DELUSIONS OF GENDER EBOOK DOWNLOAD

admin Comment(0)

Feb 28, ISBN: (Adobe ebook format). First published in the USA in by. W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., New York. Sold in the. Editorial Reviews. From Booklist. In a methodical and devastatingly effective manner, Fine eviscerates the recent trend in attributing society's gender-based. ukraine-europe.info: Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Get your Kindle here, or download a FREE Kindle Reading App.


Author: XENIA BASKETTE
Language: English, Spanish, Japanese
Country: Maldives
Genre: Science & Research
Pages: 440
Published (Last): 15.08.2016
ISBN: 436-3-47520-553-7
ePub File Size: 30.37 MB
PDF File Size: 19.63 MB
Distribution: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Downloads: 36709
Uploaded by: CEDRICK

Editorial Reviews. From Booklist. In a methodical and devastatingly effective manner, Fine .. Download Audiobooks · Book Depository Books With Free Delivery Worldwide · Box Office Mojo Find Movie Box Office Data · ComiXology. Thousands of. Read "Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Difference" by Cordelia Women & Power: A Manifesto ebook by Mary Beard. 'Fun, droll yet deeply serious.' New Scientist 'A brilliant feminist critic of the neurosciences Read her, enjoy and learn.' Hilary Rose, THES 'A witty and.

A passionately argued and much-needed corrective to the belief that men's and women's brains are intrinsically different. Settings Tips on technique 3: Point of view Tips on technique 4: Dialogue Tips on technique 5: Plot Tips on technique 6: Tense Tips on technique 7: Download cover.

More books by this author. Popular science. The Equations of Life Charles Cockell. Thinking Matter Matthew Cobb. Astroquizzical Jillian Scudder. Do Dice Play God? Ian Stewart. The Moon Oliver Morton. Artificial Intelligence Yorick Wilks. The Heart Goes Last. Margaret Atwood. A Warning. Madeleine Albright. Finding My Place. Anne Aly. A Little Life. Hanya Yanagihara. John Scalzi. Unfit to Print. The Slow Regard of Silent Things. Patrick Rothfuss. A Tale for the Time Being. Ruth Ozeki. Any Old Diamonds.

Caroline Chisholm. Sarah Goldman. The Hanging Tree. Sex at Dawn. Christopher Ryan. Ancillary Sword. Where'd You Go, Bernadette.

Maria Semple. Luke Slattery. A Gentleman's Position. The Kingdom of Gods. The Soldier's Scoundrel. It Takes Two to Tumble. Band Sinister. Nemesis Games. James S. Artificial Condition. Testosterone Rex: Myths of Sex, Science, and Society. Cordelia Fine. A Mind of Its Own: How Your Brain Distorts and Deceives. Delusions of Gender: How to write a great review. The review must be at least 50 characters long. The title should be at least 4 characters long.

See a Problem?

Your display name should be at least 2 characters long. At Kobo, we try to ensure that published reviews do not contain rude or profane language, spoilers, or any of our reviewer's personal information. You submitted the following rating and review. We'll publish them on our site once we've reviewed them. Continue shopping. Item s unavailable for purchase. Please review your cart. You can remove the unavailable item s now or we'll automatically remove it at Checkout.

Remove FREE. Unavailable for purchase. Continue shopping Checkout Continue shopping. Chi ama i libri sceglie Kobo e inMondadori.

Home eBooks Nonfiction Delusions of Gender: Choose Store. Or, get it for Kobo Super Points!

Download gender delusions of ebook

Skip this list. Ratings and Book Reviews 0 4 star ratings 0 reviews. Overall rating 4. How to write a great review Do Say what you liked best and least Describe the author's style Explain the rating you gave Don't Use rude and profane language Include any personal information Mention spoilers or the book's price Recap the plot. This is the position that sexual orientation is socialized, and that lesbianism is a choice and therefore a legitimate political act.

However, this form of feminism is extremely contentious within the movement, as it opens the door for homophobia. Oh, and then you have difference feminism, complete with their own quack psychologists such as Carol Gilligan who claim that, yes, there are innate differences between men and women, but that women's "way of knowing" is superior to men's.

