Pink vs Blue brains - The Gendered Brain - Neuroscience books

[@danielamorenoarrieta1708]

I'm from Colombia (South America) and since I am a teenager I've always dreamt of becoming a neuroscientist. There's no single college in my country that offers neuroscience, so I'm double majoring in psychology and philosophy. Your chanel has inspired me deeply to, one day, become a computational neuroscientist, but I wonder how difficult it would be for me to study math and programming by my own because I came from a very different background from those who usually study computational neuroscience (phisics, math). Thank you so much! I really LOVEE your channel!

[@CharlotteFraza]

You can do it! I know a lot of people from your background that made the switch, I think if you love the subject and study it with dedication you will get there, good luck ❤

[@fredo5552]

I just discovered your channel by accident. I love the passion that you transmit in your videos. It genuinely shows your love for this. Keep it going. My dream is to one day become a neurosurgeon. New subscriber!!

[@rudrakshyadav8416]

Can we be friends

[@rudrakshyadav8416]

Please reply

[@dmfoneill]

Suggestion: As a complementary follow-up to "How Emotions Are Made", look up "The Hidden Spring" by Mark Solms Mark's work adds perspective to the concepts of Baysian processes as they apply to "affect" being a key to decisionmaking and of the nature of consiousness.

[@philevans2996]

Bravo for such a well expressed analysis of the challenges for scientists with respect to drawing conclusions, and your point that gender impacts on brains can bappen starting day 1!

[@creaomega2643]

And we know that natural sex differences on the brain (such volume, connectivity and chemistry) can happen during Fetal development, that is day 0. This does not leave much space for social influences.

[@antoniomosley9410]

​@@creaomega2643Amazing how she reads comments that support her but comment like yours that challenge or even counter her points she doesn't notice. I wonder why.

[@johnnykidblue]

Good stuff, no fluff. I’ll be coming back. Thanks Charlotte.

[@TheMasculinistWay]

Well done!

[@coachcolville2103]

Brilliant video and really enjoyed your other videos - hope you keep making more 👌🏽

[@dilyazoloto1212]

Hoi! Ben je toevallig Nederlands?

[@abhawkxx4548]

I am an undergraduate psychology student with a strong interest in neuroscience. I’m so glad I found your channel. You have very interesting videos! Thanks for the book recommendation! Can’t wait to read it.

[@IronJhon788]

2 years after, AI can identify female or male brains with 90% accuracy.

[@icysnow57cold64]

I have a question. How do males and females bond with each other? I don't see how men and women can bond (especially romantically) with each other. Women can build incredible friendships and become very close to each other in a way men can't bond, and science shows that women can bond very well with each other. Generally, women are even more social than men are. After something bad happens, a woman quickly rushes to talk to all of her female friends to get support, whereas a man can isolate himself and grief alone. Women tend to be more emotional, more caring, more empathic, more compassionate, more affectionate, more loyal, more nurturing, more understanding, more sympathetic, more sensitive, more kind hearted, more peaceful, more calmer, more gentle, more expressive, more intuitive, and more outward than men are, and thus bond more with other women in a special way that they can’t with men. Men, on the other hand, are not that emotional, and thus can’t bond with other men in a special way. Women are more comfortable being around with other women than they are with men. They have a type of bond that usually men with women won’t really have, or with men and men. Men are usually much lonelier than women are. Men don't often talk about their personal problems with their male friends like how women do with their female friends. Females produce a lot more oxytocin than males do. And that's a reason why women tend to hug a lot more and be a lot more physically affectionate than men do.

[@MrMikkyn]

I think can men have the opportunity to form strong bonds in a military environment. They go through intense discipline, hazing, teamwork and war time trauma. They can form lifelong friendships, and have a collective understanding of what they went through, they have honour and want to save the lives of their fellow brothers. They also have collective suffering and can understand each other.

[@icysnow57cold64]

@@MrMikkyn The emotional intimacy of female friendships is far greater than those of male friendships. Men don't have friendships that deep like how women do. Many men are uncomfortable with it. Women can have the earlier stage of a friendship, but it almost feels like the next stages are “unlocked” if that makes sense. That trust becomes deeper and deeper. Eventually women are so comfortable with them that comfortable silence or gaps in conversation aren’t awkward. Women can talk, pause and enjoy one another’s company before the conversation starts up again. I find a lot of male friendships don’t get too far past stage one. You hear jokes about guys hanging out all day and going home to their wives who ask for life updates on their friends and said husbands don’t have an answer. Talking constantly isn’t necessary but it does deepen the bond.

