Understanding Brain-based Sex Differences (Part Two): Different but Equal, and Better Together
In a previous article (Part One), we delved into some of the intriguing brain-based sex differences, shedding light on how they manifest in various aspects of life. Now, let’s take our understanding a step further by examining additional disparities related to sports, childhood behavior, and shopping tendencies.
Note: As detailed in Part One, it is crucial to remember that while these patterns generally hold true for perhaps a majority of individuals most of the time, there are noteworthy exceptions that may deviate from the norm. Human cognition is a complex and diverse tapestry, shaped by a combination of nature and nurture — thus, it is vital to refrain from making sweeping generalizations. By recognizing and appreciating these patterns and differences, though, we can foster a more inclusive and equitable understanding of sex differences and beyond.
Sports: Why Males Tend to Like Them More than Females
Compared to females, it seems males tend to have a greater affinity for sports, be it as participants or enthusiastic spectators. This affinity aligns with the previously discussed traits of increased aggression and superior spatial analysis abilities commonly observed in males, qualities that find a natural fit in the realm of sports. Moreover, studies also have shown that males tend to excel in target throwing and catching (Kolb & Whishaw 317), a skillset that holds considerable advantages in numerous sports and would have been highly beneficial for early hunters.
An underlying mechanism of target throwing and catching, a better ability to conjointly perceive and act, would be beneficial in hunting and seemingly most sports. This ability would also benefit hunters in other ways, as the wilderness, more so than the home, provides novel situations that necessitate a quick yet appropriate response. Studies suggest males might be better at this ability too, as they have better connectivity between the associated parts of the brain…
More specifically, research suggests that males possess better connectivity between the front and back regions of the brain’s neocortex. (Ingalhalikar et al. 2014) The back-brain, responsible for processing information, and the front-brain, responsible for executing actions, seemingly work more in tandem when this connectivity is enhanced. This presumably leads to an improved ability to conjointly perceive and act/respond.
Furthermore, the male brain’s greater asymmetry and reduced between-hemispheric connectivity likely contribute further to this ability, as it more likely results in localized, and thus more rapid, activity. (For a deeper exploration of anatomical distinctions between the sexes, refer to the related article.)
Sports: Why Females Tend to Like Them Less than Males
Whereas males tend to be better at target throwing and catching, females tend to excel at fine motor skills. (Kolb & Whishaw 317) Fine motor skills would be beneficial to a gatherer and caretaker more than a hunter. Examples include picking food items, hand-making gathering and household items, and performing caretaking and household tasks.
(Greater fine-motor skills would be beneficial in sports too. Such benefits, though, seem less valuable in sports than an improved ability to conjointly perceive and act, at least in most cases.)
Beyond the differences in skillsets, another factor that might contribute to females’ lesser affinity for sports is their inclination towards cooperation over competition. This preference aligns with their lower levels of aggression, better communication skills, and their historic roles as caregivers.
Studies of childhood play tendencies further support this cooperate-compete preference, as well as the division of females and males as being caretakers and hunters, respectively: In particular, girls tend to play indoors in small groups, typically of two or three, and their play tends to be conversational and cooperative. Boys tend to play outdoors in larger groups, typically in active, competitive ways.
Furthermore, girls tend to gravitate towards nurturance-based toys, such as dolls and tea sets, which reinforce caring and communication skills. Boys typically opt for toys that encourage movement and physical activity, like toy cars and guns, and they frequently engage in rough-and-tumble play. (Golombok et al. 2012)
Such tendencies fit with research that indicates gender-typical play patterns may be linked to the development of different skills and behaviors in girls and boys. (Cherney & London 2006) Examples include girls honing verbal skills and nurturance, while boys develop spatial skills and dominance through competition.
Childhood: A Biological Basis for Gender-Based Toy Selection and Behavior
Stated differently then, different sex-based brain anatomies lead us to favor different types of objects and behave different, which then perhaps exponentially develops the related skills and behavioral tendencies throughout life. This perhaps helps explain other gender-typical behavior, such as a female’s bias towards towards open interaction and consensus-building compared to a male’s bias towards command-oriented hierarchical structuring. (Blank 1995)
While some may argue that such behaviors solely arise from societal gender expectations, animal studies have offered compelling evidence to the contrary. Studies involving monkeys, for instance, revealed that female monkeys gravitate towards stereotypically feminine toys, while their male counterparts show a preference for stereotypically masculine toys. (Hines 2010) This suggests a biological basis for gender-related toy selection.