I wonder why this wasn't one of those sexist psychologists, with talk of brain differences between men and women, to be debunked in this book. Strange, that. It seems fallacious gender research gets a free pass as long as it's sexist in the right direction. Indeed, this book seems to be on board with difference feminism in the chapter, "Backwards and in High Heels" i. This isn't science. It's reasoning based on what's politically expedient and expecting reality to conform to that.

If there are innate differences, then she should just say so and stop equivocating. Then we can get on to the more interesting discussion of how much difference is innate, and how significant those differences are. It may very well turn out that women are superior to men, but they can't simultaneously be better and the same.

The sad thing is, this book is very interesting and insightful in so many other ways, in outlining some ways human behavior is socialized. It could very easily have been a valuable part of that discussion.

Why can't that be enough? The intellectually honest position would have been to admit that there is much we still don't understand about human psychology, and the evidence so far seems to indicate that there is at least some difference between the psychology of men and women, but that it is the belief of the author that these differences are not hugely significant, and that socialization also plays a major role.

If that's all she did, I'd have trusted this book so much more. As it stands, I find myself dubious even of claims that sound reasonable. Advice for the author: Oh, and knock off all the outrage. How you feel about what scientists discover has no bearing on the merit of their research. It only discredits your presentation of it by making readers suspicious of confirmation bias and emotional reasoning. It feels less like science and more like propaganda. At best, it is merely distracting.

If you like this book, please read The Blank Slate. It will show you a completely different side of this issue. View 2 comments. I really think all educators need to read this book. Fine's target is the new gender essentialism, the reconstructed sexism that attempts to put women back in their traditional roles as 'unbenders of husbands' brows' and caregivers to children, and to keep them out of politics, mathematics and the sciences, by asserting that they are fitted for their place by essential female abilities and incapacities.

In the philosopher John Stuart Mill, in his book The Subjection of Women , was severe on I really think all educators need to read this book. In the philosopher John Stuart Mill, in his book The Subjection of Women , was severe on this fallacy, but like a zombie it just keeps getting up, backed by the bad-science fad of the day.

She selects some choice quotes to show us how little the new sexism differs from the old this is a very funny book , then proceeds to dismantle it with a three-pronged attack. First, she explores the construction of gender and explains aspects of the present inequality from her perspective in social psychology. She quotes trans woman Jan Morris who describes her former competence in matters of car-reversing and bottle-opening evaporating after her transition in the face of others' assumptions about her.

The power of stereotyping is not to be ignored; Fine quotes study after study to show how strongly most people, whether consciously or not, associate women with empathy and caregiving, and men with maths, science and power, and how priming gender affects subsequent thinking and performance. Simply reminding a candidate that she is a woman drastically reduces her score on a maths test, demonstrating an effect called 'stereotype threat' which is amazingly easy to remove - including an introduction to a test telling participants that 'in ten years of data-gathering, no gender-related performance difference has been found' dramatically boosts the performance of women and girls.

Cross-cultural comparisons also prove instructive, making nonsense of ethnocentric gender assumptions. Fine explores how stereotypes and the lack of role models work against women in the workplace and in education. This section is more broadly relevant to racial, social class, disabled, LGBTQ etc representation and the double bind problem of administrators appointing people like themselves on one side, and aspirations being damped by the invisibility of marginalised groups on the other.

CVs with female names are rated lower and receive fewer responses than identical ones with male names. Fine also indicts sexist work practices such as entertaining clients in strip-clubs. Stereotypes also operate in the home, where men are conditioned to believe themselves incompetent the hunter brings home the the carcass and collapses to stare into the fire unless jar-opening brawn or plug-wiring brains are required.

Fine demonstrates that men are very competent parents. Even rat-dads, with no hormone-tampering, are readily able to raise perfectly adjusted rat-kids. Surveying the data, Fine finds very scant evidence for the assumption that women are more empathic than men; there is no magical female ability to read people's thoughts, and slight differences in young children could easily be due to parents talking more to infant girls.

Even this could be due to more exposure to active toys, and in any case hardly constitutes an excuse to exclude women from the workplace. Fine is hilarious when exposing the loaded survey questions that have been used to find gender differences.

