Scan barcode
jlfields925's review against another edition
3.0
Overall liked it and thought the conclusions were pretty solid based on the evidence. Liked that Eliot tied the research to practical results. I thought it was similar to Parenting Beyond Pink and Blue. This seemed to take a deeper dive into neuroscience; I preferred the less dense approach of Parenting Beyond. If you like the nitty gritty, read this.
jules1090's review against another edition
3.0
Interesting and thought-provoking, but I had hoped it would be a little more informative from a parenting perspective.
cranea653's review against another edition
2.0
Interesting exploration, but Eliot conveniently ignored the lives of transgender and intersex people when talking about gender or sex differences.
marie_gg's review against another edition
4.0
As the mother of three sons, I've always been interested in learning more about what is hardwired into males and females, and what is influenced by environment. So when I heard about this book, I immediately put it on hold at the library.
Eliot is a neuroscientist, a graduate from Harvard and Columbia, an associate professor of neuroscience, and mother of two sons and a daughter. The basic premise of the book is that although yes, males and females have biologically based differences, many of our differences are due to environment and childrearing (or in other words, nurture).
She painstakingly analyzes the studies about male-female differences and helps the reader decipher what's been proven and what's been simply extrapolated (and exaggerated).
Here's what's been proven:
*Boys are as much as four times more likely to experience learning and developmental disorders, including autism, ADD, and dyslexia. They are 73% more likely to die in accidents and more than twice as likely to be the victims of voilent crimes.
*Girls are at least twice as likely to experience depression, anxiety, and eating disorders. They are twice as likely as boys to attempt suicide (but boys are three times more likely to succeed at it).
*Girls get better grades, but boys get higher SAT scores.
*Males have bigger brains, but they are also less likely to survive at birth and through the first year of life. They are also more likely to be miscarried.
*Girls develop more quickly in the womb and in the first few years of life. Yes, there's proof that females mature more quickly than boys.
Along with these, Eliot refutes a lot of gender-related myths out there as well. Many scientific studies showing differences between males and females were later refuted, but those findings were not published in the popular press.
Contrary to the 1970s, "Free to Be You and Me" era, now with the proliferation of boy and girl experts and John Gray types, parents seem to jump all over supposed gender differences, using them to excuse behavior and indulge in stereotypes. (Don't get me started on the pink/princess craze...or conversely, the fact that nearly all boy clothing features sports or action figures!)
Eliot tackles several phases in a person's life (including gestation) and describes the scientific data and environmental influences on shaping a person's personality. She gives excellent recommendations for fighting against stereotypes and helping children achieve their full potential, no matter their gender.
I strongly recommend this book for parents of boys and girls, teachers, and anyone who deals regularly with children.
Eliot is a neuroscientist, a graduate from Harvard and Columbia, an associate professor of neuroscience, and mother of two sons and a daughter. The basic premise of the book is that although yes, males and females have biologically based differences, many of our differences are due to environment and childrearing (or in other words, nurture).
She painstakingly analyzes the studies about male-female differences and helps the reader decipher what's been proven and what's been simply extrapolated (and exaggerated).
Here's what's been proven:
*Boys are as much as four times more likely to experience learning and developmental disorders, including autism, ADD, and dyslexia. They are 73% more likely to die in accidents and more than twice as likely to be the victims of voilent crimes.
*Girls are at least twice as likely to experience depression, anxiety, and eating disorders. They are twice as likely as boys to attempt suicide (but boys are three times more likely to succeed at it).
*Girls get better grades, but boys get higher SAT scores.
*Males have bigger brains, but they are also less likely to survive at birth and through the first year of life. They are also more likely to be miscarried.
*Girls develop more quickly in the womb and in the first few years of life. Yes, there's proof that females mature more quickly than boys.
Along with these, Eliot refutes a lot of gender-related myths out there as well. Many scientific studies showing differences between males and females were later refuted, but those findings were not published in the popular press.
Contrary to the 1970s, "Free to Be You and Me" era, now with the proliferation of boy and girl experts and John Gray types, parents seem to jump all over supposed gender differences, using them to excuse behavior and indulge in stereotypes. (Don't get me started on the pink/princess craze...or conversely, the fact that nearly all boy clothing features sports or action figures!)
Eliot tackles several phases in a person's life (including gestation) and describes the scientific data and environmental influences on shaping a person's personality. She gives excellent recommendations for fighting against stereotypes and helping children achieve their full potential, no matter their gender.
I strongly recommend this book for parents of boys and girls, teachers, and anyone who deals regularly with children.
megatsunami's review against another edition
5.0
Excellent book. Scientific, yet straightforward and enjoyable to read. Nuanced, yet clear. The author has a refreshing willingness to take into account both biological and cultural/ social forces. Also, I really felt that she didn't go into writing this book with the attitude "I'm going to prove A, B, or C," but really just wanted to examine the research and write about what it indicates. This is rare - often authors on both sides of the nature/ nurture debate are very attached to the outcomes, which I can relate to, but isn't that helpful.