Further support for the biological influence on gender-linked traits, including aggression, can also be found in studies involving individuals exposed to atypical testosterone concentrations prenatally. (Hines 2010)
These findings further emphasize the role of biology in shaping certain aspects of human behavior. However, it is essential to recognize that factors beyond biology contribute to the development of gender-specific tendencies in play and sports.
Furthermore, it is crucial to avoid the notion of restricting children to strictly gender-specific toys and behaviors, just as we would not force them to use their non-dominant hand for everything. Instead, we should encourage and embrace a diverse range of choices and activities, allowing children to explore opposite-gender ways and toys to varying degrees and in ways that best suit their individual interests and preferences.
In a manner analogous to basketball, where different positional players develop their non-dominant hand to different extents and in various ways, we should promote a fluid and adaptive approach to nurturing children’s interests and talents, irrespective of sex stereotypes.
Shopping Tendencies: A Biological Basis for Gender-Based Ones
The realm of shopping tendencies provide another gender stereotype that might have some biological basis. Comparatively, females are often perceived to enjoy the shopping experience, exploring various options but perhaps struggling more when it comes to making decisions. On the other hand, males tend to shop less and make decisions more readily.
These stereotypes seem to align with the previously discussed sex differences, particularly concerning females’ enhanced sensory perception and their adeptness at dispersing and distributing their focus — similar to multitasking. This unique ability likely enables them to discover a larger range of options and absorb more information about each choice.
Furthermore, the greater connectivity between the right and left hemispheres in females, which contributes to improved spatial memory, may also lead to enhanced memory retention in general. This translates into better recall of options and related details. Fittingly, studies indicate that females outperform males in verbal, autobiographical, and emotional memory tests, suggesting their cognitive advantage in this aspect. (Andreano & Cahill 2009)
Additionally, the relatively larger hippocampus in females, a brain area critical for forming and retaining new memories, further supports their ability to hold onto vast amounts of information.
In contrast, the greater connectivity between the front- and back-brain in males perhaps aids their ability to conjointly analyze and decide, just as it improves their ability to conjointly perceive and act. Males also appear to have greater connectivity within individual lobes of the brain. (Ingalhalikar et al. 2014) As with their greater asymmetry, this corresponds to more localized, modular functioning of the brain, which perhaps further aids a male’s ability to conjointly analyze and decide.
Males More Readily Decide, Females Better Consider Options
These traits perhaps lead males to more readily decide, and it fits with them historically being hunters, as delayed decisions in the wilderness can be costly. Other male traits, though, such as lesser sensory perception (aside from vision) and poorer memory, perhaps lead them to base decisions on comparatively limited information. Examples include considering fewer options, overlooking crucial details, and neglecting valuable insights from past experiences.
In contrast, since a female’s brain perhaps leads her to consider more options and information, it can lead her to consider too many factors. This can lead to over-analysis and even decision paralysis, especially if females indeed have lesser connectivity than males in brain areas linked to conjointly analyzing and deciding.
(Other factors, though, likely also contribute, such as possible gender differences in decision-making strategies, cerebral blood flow patterns, and other structural and functional differences in brain areas related to decision-making.)
It is vital to recognize that these are general tendencies, and individual variations exist. Females are not inherently better or worse at decision-making than males, nor vice versa. However, understanding these patterns can shed light on how typical males and females can complement each other in decision-making processes.
In practice, the pairing of a typical female with a typical male seems theoretically advantageous in determining options and making decisions. Without a female, a male more likely struggles to gather options, and he can even overlook valuable ones and other important aspects, while without a male, a female more likely struggles to decide. Together, they form a cohesive and balanced decision-making unit.
The Chinese aphorism, “Man is the head of the family, woman the neck that turns the head,” encapsulates this synergy. Females excel at discovering and emphasizing information of potential significance, while males excel at deciding what to focus on and when. To me, each seems equally important, so both should be valued the same — as two complementary components to a collective and greater whole.
Females Better Suited as COO, Males Better Suited as CEO
To put this in a different context, in the business world, it seems females would tend to perform best as the Chief Operating Officer (COO), using their natural abilities to identify multiple options and efficiently manage the numerous operations within the company. Males would tend to perform best as the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), using their natural abilities to conjointly analyze and make decisive choices based on options presented to them.
Although the CEO holds higher authority in decision-making and has authority over the COO, the COO is categorically higher in regard to providing options and management of the rest of the company. (The CEO, after all, relies on the COO’s insights and input to make informed decisions.)