[@icysnow57cold64]

@@MrMikkyn Women relate to other women in a deeper level and that is by saying that it’s pure dopamine- like, you know those moments where you’re talking to someone and they’re like “omg yes I do that too” or they basically finish your sentence because they know exactly what it is that you’re talking about? Women are in tune with their hormones, and that's what connects them with all other women!! It’s unspoken sisterhood!! Womanhood and feminine energy is so freaking powerful! Women can cry in each other's arms and hug each other and stroke the persons hair. Men don’t do that. Women will understand and connect with other women regardless of age or country ethnicity or religion. There are certain things women of all kind of universally will understand about each other without explanation and they care about each other's safety.

[@brucebonaney6921]

Thanks ever so much for you fascinating and understandable explanations of neuroscience. Thinking now about the fact that cultural gender stereotypes channel women into certain accepted careers and roles. Could it not give humans an evolutionary advantage to do so? The less effort we use to make well thought out difficult decisions about this the more energy and effort will be put into making us successful in the culturally accepted careers or roles we effortlessly follow. Already know enough people who get stuck making simple decisions…

[@rajanrahul9433]

I like tour videos very much. You are very much passionate about neuroscience. You will go very far in this field. I wish you will be become the one of the best scientists in this field. Big applause from India.

[@larissacury7714]

This discussion reminded me of the book "Lessons In Chemistry", check it out :) thank you for the video!

[@josecarlos9289]

Thanks Charlotte this is a very nice review of the book! I agree with the author that most of the studies/arguments in this gendered debate are "neurotrash". However at the same time it looks like all her arguments try to defend the "nurture" arguments for sex differences, and dismiss the "nature" ones. "After years of exposure to negative stereotypes (...) your brain might pick up on the idea that women don't do science" These kind of arguments are literally just taking side with the "nurture" part of the debate. They also don't make a lot of sense, because the same could be said about social sciences/arts: they used to be male dominated fields where women were deemed inferior. However now social sciences/arts attract more females than males. I really enjoy your channel by the way, hope it keeps growing😊

[@CharlotteFraza]

Thank you :D, and yes I agree with you! I think neuroscience cannot really solve any causal questions at the moment. You see it in many debates from race, gender, sexuality, in the end it is how the researchers interpret the data and that is usually based on cultural believes (although we consider ourselves beyond that of course ;))

[@stultuses]

@Charlotte Fraza Psychology has studied this aspect for years. The latest show that in the Scandinavian countries, where influence on gender choice for career outcomes has in fact made women go into nurturing roles more and men head towards STEM more, so highlighting the physical makeup even more This sort of makes sense when you look at evolutionary biology and the survival of the species Psychology has amassed huge volumes of data My concern is that neuroscience is pitching itself as the ultimate scientific solution, the same as psychology tried this in decades gone past, as did religion before that, as did the tribal elders before that etc etc etc The world is interconnected and the danger with modern science is that it believes it can solve a definitive by breaking down a functionally integrated object, be that human, or animal, environment etc and then believe it can derive all truth from that singular object - this is very dangerous in my opinion, especially since 'science' has been given the mantle of truth lately

[@teeI0ck]

good stuff

[@yusuf_0728]

Hi Charlotte. By chance, are you Dutch? I definitely need to subscribe to your channel. My career path as being somewhat like yours... Then I definitely need to brush up on some neuroscience.

[@andyschwartz8808]

I see, so we just need to change everything and then we can find out

[@Hanswai]

Very clear presentation! You were very articulate with your words! Thanks!

[@dagothur8037]

woah talking about different genders and corresponding differences in their brain and the whole debate gears towards if one is more competitive than the other. we first need to find how different they are (the genetics and chemicals in brain, the effect of puberty and yata yata yata on itself if possible and then the social aspect since they really do change) and then test this models in a way to understand how efficient are they on different tasks, and then we could modify the model and see their change of behavior. the ordinary conclusion is just crazy to even assume! i also never got this "pink for woman" thing. seems such a forced personal taste and fashion and ones liking when i see a female wearing pink or having pink tools more than an average (fascination with a certain color exists but due to cultural norms of the color pink, i think less females would agnostically be fascinated with the color and it be more forced, same goes with blue for boys) it probably was the Hona Montana era and i guess its over now

[@tyson3112]

Wow I'm loving your videos day by day now💖 Thanks for making such good videos which are much needed in this society and education💖

[@CharlotteFraza]

My pleasure 😊

[@tyson3112]

@@CharlotteFraza I wish i could have been as much smart as you are.. although I am biological sciences master completed student.. but I feel bit difficulty in coding and bit mathematical approaches.. i too want to learn and have PhD like you in computational neuroscience or atleast in neuroscience. You inspire me..💖 thanks a lot..!! May Science bless you even more..💖

[@chaddenning]

I mostly identiy with the color Red its the first thing I remember when born into this world ; blue for me as been looked as passive or non aggressive while red has always represented for me determination, aggression,

[@vikrampatil2748]

