Epigenetics and Gendered Brains
Recently we've discussed if there are gender-specific brain differences and whether such differences are somehow dangerous to study, for women's status as equals in science. I ran into a discussion by Nicholas Wade in the New York Times Science section on Tuesday, Sept 14 (click here to read) on epigenetic gender differences in the human brain. We all know there are some hormonal effects on brains that differ with sex. This epigenetic difference begins before that, and results from imprinting. Imprinting is a process during egg or sperm formation that turns off specific genes in either egg or sperm specifically, in a way that is inherited in cell divisions, but that does not result from a change in DNA base pair code. DNA methylation or attachments of small chemical groups to specific spots in histones, small basic proteins tightly bound to the DNA to form nucleosomes, seem to provide the epigenetic memory that can be inherited by new cells.
Because female brain cells and male brain cells have differently expressed imprinted genes, that provides a new way the two can differ beyond responses to testosterone or estrogen. And the differences are extensive. Most epigenetic changes control gene expression, and certainly those for imprinted genes do that. So sex differences now rest on two strongly different factors that depend on sex, sex hormones and imrpinted genes. Some education pundits have used gender-specific brain differences to advocate for single-sex education and other ways of teaching boys and girls differently in the past.
What do you think about these new findings?
A I think gender differences in biology will be used against women, to reduce their opportunities.
B. I am neutral about them but with two different mechanisms, I feel they are more robustly established.
C. I am glad to have more information about gendered brains and expect better learning can be designed for women and men as we accumulate more knowledge.
D. I favor open access to study of this field, but I am dubious that education gains will come of it.
http://www.academia.edu/1863608/The_Sociological_Implications_of_Epigenetics_and_Social_Neuroscience
I think that epigenetics could be used to move us away from biological determinism as far as sex sex differences in ability go. I think humans have an innate sense of gender identity, a concept of being a man or a woman, but i think that sex differences in skills and ability's have been magnified due to an unfair system in society, its gender roles and its sexism. Epigenetics opens up the possibility that oppression (which is a stressor so counts as a trigger) could effect gene expression. The parts of the brain little girls are allowed to use when playing with the toys there allowed to play with could effect which parts of the brain develop. Maybe this is also regulated by epigenetics, genes switching off in parts of the brain not used. If epigenetic markers can be passed down several generations, then the stress and oppression your grandmother faced could be effecting you today. Oppression of women has reduced there access to resources, and stopped them expressing themselves in many ways, it has been unnatural stress beyond the normal environmental signals of stress. The only way to restart the feminist movement is to solve the big conflict there is today in gender theory, as there is a clash between the politics of biological determinism and social constructionists on gender theory. In the feminist movement its causing a gap between those feminist who support the trans gender movement and those that do not. Those who are not feminists wish to use research that proves sex differences as a way of claiming that the inequality we have around gender are somehow natural. In the modern biological age the nurture nature argument has flipped in favour of nature. Epigenetics can change it all, as now everyone is in with a chance, its not about the genes they have, its about how there working, and it says that how they work has a lot more to do with nature. I am writing a blog on this subject. I dont think that building a science using just woman scientists work is the only option, a better option is to look at the results from a different prespective. Like if they show regions of the brain that process math as being more developed (iusualy on average, not 100% in everyone) and they use this as evidence for fixed sex differences and make claims that men are always gonna be on top in engineering and physics. Epigenetics can be used to say, well why is this area of the brain more developed on average in boys then in girls, is it due to the fact that over many generations girls have not had the option of using this part of the brain as much so it is not active due to being switched off. Why is it the results are not 100%, with some girls having the ability. If it is epigenetics at work, then are these changed being triggered before birth, or are some epigenetic switches still flyable during childhood when girls are playing with the wrong toys. Its been shown that playing video games can improve how adult brains work, at one time these things were for boys only. Also girls do better at maths if they are not told that boys are better at it, otherwise they give up and put there energy into other things. Maybe its to maintain there own sense of gender identity and avoid competing with the boys, as apposed to believing they are less able. A movement of BioFeminism may be needed to put feminism back on track.
Hi Dubious Female Chemist,
So the solution might be to get together with several like-minded women and set up a stream of several courses that would reinforce non-patriachal science? I'm wondering if this would be easier at a women's college? It sounds like for sure it would be easier at a liberal arts college, judging from comments on this Forum at least.
cheers,
Laura
Hi Laura,
I agree with Phoebe Lostroh and Small Science Woman. We must break out of the patriarchal context before it's safe for women when such findings come out. And how can we do that? A single great course might ignite the fire in someone's mind, but it might be extinguished by pressure from all of her other courses. I am not sanguine.
DFC
Hi Envious,
You could find such a course at Colorado College! And maybe at other liberal arts colleges. I saw a great syllabus put up by physicist Amy Bug at Swarthmore the other day.
cheers,
Laura
I'd love to take a course like that, but I don't know where to find one!
Hi Phoebe,
I'm thinking of a model intro biology class that would set the context on a different, non-patriarchal basis. What would that look like, I wonder? Using women as example scientists, using discussion and cooperation, empowering students? Sounds like one of your classes, but it may be rolling rocks uphill considering the rest of the world out there.
cheers,
Laura
I agree with Small Science Woman. We discover knowledge in the context of patriarchy. Documentation of sex differences will inevitably get used against women because of this context. One aspect of prevailing patriarchal thinking is that observations by social scientists get short shrift compared with those by geneticists. So no matter how much social science work there is demonstrating that women and men have, at best, unimportant, tiny differences in our capacities to learn, grow, change, love, flourish in a variety of careers, etc., a new finding in genetics will always get all the attention, and reinforce what people think they already "know" about women and men.
If only the world were safe for free inquiry in science!
Wow, Small Science Woman, that's pretty harsh. I still stick with the idea that knowledge itself is NOT harmful, it's what some people do with it that can hurt people. Let's target the flamethrowers, not the thinkers. I hate the idea of taboos in science.
A again. I haven't changed my mind since the last set of questions like these. It's the same idea as stopping the manufacture of nuclear weapons, as far as I can see.
B I don't work in neuro myself. I do like to read stuff about it, though. I do work on epigenetics (histone methylation etc) so I really like finding gender differences in the brain can be based on that.
C for me. I love to read more about how the brain works, and since I am convinced men's and women's are different, that doesn't threaten me.
D I had single-sex education in college, but some of today's proponents of it for early education sound really sexist to me.
