What do you think?
Rate this book
Por que gênero importa?
O dr. Leonard Sax ficou famoso nos EUA por dizer obviedades inconvenientes com o seu livro Por Que Gênero Importa?, que se tornou um best seller. A proeza deste volume é ser ao mesmo tempo científico, didático e politicamente incorreto. A polêmica foi uma força motriz para sucesso do trabalho e, também, um elemento para o esclarecimento do enorme rombo intelectual que existia entre os quereres ideológicos da academia e a realidade pura e simples dos indivíduos ― principalmente quando a ideologia resolveu se apegar ao sexo, ou melhor, ao gênero. Costurando ciência e histórias reais, o autor mantém uma narrativa voltado ao esclarecimento científico e à denúncia das falsidades consentidas no debate acadêmico e midiático em relação à sexualidade humana...
400 pages, Paperback
First published February 15, 2005
298 people are currently reading
4763 people want to read
About the author
Leonard Sax
15 books243 followersLeonard Sax is an American psychologist and family physician. He is the author of Why Gender Matters (Doubleday, 2005; revised edition to be published in 2017); Boys Adrift: the five factors driving the growing epidemic of unmotivated boys and underachieving young men (Basic Books, 2007; revised edition, 2016); Girls on the Edge (Basic Books, 2010); and The Collapse of Parenting (Basic Books, 2015). The Collapse of Parenting became a New York Times bestseller.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 731 reviews
April 13, 2022
Why Gender Matters by Leonard Sax MD PhD is an excellent source of evidence, data, and advice on boys and girls, aka men and women's differences, which is rewarding and exciting. Knowledgeable points on statistics. The author also shares his experiences and perspectives on gender matters, including discussions about delicate private situations concerning young people.
This book would be beneficial to read not only for parents and teachers but all other professionals that work with children, including GP, social workers, etc.
This book would be beneficial to read not only for parents and teachers but all other professionals that work with children, including GP, social workers, etc.
March 30, 2014
I am going to write this review by taking this book on its word that the scientific research is accurate (that is another debate) - even with that assumption the arguments and conclusions made are very troubling and problematic:
- Contrary opinions are presented as straw men, despite having their own scientific research to back them up.
- The first few chapters use peer reviewed scientific studies, but the book quickly turns to anecdotal evidence ("a principal told me that children's books are dominated by female protagonists" or claiming that bisexuality in men doesn't really exist, it's just gay men still figuring things out, with no citation, evidence, or example of this statement).
- He also quickly devolves into a conflation of gender and sex - claiming that gendered behavior that has been clearly documented to be socialization is biologically rooted - without providing scientific evidence.
- The author has an agenda. Sax is the founder and executive director of the National Association for Single Sex Public Education.
- His solution to the problem (same-sex education) does not have support from scientific studies or educational professionals: http://www.nea.org/tools/17061.htm
One can argue that our educational system needs improvement, that we need to pay attention to sex and gender in education, and that single sex education may have its place for some students - but you don't have to do so in a way that mischaracterizes the science, has an agenda, and that perpetuates harmful ideas about the immutability of gender.
- Contrary opinions are presented as straw men, despite having their own scientific research to back them up.
- The first few chapters use peer reviewed scientific studies, but the book quickly turns to anecdotal evidence ("a principal told me that children's books are dominated by female protagonists" or claiming that bisexuality in men doesn't really exist, it's just gay men still figuring things out, with no citation, evidence, or example of this statement).
- He also quickly devolves into a conflation of gender and sex - claiming that gendered behavior that has been clearly documented to be socialization is biologically rooted - without providing scientific evidence.
- The author has an agenda. Sax is the founder and executive director of the National Association for Single Sex Public Education.
- His solution to the problem (same-sex education) does not have support from scientific studies or educational professionals: http://www.nea.org/tools/17061.htm
One can argue that our educational system needs improvement, that we need to pay attention to sex and gender in education, and that single sex education may have its place for some students - but you don't have to do so in a way that mischaracterizes the science, has an agenda, and that perpetuates harmful ideas about the immutability of gender.
June 11, 2015
Great information here on the current state of brain science with regard to the differences between boys and girls. Some fascinating stuff here. At the same time, Dr. Sax sometimes wanders off into telling some off-the-track pediatrician anecdotes. He also sometimes flinches when giving us the bottom line. He will say something like this: "I don't want to go back to the bad old days of woodworking for boys and home economics for girls. But we need to recognize that our society lost something . . ." Yeah, we lost woodworking for boys and home ec for girls. I don't know why he is so diffident in his conclusions when he is so courageous in stating the actual state of the research. Dr. Sax does not have a biblical worldview and so the end result is a mish-mash. But the mish in here is dazzlingly illuminating.