As a side note, I really enjoyed her anecdotes, but I also really liked that they are clearly meant as illustration and not data!
A couple of criticisms, just because hey, nothing's perfect:
- Sometimes, her suggestions for how to help neutralize gender differences seemed to undercut her point that innate gender differences are not that large. For example, after showing that the differences between boys' and girls' verbal skills are not very large, she will say things like "This will help boys to catch up with girls' greater verbal skills." But... you just said the differences weren't that big... I get that it is kind of a catch-22: how do you acknowledge differences that have developed, without reifying them or implying they are immutable?
- Her recommendations at the end of each chapter often did not proceed clearly from what she had discussed in the chapter. The babies chapter is the worst in this area - for example, one of the tips is to breastfeed for at least a year. OK, sure, that's good, but how does that relate to equalizing gender differences? In other chapters, the recommendations seem like they are primarily her own opinion (rather than based on research or study). I don't have a problem with hearing her opinion - she's certainly better informed than many people whose opinions I encounter - but I like to know which I'm hearing, opinion or research.
As a side note, I really enjoyed her anecdotes, but I also really liked that they are clearly meant as illustration and not data!
A couple of criticisms, just because hey, nothing's perfect:
- Sometimes, her suggestions for how to help neutralize gender differences seemed to undercut her point that innate gender differences are not that large. For example, after showing that the differences between boys' and girls' verbal skills are not very large, she will say things like "This will help boys to catch up with girls' greater verbal skills." But... you just said the differences weren't that big... I get that it is kind of a catch-22: how do you acknowledge differences that have developed, without reifying them or implying they are immutable?
- Her recommendations at the end of each chapter often did not proceed clearly from what she had discussed in the chapter. The babies chapter is the worst in this area - for example, one of the tips is to breastfeed for at least a year. OK, sure, that's good, but how does that relate to equalizing gender differences? In other chapters, the recommendations seem like they are primarily her own opinion (rather than based on research or study). I don't have a problem with hearing her opinion - she's certainly better informed than many people whose opinions I encounter - but I like to know which I'm hearing, opinion or research.
mrsdragon's review against another edition
3.0
I have mixed feelings about this book:
PRO:
*The author knows her science and presents facts in a very levelheaded way. Sources are fastidiously documented in a nearly 100 page appendix.
*The author discusses both boys and girls, the sexist views our society holds and how those views effects their development
*The author offers suggestions for helping children nurture talents that may not be their preferred way of behaving
CONS:
*The author rarely shows any engagement with the subject and the brief moments that appear and quickly smothered.
*It seemed that the author was much more concerned about boys. I had no idea there was such a HUGE movement telling people that boys can't read. On the other hand, society's blatant discounting of girl's abilities in science and math got far fewer mentions. Being a female engineer I can tell you which I'm personally more acquainted with... ; )
*Many of the suggestions are bland and sweeping ex: (to get boys to read more: read to them more) though that may be due to the fact that society often overlooks the obvious
*The author's language was often sexist--referring to dolls and makeup as "feminine" or talking about how much girls just LOVE gossiping. Similarly, aggression was "masculine" and boys just can't sit still. She tended to use absolute terms (I'm sure because adding qualifiers in every senteance would soon get tiring.) Her lazy use of language was jarring because I kept getting pulled out of the book indignantly thinking "But I didn't do that!".
PRO:
*The author knows her science and presents facts in a very levelheaded way. Sources are fastidiously documented in a nearly 100 page appendix.
*The author discusses both boys and girls, the sexist views our society holds and how those views effects their development
*The author offers suggestions for helping children nurture talents that may not be their preferred way of behaving
CONS:
*The author rarely shows any engagement with the subject and the brief moments that appear and quickly smothered.
*It seemed that the author was much more concerned about boys. I had no idea there was such a HUGE movement telling people that boys can't read. On the other hand, society's blatant discounting of girl's abilities in science and math got far fewer mentions. Being a female engineer I can tell you which I'm personally more acquainted with... ; )
*Many of the suggestions are bland and sweeping ex: (to get boys to read more: read to them more) though that may be due to the fact that society often overlooks the obvious
*The author's language was often sexist--referring to dolls and makeup as "feminine" or talking about how much girls just LOVE gossiping. Similarly, aggression was "masculine" and boys just can't sit still. She tended to use absolute terms (I'm sure because adding qualifiers in every senteance would soon get tiring.) Her lazy use of language was jarring because I kept getting pulled out of the book indignantly thinking "But I didn't do that!".
ginabbina's review against another edition
4.0
I didn't actually finish the book because it was due back to the library but I read almost half so I'm writing a review anyway.
It was really interesting! The main argument is that while the are some biological differences between boys and girls, they're actually really tiny in comparison to the differences among all kids. Society does way more to exaggerate differences. The author directly answers some other books that exaggerate differences, which I found interesting.