Research makes it very clear that people will rate themselves higher or lower on abilities stereotyped to or against their gender, especially when that aspect of their identity has been primed. The search for gender-determined ability differences continues with a painstaking survey and critique of the popular literature enthusiastically claiming they exist and the neurological and psychological research which has supposedly found them.

Fine is incisive in her discussion and criticism of studies around the effect of testosterone, including play differences, but she is damning when it comes to the shocking dishonesty and misrepresentation employed by 'neurosexist' popular 'science' books. Oh, and if you don't manage to read this book, please take it from me here and now, that anyone trying to persuade you of a gender difference on the basis of pictures from brain scans is to be scornfully ignored.

The final section deals with how children are socialised to perform gender. Many parents assume they are providing gender-neutral parenting and 'fall back' on a biological explanation when their little girls demand pink dresses and dolls.

Fine shows just how far parents have to go to eliminate the pressure to perform gender by recording the hilarious experience of the Bem family, forced to such lengths as denying that they knew the gender of friends, and erasing beards from picture books. How can a preference for pink be genetic? In Victorian times, it was a male colour, while girls wore tranquil Virgin-Mary blue. Fine demonstrates with survey after survey and study after brilliant study that gender roles are pushed on us by our culture, not our chromosomes.

Biology itself is socially influenced and defined; it changes and develops in interaction with and in response to our minds and environment, as our behaviours do. Biology can be said to define possibilities but not determine them; it is never irrelevant but it is also not determinant"' View all 7 comments. Cordelia Fine has seen them too, but instead of simply accepting their assertions because they sound scientific, she delved into the research, tracking down the studies that purportedly establish these claims, as well as the substantial body of research showing quite the opposite.

The result is this book. It is not pop science — there is nothing dumbed-down about it, and Dr. It is aimed at the intelligent reader who may or may not have a science background; I do not, but found the book fascinating, clear, and well-organized, with strong, logical analysis of the research and even a few moments of humor.

There is a strange tendency to view differences in current achievements between men and women as proof of inherently different abilities. This was true even in the 19th century, when women lacked the educational tools and the freedom to even begin to compete.

Regardless of that small detail and the fact that gender roles in society continue to change, there are always those who claim that whatever women are achieving at the moment is the absolute biologically-determined limit. This book deals with three main areas of gender research, to see what has actually been proven.

First, tweaking the environment can eliminate gender differences in test performance: Women report more empathetic ability than men do, but in in real-life situations, no gender differences in mind-reading have been found.

Women will respond to an ethical dilemma in more caring ways than men after an exercise forcing participants to think about gender, but both genders will respond in the same way after non-gender-related exercises. In other words, emphasizing gender makes us more stereotypical; it reminds us how we are supposed to behave and what our strengths and weaknesses should be.

And if a simple reminder right before a test can alter performance, how much more growing up in a world with constant reminders of gender?

We should approach this research with a healthy dose of skepticism, for several reasons. This field is still experimental, tends to use very small sample sizes, and the actual studies often show much less than or something completely different from what pop science authors claim. In one particularly egregious example, an author drew gender differences from a study with only female participants. Many parents, finding that their daughters love princess costumes and their sons toy trucks without need for parental encouragement, conclude that these differences must be hardwired.

One can see, then, how all of these areas work together to create continuing perceptions of different abilities.

Delusions of Gender - Cordelia Fine - - Allen & Unwin - Australia

As the author puts it: But before this happens, speculation becomes elevated to the status of fact, especially in the hands of some popular writers. Once in the public domain these supposed facts about male and female brains become part of the culture, often lingering on well past their best-by dates. Here, they reinforce and legitimate the gender stereotypes that interact with our minds, helping to create the very gender inequalities that the neuroscientific claims seek to explain.

Definitely a must-read for anyone interested in gender and with the possible added benefit of reducing your own stereotypical behavior!

Nov 27, Saafir Evada rated it it was amazing Shelves: I like nothing better than to discover that I was completely and utterly mistaken about something.