January 10, 2020
This quote from Time magazines sums up the book well: “Until recently, there have been two groups of people: those who argue sex differences are innate and should be embraced and those who insist that they are learned and should be eliminated by changing the environment. Sax is one of the few in the middle—convinced that boys and girls are innately different and that we must change the environment so differences don’t become limitations.”
This is the latest edition & has material not found in the first. It includes 3 chapters which he says should be read as a unit on differences in gender identity & such. The appendix are worth reading, too. He's a bit repetitive, but very clear & backs up his opinions with studies as well as over 30 years of practice in the field. (He says so way too often!) Still, I highly recommend this in any format.
Update: After reading a number of reviews that I thought were wildly incorrect about this book, I found a 2005 edition in ebook format & there are a number of differences. For instance, reviews mentioned that he advocated spanking a child & single-sex schools. There was nothing like that in my 2017 edition, but there is in the 2005 edition. He didn't mention that he changed his opinions at all in my edition. I wish he had. It's fine to change opinions, but they should be acknowledged. Definitely get the 2017 edition of this book.
This is REALLY important for all teachers & parents to read, especially with the prevailing PC notion that gender is cultural. It's not, at least not fully. Culture extends biology. Male & female brains start out the same but develop differently when the first dose of testosterone is generated in the 7 week old fetus. As we age, after puberty, the differences decrease. They're huge in younger children, so teaching (both in school & at home) really has to be geared to the sex of the child. Boys often feel stupid in kindergarten as they're not ready to learn what used to be the first grade curriculum yet while girls are. It's often better to keep the boys in preschool another year. Girls were more engaged by physics if it was taught addressing the 'why', such with the wave/particle duality of light section first rather than the typical way of 'what', the kinetics (actions) which hooks the boys. Failure to engage the child means they lose interest & motivation.
We raised 2 boys & a girl (as well as many semi-fosters that still call us Dad & Mom) & I am impressed that Sax put into words & explained so many things I was unable to articulate or fully realize that drove me crazy with the gender neutral ideas that the schools had. I was terribly frustrated by the stupid 'no tolerance' policies of the schools around the 90s & I'm horrified that they've gotten even worse. Boys engage in riskier behavior, interact, & play far differently than girls. Boys roughhousing is natural & tends to bond them, just the opposite of girls. By insisting that gender differences are cultural rather than partially innate, the PC crowd is causing stereotypes as bad or even worse than the ones it is trying to dismiss & Sax shows how. We're also not replacing the underlying morality that accompanied the 'lady' & 'gentleman' with other examples, a huge oversight.
Of course, the difference between the sexes is not a single dimension absolute, it's a range that is indicative. Each kid needs their own special blend of parenting in discipline, motivation, & more. In my family, both sexes work & play hard without regard to their sex, just personal preference. Both sexes had complete toolboxes & the knowledge to use them before they left home. They could also cook, clean, & sew. I did all the sewing for the kids while my wife & mother worked with horses, mostly racing Thoroughbreds which are tough & aggressive. Still, the girls don't like loud machinery & toys while the boys reveled in them. Still, one boy was quiet & studious while the other was the wild, stereotypical monster. A harsh word was all the discipline the first needed while I sometimes thought a baseball bat wouldn't get through to the other.
According to Sax & studies that he cites, generally girls & boys see, hear, & smell differently. Girls tend to draw in many colors & tend to draw things. Boys use fewer colors & tend to draw action. Females have almost twice as much of their brain devoted to smelling than males. Boys don't hear as well, so a teacher generally has to speak about 8 decibles louder for them while fathers often have to make an effort not to speak so loudly to their teenage girls or else they seem to be shouting. (I asked my daughter & was told "Yes!" emphatically.)
One study found that women straight out of college made about 8% less than men for the same jobs (about $4500). Another found that only 7% of the women asked for more money at the initial interview while 57% of the men did & it earned them more (about $4500). Asking for more money is aggressive, risky behavior. Male primates (from monkeys to humans) are 10 times as likely to engage in risky behavior. Sax gives wonderful examples of how to deal with all of this & not reinforce negatives. I wish I'd read it way back when, but much of the data wasn't even available for the first edition of this book. (Again, read the latest edition!)