An analogy is like men are naturally taller than women, on average. And some people take to that to like: therefore men should work in offices with fifteen foot tall ceilings and furniture built for ten feet tall humans. But actually there's so much variation it would be better if desks and chairs were flexible enough for everyone.
The book also has concrete suggestions that are sort of gendered but are beneficial for all kids. Like kids should play with blocks or legos to learn spatial awareness (especially girls who might not get that much exposure, but it's fun and educational for everyone). Or, if kids are too squirmy for artsy activities, let them draw at an easel standing up (especially boys who tend to be more impatient, but relevant to anyone fidgety).
The structure is a bit of introduction then child development by age. I read the infancy and early childhood parts, I think. I might come back to this in a couple years when my baby-friends are older and I need more chapters.
It was really interesting! The main argument is that while the are some biological differences between boys and girls, they're actually really tiny in comparison to the differences among all kids. Society does way more to exaggerate differences. The author directly answers some other books that exaggerate differences, which I found interesting.
An analogy is like men are naturally taller than women, on average. And some people take to that to like: therefore men should work in offices with fifteen foot tall ceilings and furniture built for ten feet tall humans. But actually there's so much variation it would be better if desks and chairs were flexible enough for everyone.
The book also has concrete suggestions that are sort of gendered but are beneficial for all kids. Like kids should play with blocks or legos to learn spatial awareness (especially girls who might not get that much exposure, but it's fun and educational for everyone). Or, if kids are too squirmy for artsy activities, let them draw at an easel standing up (especially boys who tend to be more impatient, but relevant to anyone fidgety).
The structure is a bit of introduction then child development by age. I read the infancy and early childhood parts, I think. I might come back to this in a couple years when my baby-friends are older and I need more chapters.
jla525's review against another edition
2.0
This book is jam packed with scientifc references and stats. Not for the average reader.
I found it to be beyond boring.
I found it to be beyond boring.
epersonae's review against another edition
4.0
Great review of all the science on gender differences in children, and how our gendered society conflates tiny differences into separate childhood cultures. On a practical level, each chapter includes how to compensate for the weaknesses and use the strengths that do have a genetic component. (She has 3 kids, by the way, 2 boys and a girl, and uses them as anecdotes from time to time.)
If you have ever gnashed your teeth walking through a Toys R Us, this book is for you.
If you have ever gnashed your teeth walking through a Toys R Us, this book is for you.
robinfowl's review against another edition
4.0
I had a really hard time rating this book. There are parts of the book I loved-- I went around summarizing tidbits to my husband, friends, etc. Eliot is very careful when she summarizes research to not make too big of a case of small differences and to explain them in a way people understand-- the average boy is better/worse at X than 2/3 of the girls, so there are many many girls who are better/worse than many, many boys at X... blah blah.
But then there are these weird spots where she steps outside of her role as science journalist and emphasizes her role as parent, and gives parenting advice. Mostly, I just read these with a few grains of salt, and she's even careful in there to say "there isn't research to support this, but..."
And then at the very end of the book she's got a section on not parking our kids in bouncers etc. and seems to suggest that maybe if moms didn't do this with kids who are predisposed to autism we'd have fewer cases of autism. EVEN if there were research to say this, it's dangerous and guilt-inducing. I would guess most of us moms do our best to interact with the kids a lot and we also do things like put kid in a bouncer type thing while we take showers, put away laundry, etc. And to suggest that parents need to interact with kids during all of kids' waking hours is probably crazy. But I know now that if my 6 month old turns out to be autistic I'm sure going to be feeling a lot of guilt. Thanks, Lise Eliot...
(And I still gave it 4 stars, even after how angry that small section made me-- because mostly it's a really informative and entertaining read about a topic I'm super interested in... Mom of 3 year old and 6 month old...)
But then there are these weird spots where she steps outside of her role as science journalist and emphasizes her role as parent, and gives parenting advice. Mostly, I just read these with a few grains of salt, and she's even careful in there to say "there isn't research to support this, but..."
And then at the very end of the book she's got a section on not parking our kids in bouncers etc. and seems to suggest that maybe if moms didn't do this with kids who are predisposed to autism we'd have fewer cases of autism. EVEN if there were research to say this, it's dangerous and guilt-inducing. I would guess most of us moms do our best to interact with the kids a lot and we also do things like put kid in a bouncer type thing while we take showers, put away laundry, etc. And to suggest that parents need to interact with kids during all of kids' waking hours is probably crazy. But I know now that if my 6 month old turns out to be autistic I'm sure going to be feeling a lot of guilt. Thanks, Lise Eliot...
(And I still gave it 4 stars, even after how angry that small section made me-- because mostly it's a really informative and entertaining read about a topic I'm super interested in... Mom of 3 year old and 6 month old...)