For years, I have been writing about the differences in the brains of men and women. I have touted the innate strengths women bring to the workplace. I have supported communication skills training that teach us to adapt to gender-based styles.
The men in my life are indirectly teaching me that I may be wrong. Additionally, new research supports the perspective that sex differences in the brain are small. It's societal assumptions that magnify them.
If we are biologically different, then strengths should be recognized. However, if our differences are socially learned, then we might be ignoring an evolution of behavioral traits that is occurring in both men and women that is bringing us closer together.
After 15 years of studying brain-based behavioral research, I am beginning to see that many of our differences are learned. Whatever traits, habits, skills and perspective that can be learned by one gender, can definitely be learned, or unlearned and never learned, by the other. I believe the younger generations are proving this to be true.
I was talking to a client of mine in her early thirties about an article on women "dating down," meaning the men had less education and earning power than the women. She said, "That thinking is so eighties." She went on to explain that she and her female friends aren't looking at potential mates for those factors. They are looking for men to be good life partners, meaning they would share homemaking responsibilities, seek to have a good time together and support each others growth.
"Times are changing," she said. "Shouldn't we allow our stereotypes of men and women to change too?"
I used to teach that women changed the subject more frequently when speaking, eventually circling around to the original point they were making. The man I live with does this far more than I do. I used to teach that women were more into collaboration than commandeering. The male coaches I work with have demonstrated collaboration and sensitivity as much if not sometimes more than the women. I used to teach that women multitask better while men focused more concisely. These days, we all multitask, for better or worse, and many women can hone in on a subject with intensity.
I do stand for women being recognized for all the gifts they bring to the table.
I do stand for women being publicly honored when they demonstrate good leadership so younger women can create tangible models for their own development.
I do stand for women being seen as full contributors and excellent leaders. I stand for these women to be mothers as well if they choose to and to have the freedom to accomplish their goals in the manner that best suits their lifestyles.
I do stand for women having equal opportunities for development as men and as many chances to be successful in their business endeavors as men.
I do stand for whatever it takes to breakdown the entrenched masculine cultures in business and politics that keep women from realizing their potential and their dreams.
I stand for these things because women are valuable, not because we are better.
I want these things for men too if they also stand for women to have the same opportunities as they have. If not, I stand against men -- and women -- who choose to stifle the growth and development of women around the world.
I don't believe it's time for women to take over the world. I believe it's time that men and women support each other as full partners in economic success, world peace and cultural progress.
I think we should:
Yes, I believe more women should be leaders in companies, in their communities and in politics. Not because they are women, but because there are remarkable women that can do amazing work just as there are remarkable men as well.
If we promote women only because there should be more women in leadership, then we accept some women who abuse power, suppress progress, and stand for themselves more than they stand for the advancement of women.
I believe that as women become more economically self-sufficient, more educated and more business-savvy, they will naturally rise in power. Companies will be smart to do whatever they can to retain their top talent women. Countries will develop faster if they support women starting their own businesses. Society will be healthier and more stable as women come into their own. An article called The Third Billion details how women will be an "unprecedented resource for driving economic growth and improving the quality of life" worldwide over the next decade.
It is the good for all that we support the rise of women in the world. It is the good for all that we do this as equal partners with men. Let's quit praising our differences and start honoring how the best of us, both men and women, can be powerful together in a more collaborative society.
P.s. Check out the great interview Katie Couric did with Gloria Steinem and Jehmue Greene on today's feminism and workplace issues. They too want to stop the "either/or" and "win/lose" conversations of competition and promote men and women coming together. Steinem said she is disappointed that we lack "...the imagination of cooperation, equality and community, that we are still in this old paradigm." It is time to move on to come together.
Marcia Reynolds is an executive coach and delivers leadership programs around the world. Read the reviews for her latest book, Wander Woman: How High-Achieving Women Find Contentment and Direction.
Follow Marcia Reynolds on Twitter: www.twitter.com/MarciaReynolds
Unequal, Unfair, Ineffective and Inefficient Gender Inequity in ...
Gender Inequity in 'Whoville' : NPR
Taking on the Economics of Gender Inequity - washingtonpost.com
New Survey Finds Widespread Gender Inequity, Despite Support for Equality
Female Academics Less Satisfied Than Male Counterparts
Gender Equality Universally Embraced, But Inequalities Acknowledged
Researchers identify the gender differences in needs and communication for couples
In the meantime, those of us that have grown up with male-dominated workplace situations, and being a minority in business have a different take on it. "We don't see things the way they are...We see things the way we are." and until the incoming generation takes over as leaders, we have the situation where there are differences ... vast ones... and managing them is a matter of changing the way we see things, and ourselves.
I just took a call about a prospective speaking engagement because "guilt and self-doubt" was of interest to the group at this convention. That WILL change eventually, but there will always be gender issues.
Hey, while checking email this morning a not-to-small spider quickly scurried out from under my keyboard. I innately blurted out a high pitched hoot of fear and surprise. Will that change? Doubt it .... but it would be great if I could do that while sitting beside a man and he wouldn't shake his head like "crazy women - they don't belong at work." That still happens .... ALOT, There are still many male-dominated environments where women repress natural leadership instincts.
Here's to being yourself, regardless of gender, and regardless of the social expectations around you.