His take on violent video games was interesting, although it seemed a bit alarmist to me. Still, my experience with them & my boys was before they were so immersive. My kids also never had the option to sit inside & play them for too long. They had a lot of outdoor activities & chores. He's spot on about keeping computers out of kids' rooms & in a common area. Both sexes had issues, but especially the girl with social media. We caught on & pulled her computer. There was a huge, positive change in her attitude & grades.
He lists quite a few differences in the subjects of sex & alcohol. One was that MRIs have shown that females use more of the frontal cortex when aroused than men. In men, higher thinking often shuts down, which is in line with Robin Williams' assertion, "God gave man a brain and a penis and only enough blood to run one at a time." I had no idea that alcohol had so much more of a bad effect on female brains, either.
He presents homosexuality really well using the example of left-handedness. Less than a century ago, even that was thought to be a preference & teachers tried to force students to write right-handed. He also delves into atypical sexual roles in a great way & shows how moral judgements of such are parochial. One example is the morality of drinking alcohol, moral for most, not for Muslims & Mormons.
Sax doesn't advocate single sex schools in this edition. He specifically says not in the appendix. He does use many as examples, though. Early on, I had the impression he really liked them, but now he seems to think that just some subjects should be sex segregated & his opinions made sense to me.
He makes a great case for why gender does matter, but also discusses the outliers including gender reassignment with common sense approaches. I have no experience to guide me there, but he always stressed loving the child & that's what it's all about.
This is the latest edition & has material not found in the first. It includes 3 chapters which he says should be read as a unit on differences in gender identity & such. The appendix are worth reading, too. He's a bit repetitive, but very clear & backs up his opinions with studies as well as over 30 years of practice in the field. (He says so way too often!) Still, I highly recommend this in any format.
Update: After reading a number of reviews that I thought were wildly incorrect about this book, I found a 2005 edition in ebook format & there are a number of differences. For instance, reviews mentioned that he advocated spanking a child & single-sex schools. There was nothing like that in my 2017 edition, but there is in the 2005 edition. He didn't mention that he changed his opinions at all in my edition. I wish he had. It's fine to change opinions, but they should be acknowledged. Definitely get the 2017 edition of this book.
This is REALLY important for all teachers & parents to read, especially with the prevailing PC notion that gender is cultural. It's not, at least not fully. Culture extends biology. Male & female brains start out the same but develop differently when the first dose of testosterone is generated in the 7 week old fetus. As we age, after puberty, the differences decrease. They're huge in younger children, so teaching (both in school & at home) really has to be geared to the sex of the child. Boys often feel stupid in kindergarten as they're not ready to learn what used to be the first grade curriculum yet while girls are. It's often better to keep the boys in preschool another year. Girls were more engaged by physics if it was taught addressing the 'why', such with the wave/particle duality of light section first rather than the typical way of 'what', the kinetics (actions) which hooks the boys. Failure to engage the child means they lose interest & motivation.
We raised 2 boys & a girl (as well as many semi-fosters that still call us Dad & Mom) & I am impressed that Sax put into words & explained so many things I was unable to articulate or fully realize that drove me crazy with the gender neutral ideas that the schools had. I was terribly frustrated by the stupid 'no tolerance' policies of the schools around the 90s & I'm horrified that they've gotten even worse. Boys engage in riskier behavior, interact, & play far differently than girls. Boys roughhousing is natural & tends to bond them, just the opposite of girls. By insisting that gender differences are cultural rather than partially innate, the PC crowd is causing stereotypes as bad or even worse than the ones it is trying to dismiss & Sax shows how. We're also not replacing the underlying morality that accompanied the 'lady' & 'gentleman' with other examples, a huge oversight.
Of course, the difference between the sexes is not a single dimension absolute, it's a range that is indicative. Each kid needs their own special blend of parenting in discipline, motivation, & more. In my family, both sexes work & play hard without regard to their sex, just personal preference. Both sexes had complete toolboxes & the knowledge to use them before they left home. They could also cook, clean, & sew. I did all the sewing for the kids while my wife & mother worked with horses, mostly racing Thoroughbreds which are tough & aggressive. Still, the girls don't like loud machinery & toys while the boys reveled in them. Still, one boy was quiet & studious while the other was the wild, stereotypical monster. A harsh word was all the discipline the first needed while I sometimes thought a baseball bat wouldn't get through to the other.
