Neuroethics

, Volume 5, Issue 3, pp 305–315 | Cite as

Hardwired for Sexism? Approaches to Sex/Gender in Neuroscience

Original Paper

Abstract

Evidence has long suggested that ‘hardwiring’ is a poor metaphor for brain development. But the metaphor may be an apt one for the dominant paradigm for researching sex differences, which pushes most neuroscience studies of sex/gender inexorably towards the ‘discovery’ of sex/gender differences, and makes contemporary gender structures appear natural and inevitable. The argument we forward in this paper is twofold. In the first part of the paper, we address the dominant ‘hardwiring’ paradigm of sex/gender research in contemporary neuroscience, which is built on broad consensus that there are important ‘original’ sex differences in brain structure and function, organized by sex-differentiating prenatal hormone exposures. We explain why this consensus is both unscientific and unethical. In the second part of the paper, we sketch an alternative research program focused not on the origins of sex/gender differences but on variability and plasticity of brain/behavior. We argue that interventional experiments based on this approach will address more tractable questions, and lead to much more satisfactory results than the brain organization paradigm can provide.

Keywords

Hardwiring Brain organization theory Plasticity Biosocial Intersectionality 

References

  1. 1.
    Fausto-Sterling, A. 2000. Sexing the body. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ridgeway, C.L. 2009. Framed before we know it: how gender shapes social relations. Gender & Society 23: 145–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Risman, B.J. 2004. Gender as a social structure: theory wrestling with activism. Gender & Society 18: 429–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hines, M. 2004. Brain gender. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fausto-Sterling, A. 2005. The bare bones of sex: part 1—sex and gender. Signs 30: 1491–1527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kaiser, A., E. Kuenzli, et al. 2007. On females’ lateral and males’ bilateral activation during language production: an fMRI study. International Journal of Psychophysiology 63: 192–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kessler, S.J. 1998. Lessons from the intersexed. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Oudshoorn, N. 1994. Beyond the natural body: An archeology of sex hormones. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fausto-Sterling, A. 2008. The bare bones of race. Social Studies of Science 38: 657–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Willis, E., R. Miller, et al. 2001. Gendered embodiment and survival for young people with cystic fibrosis. Social Science & Medicine 53: 1163–1174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Krieger, N. 2003. Genders, sexes, and health: what are the connections—and why does it matter? International Journal of Epidemiology 32: 652–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kaiser, A., S. Haller, et al. 2009. On sex/gender related similarities and differences in fMRI language research. Brain Research Reviews 61: 49–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Baron-Cohen, S. 2003. The essential difference: The truth about the male and female brain. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Eliot, L. 2009. Pink brain, blue brain: How small differences grow into troublesome gaps—and what we can do about it. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bogart, L.M., H. Cecil, D.A. Wagstaff, S.D. Pinkerton, and P.R. Abramson. 2000. Is it “sex”?: College students’ interpretations of sexual behavior terminology. Journal of Sex Research 37: 108–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sanders, S.A., and J.M. Reinisch. 1999. Would you say you “had sex” if … ? Jama-Journal of the American Medical Association 281: 275–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kenen, S.H. 1997. Who counts when you’re counting homosexuals? Hormones and homosexuality in mid-twentieth century America. In Science and homosexualities, ed. V. Rosario, 197–218. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Steakley, J.D. 1997. Per scientiam ad justitiam: Magnus Hirschfeld and the sexual politics of innate homosexuality. In Science and homosexualities, ed. V. Rosario, 133–154. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Terry, J. 1999. An American obsession: Science, medicine, and homosexuality in modern society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bao, A.M., and D.F. Swaab. 2010. Sex differences in the brain, behavior, and neuropsychiatric disorders. Neuroscientist 16: 550–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cahill, L. 2006. Why sex matters for neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 7(6): 477–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jordan-Young, R.M. 2010. Brain storm: The flaws in the science of sex differences. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jost, A. 1953. Problems of fetal endocrinology—the gonadal and hypophyseal hormones. Recent Progress in Hormone Research 8: 379–418.