The deeper the rotten belief sits, the more satisfying the pop when it is wrenched out. This book changed my mind in ways few books ever do. I had a cavalier belief that psychological differences between men and women were "innate" and "biological. I highly recommend this book. May 03, Alissa Thorne rated it it was ok Shelves: I did learn some interesting things.

One study showed a clear Warning: One study showed a clear gender prejudice in hiring for engineering roles. Identical resumes were sent to companies with only a change in the name being obviously female versus obviously male, and the male resumes had a higher response rate. A theme throughout the book was the relationship of self-identification and social grouping--basically the influence that feeling that "people like me" has on our self-image, and in turn our actions, behavior, aptitude.

A simple example is the study in which female college students were asked if they were interested in pursuing engineering studies, but in differing environments. One environment featured a classic geek decor, while the other featured a more preppy decor. This seems much broader than a gender issue to me, but it's a gender book, so ok. When it came to the potential non-social influences though I think the narration made this particularly cringe-worthy--the sneer when describing a competing theory, or the pompus and self-important voice used when quoting an opponent were particularly off-putting.

In a study showing evidence in favor of biological explanations for gender differences in behavior, the author would rightly lambaste the study for using self-reports valid evidence.

Then pages later, in a study intended to offer an alternate explanation would be a phrase like, "Mothers of infants report Obviously the modern scientist is wrong because their hypothesis bears some surface similarities to someone from a different time who held beliefs we know to be untrue!

While I did learn that there was little or no valid evidence for some of the biological gender differences that I had previously heard touted, it was hardly a review of what differences are known to exist.

You may also like: DONGRI TO DUBAI EBOOK DOWNLOAD

This was most obvious when the author mentioned in passing that one known gender difference--smaller brains of females versus males--results in extensive structural differences in the brain. And that this most likely served to make the genders more similar, as the different structures achieved different things in the same way.

Such a key piece of data and the huge assertion must be backed by chapters of exposition of the evidence and detailed critique of the studies backing it--in short, the same treatment given to any other hypothesis in the book, right? In a book about how gender based brain differences may impact gender behaviors, surely the fact that there is allegedly structural brain differences will be examined in detail. And the hypothesis that these differences may work to achieve gender similarities will be backed by multiple studies, each carefully critiqued, right?

No, this statement was simply made, and then passed right on by. I'm glad I forced myself through this book--you can still learn a lot from a biased account. But man, it was tough to get through. Nearly 20 years ago I studied sociology at a feminist, Marxist university.

Oh boy pun intended! Far from it. In fact — and this is a rare achievement for a book — it started me re-assessing my life from way back and seeing … well, seeing how often I had lived within gender assumptions and even played to them just because it made life not simply easier, but pleasanter. The examples show in pitiless detail that their biological determinism was merely supergluing on cultural blinkers.

As her argument runs, later decades are likely to look back and have the same response to our use of neuroscience to plaster authority onto scientifically unsupported notions of gender. There are many, many examples of our gendered culture in this strongly argued but easily read book. Read the book — male or female, the impact of culture on your self-perception, and therefore, your life and choices will rock your assumptions of autonomy.

Gender roles in society are supposedly natural and pre-ordained and we should learn to like them and love them. It's so easy to believe in the myth and Cordelia Fine does an excellent job of outlining why this is a myth and why the scientific methodologies and experiments behind studies that supposedly prove that men and women are inherently different are so often flawed.

Ebook gender delusions download of

She's done her research thoroughly and come up with good counters to the conclusions of popular experiments, and what's more she writes with confidence and persuasiveness both scientifically and sociologically putting forth plenty of alternative reasons as to why Women might be seen as more caring, or why that female baby supposedly reared in a gender neutral fashion is still reaching for pink barbie dolls to play with.

Skeptically you could argue that Fine has an agenda, but then her argument that male scientists and popular writers on gender also have an agenda and I think it's pretty fair to get all sides of this story. Tjere were a few moments where I felt that Fine was less inclined to talk deeply about the conclusions of studies that seemed to support her viewpoints althouh this may in part be to keep the writing fluid and readable, since neuroscience can be a damn boring topic.

