Letters to the Editor

• Your rants are beyond the scope of this article

  [Read the article: Why women stay with abusers]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  Where is all this acrimony coming from? Did anyone read the article on the BYU study? Here are some key points from it (bold type is mine for emphasis):

  "At 24 months of age, children seem to recognize gender stereotypes - and when they are broken, according to research from Brigham Young University."

  So they're talking about what children *observe* and react to. Not what they can do or not do at any particular age. They are not even talking about children being interested in "male" or "female" toys (babies vs trucks). These 2 yos are observing and reacting to *adult* behavior. It’s a very narrow investigation, and has nothing to do with abilities or preferences. It’s not comparing brain size, shape, function or development. It’s measuring eye contact with images.

  Here's what the study did:

  "Flom placed toddlers in front of two video monitors. A male and female actor were taped putting on lipstick or shaving, and applying nail polish or tying a necktie. Two images were shown at the same time and BYU timed how long the toddlers paid attention to each.

  The professor found the 2-year-olds looked longer at the inconsistent images - not because the children believed they were "wrong" but because they were unfamiliar, Flom said. In other words, children in the study were used to seeing women use lipstick and men wear ties."

  Ergo, by 2, children can see patterns of activity, and relate them to people of a particular gender. When that pattern of behavior is performed by someone of the opposite gender, the 2yos notice. Again, this has nothing to do with differently developed brains for different genders. Unless posters are implying there is a "lipstick application center" in the brain that is bigger in girls than in boys? And a "tie tying center" that's bigger in boy brains?

  Here are some conclusions drawn from the above study:

  "The study is a "nice demonstration of a developmental phenomenon," said Chris Porter, a BYU professor of human development who wasn't involved in the research. He said it shows babies are good observers who can pick up on subtle cues.

  "Perhaps there's more of a social pressure towards socializing these children to sexual norms" than previously thought, he added."

  Being good observers is nature (innate to brain development in both genders). What they observe as “typical” gender behavior is nurture, since cave dwellers neither applied lipstick nor wore ties.

  “"There's something about gender that's very captivating for children," Fogel said. "We don't quite know why."

  One explanation may be that it's biological. But the social environment plays a role, too. Parents who express strong gender stereotypical behavior have children who do the same, he said.”

  Please note that neither the study nor Tracy Clark-Flory deny the developmental differences between genders. No one (except a few posters falsely accusing T C-F) is saying this study trumps boys being innately good at some tasks and girls being innately good at others. No one is saying all brain are exactly the same. This study wasn't about brains, it was about eyeballs. And it seems to imply (though I'd prefer some more facts on this) that 2yo boys and girls noticed these gender reverals equally.

  Now, here are some of my own thoughts:

  These are very simple, stereotypical behaviors modeled for children, and obviously probably don’t apply to children whose parents and caregivers neither wear ties nor apply lipstick. And no one is advocating men start wearing lipstick and women ties to promote gender equality. But what I take away from this is: kids notice what we do.

  And that probably goes waaaaay beyond gendered activities. They probably notice how we interact with spouses, friends, checkout clerks and traffic. So we should never assume are kids “won’t notice” if we behave in a way we wouldn’t want our kids to behave.

  As I said in an earlier post, if we want our kids to feel that they are capable of doing well at any number of tasks, careers, activities, etc., we should make sure we model that for them, in both genders. Or at the very least. We shouldn’t limit our kids’ options by gender (no “boy jobs” or “girl jobs” around the house). (n no, I’m not saying everyone is equally good at everything. But I’m saying our abilities shouldn’t be determined solely by gender.)

  The last statement I bold typed needs some stats to back it up. But it’s intriguing. And should be examined further. Especially by those posters who suggest Tracy Cark-Flory is an idiot and I am a man-hater.

  Permalink Saturday, June 16, 2007 05:26 AM

• Ooops!

  [Read the article: Why women stay with abusers]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  I somehow posted this above comment (#83) to the wrong column. Please ignore it.

  Permalink Saturday, June 16, 2007 05:31 AM