Its been observed that of the civil rights achieved since the 1960s, white women in particular have been favored and essentially replaced minority males in opportunities and positions. As evident in the number of white women senators are 17 while there has been only one black male senator, the current one having been appointed. There are also fewer black male congressmen than women congressperson in the House: 26 black males to 74 females. In fact HP has a sparsely observed article on this in IMPACT section of how minority males start life in poorer health, in more broken homes, with poorer education and poorer financial situation, have fewer paternal presence, are more proned to homicide and suicide.
And black and latino females are outpacing males in education, have more family and community support, have more medical care, etc.
White women simply are not in a position to say "let's stop looking at gender" when minority males are systemically being repressed before they even reach adulthood.
My experience has been that women in powerful positions (and even many in not so powerful positions) are more likely to be controlling, annoying, and simply difficult to work for/with. Apparently, though, it is considered a sign of being progressive and liberated to have women in positions of power in an organization, and so these types of women can get away with things that men cannot.
As a side note, I have come across god being referred to as a "she" in an attempt to challenge the social norms. Never have I seen satan being referred to as a "she" though. Interesting, don't you think?
Certain things like emotions are hard-wired, similar to hard drive; people haven't changed very much over the ages. it's the software of learning that floats in and out of the ages; that's what seem to change and evolve.
It only gets to be a "problem" in heterosexual culture.
The truth is, most (not all) heterosexual males are more YIN and most women more YANG. Those differences are easily seen in pre-school age children, and they persist through adulthood. Per Jung (and others) one of the tasks of midlife is to bring some balance into the mix.
Women (and some men) have spent a lot of time and calories telling us just how different we are. Deborah Tannen and others have written plenty of scientific and popular literature on the subject.
Now, you're saying that it's not nature, but nurture. That could be so - but if it is, then it's hard to explain how differently boys and girls behave, even in pre-school years. Newer research on the causes of homosexuality seem to indicate that feminization in boys and masculinzation girls has its roots in nature, not nurture.
So here's a thought: Stop praising the differences, and stop condemning the differences (as more than a few first wave feminists did). And stop tying them so exclusively to gender, when 10% of our population is same sex oriented, and exhibits the same sort of differences between YIN versus YANG in personality development.
---
Whoops...should have been the other way 'round. Most men more YANG; most women more YIN.
There are some innate differences. The differences are magnified by social learning. Thus, by the time people are adults, with socialization there are statistically signficant differences between groups, but generally the differences cannot be applied reliably to individuals.
All factors being equal, though, if one raised a random male child and a random female child under hypothetical "identically equal" conditions, there would remain some differences at adulthood, but they would likely be slight, and with random variation could even be nonsignificant.
Take a random child of unspecfied biological sex and raise him/her under unspecifed "gender socialization" conditions, turn him/her loose in the adult world -- and since we still have male and female role stereotypes, he or she still has to deal with the stereotypes.
However, since our brains will always use cognitive shortcuts based on a person's salient features, rewiring the stereotypes is no easy task -- our unconscious stereotypes are internalized with our own social roles -- and thus our gender stereotypes of others go hand in hand with our own gender role socialization from the outset.
Thus, for now, I'll continue using only my initials on my resume, since after doing so, people ceased saying it "lacked warmth" and "seemed too dominant", and read it to the end. "Pink scented paper" just wasn't an option.
Where did the author say this? I think the confusion over feminism is mostly mischaracterization. No one's saying men are losers or have to be "kept in line". Feminism is humanism - the radical notion that women are HUMAN BEINGS first and foremost. It's as simple and complex as that. And that's not as intuitive a concept as you may think. Young girls grow up in this culture being trained and encouraged to think of themselves as t!ts and a$$. Boys, especially in these days of porn and sexist video games, are happy to keep them pigeonholed as such. And yet sexual relationships are not thriving. Overall satisfaction isn't increasing.
The idea as I understand it is to encourage both genders to fulfill and respect their own, unique nature as a human being ... and then to recognize and respect that humanity in one another.
Thanks for a refreshing piece that fights back against a very destructive modern trend. Nick Kristof, who writes beautifully about women's issues, had a good piece along these lines the other day, Don't Write off Men Just Yet. Worth a read.
Where's the evidence for your theory that men's incomes will decline while women's stays the same? That's not what's happening right now. Women ARE earning more, at least those who are choosing to enter and compete in the occupations that pay more. If that means fewer men earn at that level, then that's just fair play. Men aren't being disadvantaged by having to compete with women. No one's talking about reverse discrimination, just honest, fair competition.
Second, you're ignoring the other intangible aspects mentioned in the discussion. If women earn more, then more men may be able to be caregivers. People may be able to follow their true nature - whether as competitor or caregiver - based on their talents, not their gender. Men can be relieved of the burden of earning so much, and can pursue fields that interest them more, but pay less. There are decided advantages for men in all this.
I think the point is that women should be able to enjoy the fruits of this situation as well. What I'm seeing these days are women being expected to earn income, care for the children and home, care for aging parents ... and still "embrace their femininity" by being hot sexy babes who fulfill their man's every wish. It's a lose lose situation. On top of that, the new trend is to demonize women as "feminists" if they balk at any of these
warmly,
Christine