Thankfully her wit, sarcasm and brisk pace stop the book from ever getting dry. Ultimately, too, she's not concluding that there's absolutely nothing in these scientific studies, merely that the work being done doesn't warrant such massive conclusions being drawn. I'm certainly convinced of that. This is not what I'd call a "popular science" book -- it's aimed at an intellectual audience with some understanding of science and a willingness to deal with academic language.

That makes it less accessible than a lot of the talk show-fodder books it's debunking, like all those ridiculous "Why Men Are Insensitive Horndogs Who Suck at Housework Surprise! It's Biology! Fine takes on pretty much the entire field of neuroscience, or rather, This is not what I'd call a "popular science" book -- it's aimed at an intellectual audience with some understanding of science and a willingness to deal with academic language. Fine takes on pretty much the entire field of neuroscience, or rather, that segment of the field that's publishing books claiming that men and women are hardwired to act like sitcom characters.

I found this a very balanced entry in the nature vs. Contrary to the characterizations of some of her critics, Fine is neither strident nor ignorant of the science. She's a feminist, to be sure, and she gets a bit snarky with some of the more ridiculous modern claims of gender essentialists and is a bit too fond of making a point by leading with a particularly egregious howler from a hundred years ago , but she isn't trying to wish away innate sex differences, nor claiming that everything is a social construct.

However, anyone who reads this and remains unconvinced that there's a whole lot of socialization going on in both your right-brain and your left-brain will probably not be convinced by any other mountain of evidence. Aug 11, Marta rated it really liked it Shelves: A spirited debunking of the perennial claims that women are different and usually, it so happens that this difference is in truth inferiority from men because SCIENCE.

It is both amusing and infuriating to read how sexist scientists and journalists try angle after angle, and when one is debunked say, no, brain size does not actually matter , they find another, even more dubious claim. This is not a book without faults. Firstly, the author veers to the verbose side, and secondly, the book pays A spirited debunking of the perennial claims that women are different and usually, it so happens that this difference is in truth inferiority from men because SCIENCE.

Firstly, the author veers to the verbose side, and secondly, the book pays almost no attentions to people outside the gender binary - a serious flaw and one that Cordelia Fine would do well to repair in any further editions. Still, I found it interesting, well-researched the author has a knack for presenting scientific research in an accessible way, even if the empiricist in me would prefer more hard data - but bibliographical information provided is exceptional!

I especially recommend it to parents interested in gender-neutral parenting, women in male-dominated professions, and everyone interested in the fascinating ways our biases inform scientific research both with regards to interpretation as well as planning experiments themselves. Jul 08, Robin rated it liked it. Cordelia Fine attempts to refute the popular idea that men and women have an innate neurological difference which results in different brains.

I recommend reading them in that order because Fine's book refutes many of the points made in Baron-Cohen's. Fine makes a good case that many of the differences we see in gender could readily be traced back to cultural or sociological phenomena, and that it is too early to declare tha Cordelia Fine attempts to refute the popular idea that men and women have an innate neurological difference which results in different brains. Fine makes a good case that many of the differences we see in gender could readily be traced back to cultural or sociological phenomena, and that it is too early to declare that brain differences in men and women are innate.

She does an excellent job of pointing out the flaws in many of the studies cited by the other side. This book is a much-needed dose of caution in the rush to say men and women just are innately different. She does a great job of reminding us that the reinforcement for gender roles is all around us in ways we can't even see.

One weakness in the book is that she doesn't adequately address the cross-cultural studies. If gender-based tendencies in brains are not inherent, then how come some appear in cultures world-wide? What are the chances that such diverse cultures would have developed similar gender roles if they do not have some biological basis?

Feb 13, Barbara The Bibliophage rated it really liked it Shelves: Cordelia Fine is a scientist, feminist, and a mom. Her book debunks studies that purport to be solid science, but ultimately just support gender stereotypes. And how this, along with neuroplasticity, mean that brains cannot possibly be hard-wired by gender. Many more details in my review at TheBibliophage. God damn! This book actually changed the way I see the world!!