Similar to a typical partnership between a female and a male, these leadership roles should be regarded as equally important and complementary components of a cohesive whole. Each position brings distinct strengths to the table, contributing to the overall success of the organization.
It is crucial to recognize the inherent value of both roles and treat them with equal significance. In the absence of other modifying factors, such as the supply and demand of diverse mindsets, it is essential to place equal value on both the COO and CEO positions.
(As a thought-provoking aside, it might be prudent to reconsider the conventional pattern of COO succession to the CEO role. These positions require different skill sets, and a successful COO may not necessarily be the best fit for the CEO role. Evaluating leadership potential based on individual capabilities and aptitudes could lead to more effective and optimal leadership transitions.)
Females and Males: Different but Equal, and Better Together
Similarly, overall, I do not think one brain type is better than the other, as each has its advantages and challenges. If this material portrays otherwise, know that my book describes other benefits of each of these brain types, such as a female brain’s lower likelihood of neurological disorders, reduced vulnerability to deficits from such conditions, and comparatively fewer struggles to learn new concepts and tasks later in life.
Rather than viewing different brain types as competing or opposing forces, we should embrace the idea that they complement and collaborate with each other. The original division of females as caretakers and males as hunters exemplifies this cooperative and complementary nature.
While the caretaker-hunter sex division was more so out of necessity, societal progress and advancements in technology have led to a more fluid and flexible approach to gender roles. Nowadays, many males choose to take on the role of caretakers, while many females prefer to be moneymakers — the modern-day equivalent of hunters.
When the Pattern Breaks: An 80/20 Split
As the last example indicates, the tendencies of the brain can be different for different people and in different aspects of life. This is true for a female or male as well as for a right- or left-brain person (as describe in another article). Generally speaking, I have found these tendencies to apply about 80 percent of the time to about 80 percent of the people in about 80 percent of their activities.
Regarding my own brain traits, I am part of the 80 percent majority group in regard to a dominant side of the brain, as I tend to be a left-brain person most of the time and in most of my activities. I am part of the 20 percent minority, though, in regard to the traits related to a male brain, as most of the time I align with the traits of a female brain.
Interestingly, and similar to my observed pattern of an 80/20 split, some researchers suggest we each have a mix of both gender traits, a so-called mosaic brain. This may be the case for most of us, and it does help explain the diverse spectrum of brain characteristics among individuals. But as has been demonstrated, gender-related tendencies nonetheless exist.
Thus, although this material reinforces some existing gender stereotypes and even societal roles, it should be clear that many people will not fit them at varying times due to significant individual diversity. (I discuss the use of stereotypes, including our misuse of them, in my book.)
When differences exist, both nature and nurture can be the cause, with nurture seeming to be a considerable factor in many of them. For example, societies have only relatively recently begun embracing females in roles beyond caretakers. This might explain certain statistical imbalances, such as the higher number of male authors despite females possessing superior language abilities.
Similarly, due to the educational system and some societal values in the United States, its people generally seem to develop the left-brain more so than the right-brain (although this is not to say that most of its people are left-brained). This emphasis can mask and diminish a person’s natural inclination towards right-brain activities and preferences.
Concluding Remarks: Unraveling the Puzzle of Our Unique Brains
Although brain-based gender differences exist (as does a tendency to favor the left- or right-brain), each of us has a unique brain, and we each have our own difficulties due to our own nature and nurture. We each also have our own strengths, many of them perhaps unknown to us. Through a process I recommend in my book, not only can we come to discover our areas of interest and passions, but we also come to reveal, better understand, and develop our strengths as well as our weaknesses. Pay Attention! — start picking up the pieces to your life’s puzzles — and find out!
Note: It is important to reiterate that the above tendencies and findings are based on general patterns observed in research. Individual variations within each sex are significant, and it is essential to acknowledge that gender is not strictly limited to a binary concept but encompasses a spectrum of identities beyond male and female.
Hence, it is crucial to avoid sweeping generalizations or assumptions. Additionally, these observations should not restrict individuals from pursuing any role or field based on their sex, as personal interests, abilities, and preferences vary greatly among individuals.
I invite you to share your observations and insights regarding brain-based sex differences. Feel free to ask any questions or contribute to the discussion.
Moreover, please follow me to ensure you catch my upcoming, equally insightful and revealing, brain-based articles on personality types / societal roles, interaction styles, and more! This includes a related, intriguing theory that delves into our preference for a specific brain quadrant and even a brain-based explanation for handedness — a long-standing mystery, finally solved!
Together, let’s continue unraveling the mysteries of the human brain and uncover the profound implications they have for our lives.
