fluffy_little_something wrote:...one can even see on a brain scan whether a brain is male or female, different structure, different brain activity.
Wait, what? "Brain scan" being what exactly?? Your terminology is sci-fi, not medical. If you're talking about imaging, what kind? What is structurally different in the brain between men and women?
Secondly, brain function (and structure) is greatly dependent on nurture and experience. Claiming a specific structural or activation difference as being caused by gender might be entirely backwards. It might be that the life experience is responsible for the features you've decided are "different".
There's a vast difference in how men and women are nurtured (and generally treated) in most societies. The only way to judge whether a brain difference is caused by (or causes!) a difference in behavior, skill, or aptitude is to do a study that eliminates the cultural variables. Since we cannot do this, any aptitude/skill differences noted between men and women cannot be judged as caused by, or effected by, gender.
We cannot compare the brains of a man and a woman who are otherwise the same, developmentally, because they're not raised the same way. We can't even compare children. Gender stereotypes are presented to humans at day one. The moment a person is born, someone does something to them based on gender beliefs that may or may not have any meaning at all to the human species. In the USA, baby boys are almost immediately mutilated with an unnecessary procedure called circumcision. Then there's how children are dressed and treated by the adults that surround them.
There's no way to judge male vs female aptitude differences when we never have any male and female humans raised purely equally to study.
Training people to develop specialized skills also changes brain activity and likely brain structure. These structural changes aren't visible to existing imaging techniques, to the best of my knowledge (anyone with sources to cite that prove otherwise, by all means present them). These structural differences are the kind we can only only see in dissection, and this STILL tells us almost NOTHING about intelligence; it definitely tells us zero about skills and aptitude (barring evidence of overt damage).
If you had magical sci-fi "brain scan" technology, you'd STILL have to consider nurture (culture) BEFORE considering gender. However, we don't have magical/sci-fi brain scan tech. Star Trek is fantasy.
If you happen to be referencing fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging), fMRI works by theoretically showing regions of activity, based on evidence of increased blood flow (the iron in the blood is what we are seeing in an fMRI). It's not known if this is absolutely correct (that blood flow equates to peak activity), we don't know what that activity is, and we don't have any way to define the differences between "active" and "less active" brain regions in any subtle manner... but it's all we have at the moment.
FMRI does not demonstrate qualitative differences between brains in a way that is useful for judging skills and aptitudes. FMRI can help identify brain injury / damage, but it doesn't provide remotely enough meaningful data to judge whether, for example, a [healthy and uninjured] man or woman is better at any task than another [healthy and uninjured] man or woman.
The resolution of the imaging for showing activity is fairly low and the actual function of the brain is still not understood to any serious degree. We only have a grasp of which large regions are related to certain categories of functions (visual, aural, touch, motor function, etc). When it comes to fine detail of brain processing, we have no information and no way to know what is happening with any current brain imaging.
We can observe order of operations to some degree (regions of activation in sequence for tasks given to a test subject) but we cannot use this information to determine whether one person is "better" than another at any task (again, excepting for injured brains, which we can more easily judge as incapacitated).
People who don't know the reality of existing imaging techniques tend to believe in exaggerated notions of the meaningfulness of imaging provided in research studies. Bad scientists have always used irrelevant data to draw ideological conclusions, and fMRI is not immune to such abuses. Beware any literature that claims a "brain scan" proved one person was "better" than another, even if they were trying to qualify their claim by saying "at certain tasks". There's almost no way that they correctly excluded nurture/development from the variables, and ignoring those variables is bad science.
At the very best, any such brain studies are showing that we can observe how sexism successfully cripples one gender against certain skills and behaviors foolishly associated with only the other gender (women blocked from brain development that would result if allowed an interest in, or pursuit of, the sciences; men emotionally stunted by toxic masculinity... for two very broad and imprecise examples among many).
Then there's the whole issue of non-binary gender that's being completely ignored in this discussion!! It further demonstrates that aptitudes are greatly impacted by nurture and that claims of one gender/sex being inherently better or worse at anything is utter bollocks.
fluffy_little_something wrote:There is nothing wrong about one sex being more interested in and better at this, and the other sex being more interested in and better at that.
Nothing wrong... except there's no evidence that this actually happens at all. What you see is culture. You're mistaking it for nature. We've had this discussion before. You're still seemingly unwilling to accept that you may have been acculturated to accept something that is not factual. I highly recommend opening yourself to being wrong. It lets you learn and grow.
I agree with every reply made by the people here who are challenging you. Your claims are inaccurate, your citations of fact are non-existent, and your language is suspect. Blowing off sexism and citing "political correctness" as a manufacturer of sexism is a huge red flag for actual sexist ideologies.
You may not be aware of your cultural sexism, and that's understandable. I'm NOT saying you're a bad person. You likely have zero malignant intent. However your ignorance of sexism is still a thing of worry because it means that you unknowingly contribute to the maintenance of sexism. Please seriously consider the challenges being made to your beliefs here.