible 2011). Finally, polygamy is legal in many Muslim countries and not condemned in the Koran.

Menstruation is similarly described as unclean in Judaism. In a male orthodox prayer, Jews say, “Blessed is He that did not make me a woman” (Skeptics Annotated Bible 2011). Orthodox Jews, like their Islamic counterparts in Iran, have set up modesty police who assault young women and men if they are showing too much of their bodies on the streets. In Jewish religious law, a woman cannot be divorced from her husband unless she receives a certificate from him. If this does not take place, she cannot get divorced (Skeptics Annotated Bible 2011). Men are allowed to pray at holy sites where women are not and orthodox Jews do not allow women to recite prayers in the synagogue.

Anderson, B., (2000) Joyous Greetings: The First International Women’s Movement 1813 – 1860.

New York: Oxford University Press

Anderson, B., and Zinsser, J., (1988a) A History of Their Own: Women in Europe from Prehistory to the Present. Volume 1 London: Penguin

Anderson, B., and Zinsser, J., (1988b) A History of Their Own: Women in Europe from Prehistory to  the Present. Volume II London: Penguin

Bowker, J., ed. (2005) The Oxford Dictionary of World Religions. Oxford University Press: Oxford

Calef, S., (2009) ‘Charting New Territory: Religion and the Gender-Critical Turn.’ Women, Gender and Religion. eds. Calef. S., and Simkins, R., Journal of Religion and Society (Supplement Series 5)

Chowdhury, S., (2008) ‘ India’s Premier Pays Lip Service To Villagers.’ FT.com [online] available from http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4da491c8-b7e5-11dd-ac6d-000779fd18c.html#axzz1LHqkWYno>[04/05/2011]

Daneshkhu, S., (2006) ‘US Lags Behind in Gender Gap Studies.’ FT.com [online] available from <http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fcccb534-7991-11db-90a6-0000779e2340.html#axzz1LHqkWYno>[04/05/2011]

De Beauvoir, S., (1997) The Second Sex. Trans. ed. by Parsley, H., London: Vintage

Donnan, S., (2006) ‘Indonesia Brings Debate on Polygamy out of the Shadows.’ FT.com [online] available from <http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/054c77b4-def9-11da-acee-0000779e2340.html#axzz1LHqkWYno>[04/05/2011]

Financial Times (2008) ‘Rethinking the Message of Islam’ FT.com [online] available from http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5b77cb06-e56a-11dc-9334-0000779fd2ac.html#axzz1LHqkWYno>[04/05/2011]

Gardner, D., (2010) ‘Study Charts Values Across the Mediteranean.’ FT.com [online] available from

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fedb60d0-bf62-11df-965a-00144feab49a.html#axzz1LHqkWYno>[04/05/2011]

Greer, F., (1992) ‘Feminists: Rights Bill – Wrong for us.’ Jerusalem Post [online] available from <http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/jpost/access/99778595.html?dids=99778595:99778595&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Dec+27%2C+1992&author=Greer+Fay+Cashman&pub=Jerusalem+Post&desc=FEMINISTS%3A+RIGHTS+BILL+-+WRONG+FOR+US&pqatl=google>[04/05/2011]

Izenberg, D., (1990) ‘One Step Nearer Equality.’ Jerusalem Post [online] available from http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/jpost/access/99245697.html?dids=99245697:99245697&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Oct+26%2C+1990&author=Dan+Izenberg&pub=Jerusalem+Post&desc=ONE+STEP+NEARER+EQUALITY&pqatl=google>[04/05/2011]

Marin, R., and Morgan, M., (2004) ‘Constitutional Domestication of International Gender Norms.’

Gender And Human Rights. Ed. by Knop, K., London: Oxford

Mulholland, H., (2007) ‘Religion no Excuse for Gender Inequality, says Cherie Booth.’ Guardian Unlimited

online] available from <http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2007/oct/31/immigrationpolicy.gender>[04/05/2011]

Oakley, A., (2002) Gender on Planet Earth. Bristol: The Policy Press

Oakley, A., (2005) The Ann Oakley Reader: Gender, Women And Social Science. Bristol: The Policy Press

Raday, F., (2005) ‘Culture, religion and gender.’ Journal of Religion & Society. Supplement Series 5 The Kripke Center ISSN: 1941-8450 [online] available from <http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm>[04/05/2011]

Skeptick’s Annotated Bible (2011) [online] available from <http://skepticksannotatedbible.com/>[04/05/2011]

UN (2006) ‘Meeting of States Parties to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination

against Women.’ Fourteenth meeting New York, 23 June 2006 [online] available from <http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm>[04/05/2011]

UN (2011a) ‘Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.’ United Nations division for the Advancement of Women, Department of Economic and Social Affairs [online] available from<http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/>[04/05/2011]

UN (2011b) ‘International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.’ Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights: General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) 16 December 1966 [online] available from <http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm>[04/05/2011]

UN (2011c) ‘Short History of CEDAW Convention.’ United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. [online] available from <http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm>[04/05/2011]

Williams, R., (1998) Keywords:  A Vocabulary of Culture and Society. London: Fontana

World Health Organization (2011) ‘Female genital mutilation’, Fact sheet No. 241 (2010) ‘Key Facts’ [online] available from <http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/>[04/05/2011]


People are not their religions…


People are not their religions.

Terms like “Christian” and “Muslim” often obscure the contradictions we all know we have. (Thanks to my mate Harsh Mellow for pointing this out)

Most folk only believe bits of the dogma and orthodoxies pushed by religious leaders and leave out the rest. That explains why there are so many different variants of the major faiths.

People are born into families and cultures where certain religions are dominant and rarely choose their own faith – that’s why the so-called leaders are desperate to continue to circumcise etc – they need to put their marks on the young.

The same goes for teaching children myth as history. This is why I’m arguing to Keep Religion Out of Schools (KROS). Religion is more dangerous than sex and we have an age of consent for that.

We have nearly identical DNA to chimps yet we are fooled into thinking we’re different from folk who wear a slightly different symbol round their necks.

I blame the political and religious leaders for this state of affairs. That’s why I say “Don’t follow leaders – they fuck you up!”

Here’s a quote from my satirical novel:

We’re not saying it’s the new religion. The time of leaders has passed, and the age of governments is ending. We’re not looking to the past but to the future. We don’t need gods and goddesses for we are women – we gave birth to humanity and we’ll solve our own problems.