Thanks to youtube recommendation I am surprised to see people like this do exist keep it up 👍👍👍👍

[@creaomega2643]

I have to disagree or, better to specify at least few things even if i dunno you ever read this. Like someone already specified, the book seems to dismiss or downplay too much Nature related arguments. You said that indeed we cannot say if Nature or Nurture play a significant role, but i think argument in favour of Nature have not been presented that much in the video. For example, without inherent brain brain differences between men and women, it will be hard to explain many aspects of our evolution, like how our female and male ancestors were able to be attracted to each other or if our male and female ancestors (before complex societies) had the same type of behaviour, why they end up having relevant anatomical differences (like differences in muscle mass)? If you make a natural selection argument, wouldn't make sense that their behaviour or aspects of their brain would be more optimized for the challenges they would likely face because of their sex? I will take more modern and practical evidence. We know that sex hormones can affect brain activity and development, which can eventually translate in differences in mood or sexual behaviours. For example if the behaviour of convicted recidivist sex offenders was only the result of Social Entitlement, then we would have no way to explain why chemical or surgical castration work more than 70% or 90% of the time. Surgical or Chemical Castration work by reducing androgens hormones (sometimes by straight up introducing typical Female hormones; castration levels for chemical castration are at around can already be around 20-50 ng/dl; women androgens levels are at 15-79 ng/dl). Androgens hormones (like specifically Testosterone) have been show to affect Libido regardless of sex. If one sex have naturally more T and androgens than the other sex, this by itself is a biological difference that can influence sexual behaviour and neurochemistry (the only biological way out here is if you argue that, even by accounting to their different concentrations, the neurological consequences of exposure to male or female sex hormones are the same - which doesn't seem so far - OR that NEUROLOGICAL DIFFERENCES in women brains compensate the phenomena ; the former assumption can be excluded due to evidence, meaning that the only 2 logical outcomes include a biological difference between the 2 brains). Another strip of evidence comes from animals, specifically mammals. It is hard to argue that animals live in complex societies that perpetrate harmfull stereotypes like humans do. Despite that, differences in their behaviours or aspects of their cognition have being found, some of which correlated to biological aspects. At that point the question will be why such differences emerged in such animals in the first place and if we can valorize only the role of nurture when we see similar correlates in humans. One last evidence for now is the baby thing. You valorize a lot the value of nurture when it comes to babies and you make it seems that raising a newborn in a gender neutral way even for a few days to see to see relevant brain differences likely due to nature is virtually or nearly impossible due to kids neuroplasticity. If this is the case, i would argue that you are over-estimating a bit the effects on nurture on our ability to see relevant brain differences that are likely due to inherent natural factors. But for this reason i will take evidence that predates birth: We are aware of brain differences that are present during Fetal development and such differences are not only related to volume, but also connectivity and chemistry (like differences in serotonergic system found in human placenta between sexes). All this biological differences would make absolutely no sense if they wouldn't have some actual effects in the real world. I wanna do one last question, but this is more personal so read it in the least aggressive way. You argued that there are many "Gendered things" that influence girls brain, which may typically translate in some disadvantagious outcomes for them. Now a major personal question: Why are you using stereotypical Gendered Dressing, hair style and overall aesthetic presentation ? Aren't you endorsing stereotypical gendered Behaviour that will be picked up by yours or other people children? If today like you said we have more freedom and you also have the freedom to not do that while knowing that doing this and following many gender stereotypes will affect your and other people brains in some capacity... then why are you doing that ? Isn't Losing a bit of social approval worth it if at the end of the day you decrease the stereotypical perpertration of Gender Norms? After all, one can argue that a person must contribute to the change they would like to see in the world and many people are able to follow this and deal with all the consequences. For me it seems as if yours is a statement on how you like some aspects of the status quo even if you perfectly know the potential effects it can have on others and prefer this outcome over the consequences (bigger or small that they may be, if any) that not following some stereotypical norms can bring to you. No hate, but this is just my observation.

[@NoNonsense_01]

You broached the subject of gender-equal societies having wider gender gaps in STEM, but the arguments supposed to explain these findings are not convincing. The societal pressure would be, by definition, much higher in gender-unequal societies. Moreover, attribution of discrimination, wherever there is disparity is not scientific. Currently, women outnumber men in both college enrollment and completion. Should we assume then that men are now being discriminated against in society?

[@ChristinaHarrison-hw4lr]

Back in the 1940s pink was for boys. Blue was for girls.

[@joeewell4846]

"Neuroscience" is a pseudo-scientific field of Psychology, not science! "Neurology" is the scientific field which should be addressed here, defining the "pink" and "blue" brains in terms of hormonal balance and function.

[@chaddenning]

I think the female brain is very wired differently than the man and while similar there are many differences like Ryu n Ken