I shall do it justice with a worthy review! Just way till I get my hands on a computer! Nov 06, Kogiopsis rated it really liked it Shelves: Many of the general ideas presented in this book were familiar to me: However, for all that the conclusions Cordelia Fine drew were hardly surprising to me, reading this book had a significant impact. It felt almost like an out of body experience, to read a Many of the general ideas presented in this book were familiar to me: It felt almost like an out of body experience, to read about these studies and then look at similar cases in my own life and, all of a sudden, to be able to see the strings.

This is probably what Neo felt like when he learned to see the Matrix. It's disorienting. I read this book on a road trip with my parents, and I'm sure they wish I hadn't because I would not shut up about it. Partly, that's because I couldn't really process it without talking about it and applying it; partly, that's because my mom is a teacher and my dad is an engineer and I feel like the things I was learning from Cordelia Fine are intimately applicable to their work and dealing with other people.

That's probably true of most people, though; but since one has direct impact on how confident students feel speaking in her courses and the other interacts with younger engineers, this seemed very relevant. I think I've probably brought the book up once a week since, too. The one concept that sticks with me the most is that of stereotype threat. Simply put, stereotype threat describes an effect when someone, being aware that a group they are part of is believed to have a certain capability, changes the way they approach that task.

For instance, women who are reminded of the stereotype that women are bad at math perform worse on math tests. I had to set the book aside when I read that, because it explained so much about things I've struggled with: It's a feeling of being stifled, being trapped, that I've experienced a lot more than I'd like to, and finally having an explanation for it is clearing up a lot in my life.

Given the nature of the book, I assume her research was thoroughly done, but there's still a distinct rhetorical strategy to the final work and I couldn't stop wondering if that had shaped the results presented. Delusions of Gender is an enjoyably acerbic and eloquent takedown of evolutionary psychologists and their neuroscientist collaborators—those practitioners of Bad Science, whose work is often repeated uncritically in tabloid newspapers or used to shape educational curricula.

Cordelia Fine examines a number of supposedly scientific studies, together with the books and newspaper articles which have popularised them for a general audience Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus and their odious ilk Delusions of Gender is an enjoyably acerbic and eloquent takedown of evolutionary psychologists and their neuroscientist collaborators—those practitioners of Bad Science, whose work is often repeated uncritically in tabloid newspapers or used to shape educational curricula.

Cordelia Fine examines a number of supposedly scientific studies, together with the books and newspaper articles which have popularised them for a general audience Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus and their odious ilk , which seek to explain gender difference and inequality through neurological differences. Researchers conflate the brain and the mind in order for their findings to conform with gender stereotypes.

Men and women have biological differences, Fine states, which may reflect on different brains, but there is no proof that these differences map onto tasks, preferences, modes of thinking, etc. Indeed, there may be more similarities between a man and a woman who both have a comparatively large brain relative to their body mass than between a woman with a comparatively large brain and a woman with a comparatively small brain.

Gender difference doesn't create gender inequality—it may well be vice versa. As someone who works in the humanities and not the sciences, I did learn a lot from this book, particularly in terms of how to interpret or not neuroscientific data. Fine has done a good job of synthesising a lot of secondary material in a very readable way. However, I did think there were some surprising omissions here—there is no consideration, or even mention, of societies in which there are more than two genders, and there's no mention of transgender or genderqueer people.

While I'm sure that most of the scientific data that Fine deals with assume binary gender, and was gathered from predominantly white Westerners, I do think that had she done a bit more digging, she would have unearthed a wealth of work which would have undermined the assumption of the Western-centric gender binary while supporting the very point she's trying to make.

Delusions of Gender is a thorough debunking by Cordelia Fine of scientific studies and scientific posturing regarding what we know about the biological and particularly, neurological differences between sexes. There are a few reasons for this: Somehow, Fine manages to distill this into a page book, and it mostly works. She does a good job of wading through recentish from my perspective, given that this book is verging on a decade old research and writing, picking apart arguments and debunking theories.

She links these ideas to much older ideas about sex and gender. And she provides some guidance to the layperson in terms of how we can approach learning about sex and gender, from a scientific perspective, in the future. She reviews the standard gaps in workforce distribution, in pay, in equity of housework and other caring labour.