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Phoenix, C.H., R.W. Goy, et al. 1959. Organizing action of prenatally administered testosterone propionate on the tissues mediating mating behavior in the female guinea pig. Endocrinology 65: 369–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bishop, K.M., and D. Wahlsten. 1999. Sex and species differences in mouse and rat forebrain commissures depend on the method of adjusting for brain size. Brain Research 815: 358–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schum, J.E., and K.E. Wynne-Edwards. 2005. Estradiol and progesterone in paternal and non-paternal hamsters (Phodopus) becoming fathers: conflict with hypothesized roles. Hormones and Behavior 47: 410–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    van den Wijngaard, M. 1997. Reinventing the sexes: The biomedical construction of femininity and masculinity. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Costanzo, M.S., N.C. Bennett, et al. 2009. Spatial learning and memory in african mole-rats: the role of sociality and sex. Physiology & Behavior 96: 128–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lim, M.M., H.P. Nair, et al. 2005. Species and sex differences in brain distribution of corticotropin-releasing factor receptor subtypes 1 and 2 in monogamous and promiscuous vole species. Journal of Comparative Neurology 487: 75–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lonstein, J.S. 2002. Effects of dopamine receptor antagonism with haloperidol on nurturing behavior in the biparental prairie vole. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior 74: 11–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Balaban, E. 2006. Cognitive developmental biology: history, process and fortune’s wheel. Cognition 101: 298–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bester-Meredith, J.K., and C.A. Marler. 2001. Vasopressin and aggression in cross-fostered California mice (Peromyscus californicus) and white-footed mice (Peromyscus leucopus). Hormones and Behavior 40: 51–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Resko, J.A., and C.E. Roselli. 1997. Prenatal hormones organize sex differences of the neuroendocrine reproductive system: observations on guinea pigs and nonhuman primates. Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology 17: 627–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sheng, Z.J., J. Kawano, et al. 2004. ‘Expression of estrogen receptors (Alpha, Beta) and androgen receptor in serotonin neurons of the rat and mouse dorsal raphe nuclei: sex and species differences. Neuroscience Research 49: 185–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tilbrook, A.J., A.I. Turner, et al. 2000. Effects of stress on reproduction in non-rodent mammals: the role of glucocorticoids and sex differences. Reviews of Reproduction 5: 105–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Nopoulos, P., M. Flaum, et al. 2000. Sexual dimorphism in the human brain: evaluation of tissue volume, tissue composition and surface anatomy using magnetic resonance imaging. Psychiatry Research-Neuroimaging 98: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Allen, L.S., M. Hines, et al. 1989. Two sexually dimorphic cell groups in the human-brain. Journal of Neuroscience 9: 497–506.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Byne, W., S. Tobet, et al. 2001. The interstitial nuclei of the human anterior hypothalamus: an investigation of variation with sex, sexual orientation, and HIV status. Hormones and Behavior 40: 86–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Byne, W., M.S. Lasco, et al. 2000. The interstitial nuclei of the human anterior hypothalamus: an investigation of sexual variation in volume and cell size, number and density. Brain Research 856: 254–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    LeVay, S. 1991. A difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men. Science 253: 1034–1037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Goldstein, J.M., L.J. Seidman, et al. 2001. Normal sexual dimorphism of the adult human brain assessed by in vivo magnetic resonance imaging. Cerebral Cortex 11: 490–497.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Clemens, L.G., M. Hiroi, and R. Gorski. 1969. Induction and facilitation of female mating behavior in rats treated neonatally with low doses of testosterone propionate. Endocrinology 84: 1430–1438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wakshlak, A., and M. Weinstock. 1990. Neonatal handling reverses behavioral abnormalities induced in rats by prenatal stress. Physiology & Behavior 48: 289–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Leboucher, G. 1989. Maternal-behavior in normal and androgenized female rats—effect of age and experience. Physiology & Behavior 45: 313–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Hendricks, S.E., J.R. Lehman, and G. Oswalt. 1982. Responses to copulatory stimulation in neonatally androgenized female rats. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology 96: 834–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Buchmann, C., and T.A. DiPrete. 