![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
marjaerwinBess Hungerford has recently published an essay arguing the brain sex does not exist, citing Anne Lawrence, Cordelia Fine, and Rebecca Jordan-Young:
http://sexnotgender.com/what-is-sex/brain-sex-does-not-exist/
I am not a neuroscientist, but I've tried to follow the research.
Anne Lawrence argues that the studies of sexual dimorphism in the brain and particularly of sexual dimorphism in transsexual people's brains, are flawed.
And they are flawed, and need follow-up; there tend to be small sample sizes, and there can be badly-chosen control groups, making it hard to separate sex identity from sexual orientation. It is clear that there are sexually-dimorphic areas of the limbic system, such as the BSTc in the hypothalamus. So far most studies have shown that trans people tend to have the same characteristics as our identified sex, rather than our assigned sex. A few data points from some studies indicate that trans people who have not had hormone replacement therapy already have the same characteristics as their identified sex, and cis people who had hormone problems, or prostate cancer treatment, also had the same characteristics as their identified-and-assigned sex.
Anne Lawrence argues that, in the absence of stronger evidence for the neurological theories, we should favor the psychosexual theories Ray Blanchard et al have pushed.
Now from personal experience, I know that the Bailey-Blanchard-Lawrence two-type theory is false, but I can't prove it. The Bailey-Blanchard-Lawrence two-type theory fails to account for trans womyn, like me, who don't fit into either type. It fails to account for the seemingly high proportion of trans people who are intersex and of intersex people who are trans. It is also lesbophobic.
I haven't had the opportunity to read Fine's or Jourdan-Young's books yet, but both are on my to-read list.
As far as I know, Cordelia Fine and Rebecca Jourdan-Young are responding to the misuse of brain sex explanations to justify sexist attitudes, practices, and policies, and the misuse of brain sex differences to explain behavioral differences when sexist attitudes, practices, and policies can also create/enforce behavioral differences. For example, a womon is punished for being more masculine, and also punished for being more feminine, and a man is encouraged to be more masculine and mainly punished for being more feminine, and these enforcement patterns shape femininity and masculinity.
All three sources are negative sources. Lawrence is addressing brain sex and transsexualism, expressing doubt, and expressing her preference for the Bailey-Blanchard-Lawrence theory. Fine and Jourdan-Young are addressing brain sex and neurosexism, and it's possible to prefer brain sex theories for transsexualism while opposing neurosexism and avoiding brain sex differences for anything else.
Zoe Brain tends to keep up with the trans-related brain research on her blog:
http://aebrain.blogspot.com/search/label/Brains
http://sexnotgender.com/what-is-sex/brain-sex-does-not-exist/
I am not a neuroscientist, but I've tried to follow the research.
Anne Lawrence argues that the studies of sexual dimorphism in the brain and particularly of sexual dimorphism in transsexual people's brains, are flawed.
And they are flawed, and need follow-up; there tend to be small sample sizes, and there can be badly-chosen control groups, making it hard to separate sex identity from sexual orientation. It is clear that there are sexually-dimorphic areas of the limbic system, such as the BSTc in the hypothalamus. So far most studies have shown that trans people tend to have the same characteristics as our identified sex, rather than our assigned sex. A few data points from some studies indicate that trans people who have not had hormone replacement therapy already have the same characteristics as their identified sex, and cis people who had hormone problems, or prostate cancer treatment, also had the same characteristics as their identified-and-assigned sex.
Anne Lawrence argues that, in the absence of stronger evidence for the neurological theories, we should favor the psychosexual theories Ray Blanchard et al have pushed.
Now from personal experience, I know that the Bailey-Blanchard-Lawrence two-type theory is false, but I can't prove it. The Bailey-Blanchard-Lawrence two-type theory fails to account for trans womyn, like me, who don't fit into either type. It fails to account for the seemingly high proportion of trans people who are intersex and of intersex people who are trans. It is also lesbophobic.
I haven't had the opportunity to read Fine's or Jourdan-Young's books yet, but both are on my to-read list.
As far as I know, Cordelia Fine and Rebecca Jourdan-Young are responding to the misuse of brain sex explanations to justify sexist attitudes, practices, and policies, and the misuse of brain sex differences to explain behavioral differences when sexist attitudes, practices, and policies can also create/enforce behavioral differences. For example, a womon is punished for being more masculine, and also punished for being more feminine, and a man is encouraged to be more masculine and mainly punished for being more feminine, and these enforcement patterns shape femininity and masculinity.
All three sources are negative sources. Lawrence is addressing brain sex and transsexualism, expressing doubt, and expressing her preference for the Bailey-Blanchard-Lawrence theory. Fine and Jourdan-Young are addressing brain sex and neurosexism, and it's possible to prefer brain sex theories for transsexualism while opposing neurosexism and avoiding brain sex differences for anything else.
Zoe Brain tends to keep up with the trans-related brain research on her blog:
http://aebrain.blogspot.com/search/label/Brains