This seems particularly topical given absurd rumblings from the US government about defining gender in law. Again, I was already well aware of a lot of what Fine said in thsi chapter, but she lays it out clearly.

This whole part is valuable because she talks specifics, right down to the study and the scientists conducting them. This section is just a great reminder in general that science is a human process, and like any human process, is prone to error and a good tonic against thinking of science as this black box that we put experimental data into and get facts about the world out of.

She basically says: I like the inclusion of this part in the book, because it encourages readers to consider how we actually apply scientific discoveries to our lives.

That being said, this part of the book is probably the most scattered of the three and the least interesting from a scientific perspective.

Join Kobo & start eReading today

Delusions of Gender endears itself to me because, at the end of the day, Fine is basically saying we need to stay skeptical of claims that appear to be scientific on the surface but, if you scratch that surface, reveal supposition.

Beyond its subjects of sex and gender, this book encourages critical thinking about doing science, and that is something that is sorely needed in society today. Lastly, although I have long been interested in gender and thinking more deeply about it, this book definitely got me thinking about gender along different tracks.

While I already knew much of what Fine explains or alludes to, I learned more things and even had my own unconscious biases checked at some points. Nov 27, Scribble Orca marked it as to-be-consideread Recommended to Scribble by: How gratifying to find authors who know their stuff, have the necessary tools to analyse and critique, and who take the time to pick holes in the commercial follies of these pseudo-scientific wanna-be-never-could-so-better twist-everything-to-please-myself-and-make-a-fast- f buck-simultaneously authors.

Should dovetail quite nicely with Sex at Dusk: Lifting the Shiny Wrapping from Sex at Dawn. View 1 comment. Delusions of Gender is split into three sections, all of which argue the same thing: But society, our minds, and badly designed scientific experiments have made us believe that there are. As it turns out, Cordelia Fine has an accessible writing style and is able to take complex concepts and explain them in relatively simple terms, so I never found myself lost or confused.

Priming, by the way, is the way our minds are affected by subtle changes in our surroundings. These changes in surroundings, which would seem insignificant to you and me, can affect our brains so drastically that they seep into our performance on tasks and our perceptions of reality. For example, if a girl who is just about to write an exam is told that girls normally perform worse than boys on this type of exam, then her brain will be primed to do worse, regardless of her actual skill level.

Similarly, if she is told that girls normally perform better than boys on this type of exam, then she will do better, regardless of her skill level. We have been primed by society to perform according to our genders, and this process starts early. The more we are taught these differences, the more we perform according to them. The more we perform according to them, the more we believe in biological differences between genders.

The more we believe in biological differences between genders… you get the picture. In the next section of the book, Fine carefully rebuts the many scientific experiments and studies that claim to prove the inherent differences between male and female brains. Scientists and the public have used these experiments for decades to support their sexist claims about girls and women, but Fine is here to tell us that those experiments had small sample sizes, flimsy experiment designs, and other glaring holes that should make us all question their scientific authority.

Each claim she makes in this section is backed up by solid research, and all her sources are outlined in the endnotes and bibliography, which together span about 80 pages. She also provides counter-studies along the way to disprove these experiments, all of which help drive her initial point home. At the end of this section, she points to a mass study, or meta-analysis, that puts together data from thousands of participants from various studies investigating the same question, and showed that, when using a large sample size as opposed to the small ones normally used in these experiments , most of the trends that scientists have claimed to find on gender differences turn out to be statistically insignificant, and therefore unsupported by science.

Fine also points to the important concept of neuroplasticity, or how our brains are constantly being shaped by external factors, such as our social environment and experiences: Our brains are malleable and heavily influenced by external factors, which, more often than not, are working against us, and these factors need to be honestly discussed by scientists who enter into this field of work.

All in all, I have benefited greatly from this book. Oct 04, Jaylia3 rated it it was amazing. What she exposes and describes in detail are poorly designed experiments, blind leaps of faith and convoluted circular reasoning.

In scientists! According to what Fine uncovered we have mutable brains, continuously influenced and changed by our cultural environment. Besides being thought provoking—it may make you rethink a lot of your beliefs—this book is both funny and well written.