2006. The growing female advantage in college completion: the role of family background and academic achievement. American Sociological Review 71: 515–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Huang, G., & Taddese, N. et al. (2000). Entry and persistence of women and minorities in college science and engineering education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. NCES 2000–601.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Hyde, J.S., S.M. Lindberg, et al. 2008. Diversity—gender similarities characterize math performance. Science 321: 494–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Hyde, J.S., and J.E. Mertz. 2009. Gender, culture, and mathematics performance. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106: 8801–8807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Jorm, A.F., K.B.G. Dear, et al. 2003. Cohort difference in sexual orientation: results from a large age-stratified population sample. Gerontology 49: 392–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). Fast facts: What is the percentage of degrees conferred by sex and race? http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=72, date accessed March 2, 2010.
  52. 52.
    Smith, T.M. 1995. The educational progress of women: Findings from ‘the condition of education. Washington: National Center for Education Statistics, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Hyde, J.S. 2005. The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist 60: 581–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Feng, J., I. Spence, and J. Pratt. 2007. Playing an action video game reduces gender differences in spatial cognition. Psychological Science 18: 850–855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Berenbaum, S.A. 1999. Effects of early androgens on sex-typed activities and interests in adolescents with congenital adrenal hyperplasia. Hormones and Behavior 35: 102–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Hines, M., C. Brook, and G.S. Conway. 2004. Androgen and psychosexual development: core gender identity, sexual orientation, and recalled childhood gender role behavior in women and men with Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (CAH). Journal of Sex Research 41: 75–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Meyer-Bahlburg, H.F.L. 2001. Gender and sexuality in classic congenital adrenal hyperplasia’. Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinics of North America 30: 155–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Ehrhardt, A.A., G.C. Grisanti, and H.F.L. Meyer-Bahlburg. 1977. Prenatal exposure to Medroxyprogesterone Acetate (MPA) in girls. Psychoneuroendocrinology 2: 391–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Reinisch, J.M., and S.A. Sanders. 1992. Effects of prenatal exposure to diethylstilbestrol (DES) on hemispheric laterality and spatial ability in human males. Hormones and Behavior 26: 62–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Knickmeyer, R.C., and S. Baron-Cohen. 2006. Fetal testosterone and sex differences in typical social development and in autism. Journal of Child Neurology 21: 825–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Blanchard, R., and R.A. Lippa. 2007. Birth order, sibling sex ratio, handedness, and sexual orientation of male and female participants in a bbc internet research project'. Archives of Sexual Behavior 36: 163–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Gladue, B.A., and J.M. Bailey. 1995. Spatial ability, handedness, and human sexual orientation. Psychoneuroendocrinology 20: 487–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Lalumiere, M.L., R. Blanchard, and K.J. Zucker. 2000. Sexual orientation and handedness in men and women: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin 126: 575–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Cook, T.D., and D.T. Campbell. 1979. Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Savin-Williams, R.C. 2006. Who’s gay? Does it matter? Current Directions in Psychological Science 15: 40–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Sell, R.L., J.A. Wells, et al. 1995. The prevalence of homosexual behavior and attraction in the United-States, the United-Kingdom and France—results of national population-based samples. Archives of Sexual Behavior 24: 235–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Gastaud, F., C. Bouvattier, et al. 2007. Impaired sexual and reproductive outcomes in women with classical forms of congenital adrenal hyperplasia. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 92: 1391–1396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Meyer-Bahlburg, H.F.L., and C. Dolezal. 2008. Sexual orientation in women with classical or non-classical adrenal hyperplasia as a function degree of prenatal androgen excess. Archives of Sexual Behavior 37: 85–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Zucker, K.J., S.J. Bradley, et al. 1996. Psychosexual development of women with congenital adrenal hyperplasia. Hormones and Behavior 30: 300–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Jordan-Young, R. M. (2011). Hormones, context, and “Brain Gender”: evidence from congenital adrenal hyperplasia. Social Science & Medicine, special issue on Gender & Health (volume not yet numbered). doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.08.026
  71. 71.
    Lin-Su, Y.R., S. Nimkarn, et al. 2008. Congenital adrenal hyperplasia in adolescents—diagnosis and management. Annals of the New York Academy of Science 1135: 95–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    White, P.C., and P.W. Speiser. 2000. Congenital adrenal hyperplasia due to 21-hydroxylase deficiency. Endocrine Reviews 21: 245–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Karkazis, K. 2008. Fixing sex: Intersex, medical authority, and lived experience. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Lish, J.D., H.F.L. Meyer-Bahlburg, et al. 1992. Prenatal exposure to diethylstilbestrol (Des): childhood play behavior and adult gender-role behavior in women. Archives of Sexual Behavior 21: 423–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Titus-Ernstoff, L., K. Perez, et al. 2003. Psychosexual characteristics of men and women exposed prenatally to diethylstilbestrol. Epidemiology 14: 155–160.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Schachter, S.C. 1994. Handedness in women with intrauterine exposure to diethylstilbestrol. Neuropsychologia 32: 619–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Scheirs, J.G.M., and A. Vingerhoets. 1995. Handedness and other laterality indexes in women prenatally exposed to DES. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 17: 725–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Smith, L.L., and M. Hines. 2000. Language lateralization and handedness in women prenatally exposed to diethylstilbestrol (DES). Psychoneuroendocrinology 25(5): 497–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Ehrhardt, A.A., H.F.L. Meyer-Bahlburg, et al. 1985. Sexual orientation after prenatal exposure to exogenous estrogen. Archives of Sexual Behavior 14: 57–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Meyer-Bahlburg, H.F.L., A.A. Ehrhardt, et al. 1995. Prenatal estrogens and the development of homosexual orientation. Developmental Psychology 31: 12–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Hewlett, S.A. 2002. Creating a life: Professional women and the quest for children. New York: Hyperion.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Holden, C. 2000. Parity as a goal sparks bitter battle. Science 289: 380–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Udry, R. 2000. Biological limits of gender construction. American Sociological Review 65: 443–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Fine, C. 2008. Will working mothers’ brains explode? The Popular New Genre of Neurosexism, Neuroethics 1: 69–72.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Brescoll, V., and M. LaFrance. 2004. The correlates and consequences of newspaper reports of research on sex differences. Psychological Science 15: 515–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Fine, C. 2010. Delusions of gender. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Young, R.M., and E. Balaban. 2006. Psychoneuroindoctrinology. Nature 443: 634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Brizendine, L. 2006. The female brain. New York: Morgan Road Books.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Swaab, D.F., and A. Garcia-Falgueras. 2009. Sexual differentiation of the human brain in relation to gender identity and sexual orientation. Functional Neurology 24: 17–28.Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Hyde, J.S., and M.C. Linn. 2006. Diversity—gender similarities in mathematics and science. Science 314: 599–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Guiso, L., F. Monte, et al. 2008. Diversity. Culture, gender, and math. Science 320: 1164–1165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Maguire, E.A., D.G. Gadian, et al. 2000. Navigation-related structural change in the hippocampi of taxi drivers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 97: 4398–4403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Maguire, E.A., H.J. Spiers, et al. 2003. Navigation expertise and the human hippocampus: a structural brain imaging analysis. Hippocampus 13: 250–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Messing, K., and J.M. Stellman. 2006. Sex, gender and women’s occupational health: the importance of considering mechanism. Environmental Research 101: 149–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Driemeyer, J., J. Boyke, et al. 2008. Changes in gray matter induced by learning-revisited. Plos One 3(7): e2669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Lappe, C., S.C. Herholz, et al. 2008. Cortical plasticity induced by short-term unimodal and multimodal musical training. Journal of Neuroscience 28: 9632–9639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Rose, S., S. Ceci, and W.M. Williams. 2009. Should scientists study race and IQ? No: science and society do not benefit. Nature 457: 786–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Barnard CollegeColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.SISSATriesteItaly

Personalised recommendations