According to Sax & studies that he cites, generally girls & boys see, hear, & smell differently. Girls tend to draw in many colors & tend to draw things. Boys use fewer colors & tend to draw action. Females have almost twice as much of their brain devoted to smelling than males. Boys don't hear as well, so a teacher generally has to speak about 8 decibles louder for them while fathers often have to make an effort not to speak so loudly to their teenage girls or else they seem to be shouting. (I asked my daughter & was told "Yes!" emphatically.)
One study found that women straight out of college made about 8% less than men for the same jobs (about $4500). Another found that only 7% of the women asked for more money at the initial interview while 57% of the men did & it earned them more (about $4500). Asking for more money is aggressive, risky behavior. Male primates (from monkeys to humans) are 10 times as likely to engage in risky behavior. Sax gives wonderful examples of how to deal with all of this & not reinforce negatives. I wish I'd read it way back when, but much of the data wasn't even available for the first edition of this book. (Again, read the latest edition!)
His take on violent video games was interesting, although it seemed a bit alarmist to me. Still, my experience with them & my boys was before they were so immersive. My kids also never had the option to sit inside & play them for too long. They had a lot of outdoor activities & chores. He's spot on about keeping computers out of kids' rooms & in a common area. Both sexes had issues, but especially the girl with social media. We caught on & pulled her computer. There was a huge, positive change in her attitude & grades.
He lists quite a few differences in the subjects of sex & alcohol. One was that MRIs have shown that females use more of the frontal cortex when aroused than men. In men, higher thinking often shuts down, which is in line with Robin Williams' assertion, "God gave man a brain and a penis and only enough blood to run one at a time." I had no idea that alcohol had so much more of a bad effect on female brains, either.
He presents homosexuality really well using the example of left-handedness. Less than a century ago, even that was thought to be a preference & teachers tried to force students to write right-handed. He also delves into atypical sexual roles in a great way & shows how moral judgements of such are parochial. One example is the morality of drinking alcohol, moral for most, not for Muslims & Mormons.
Sax doesn't advocate single sex schools in this edition. He specifically says not in the appendix. He does use many as examples, though. Early on, I had the impression he really liked them, but now he seems to think that just some subjects should be sex segregated & his opinions made sense to me.
He makes a great case for why gender does matter, but also discusses the outliers including gender reassignment with common sense approaches. I have no experience to guide me there, but he always stressed loving the child & that's what it's all about.
June 2, 2025
"We don't want to accept that we enter life with certain unchangeable factors established by God, such as who our parents are, where we were born, or that we are born male or female." (3.5 stars)
Dr. Leonard Sax's WHY GENDER MATTERS (Second Edition) is a timely, thought-provoking work that explores the biological and psychological differences between males and females. Differences that, in today's cultural landscape, are too often denied or ignored.
While the entire book is interesting, the sections dealing with sexuality stood out as the most absorbing. Sax's exploration of how sex, gender identity, and sexual behavior are shaped by innate biological factors was not only fascinating but also profoundly important given the ongoing cultural battles around these issues. What makes these chapters especially powerful is Sax’s willingness to stand firm on the reality of biological sex differences and their implications for parenting, education, and public policy. In a world increasingly dominated by ideological denial of these truths, Sax is courageously on the right side of this battle. He doesn't shy away from sensitive topics and does so with a blend of scientific rigor and human compassion.
That said, not every section of the book is equally strong. While the overall argument is compelling, there are moments where the pacing slows or where the conclusions feel more debatable than definitive. I don't agree with every point Sax makes, but I am deeply grateful that he is elevating this conversation and reasserting the truth that boys and girls are, by design, different.
WHY GENDER MATTERS is an important read, especially for educators, parents, and anyone concerned about the future of our children in a culture that often blurs the lines of biological reality. Dr. Sax’s work reminds us that acknowledging the truth about sex is not regressive. It’s essential.
Dr. Leonard Sax's WHY GENDER MATTERS (Second Edition) is a timely, thought-provoking work that explores the biological and psychological differences between males and females. Differences that, in today's cultural landscape, are too often denied or ignored.
While the entire book is interesting, the sections dealing with sexuality stood out as the most absorbing. Sax's exploration of how sex, gender identity, and sexual behavior are shaped by innate biological factors was not only fascinating but also profoundly important given the ongoing cultural battles around these issues. What makes these chapters especially powerful is Sax’s willingness to stand firm on the reality of biological sex differences and their implications for parenting, education, and public policy. In a world increasingly dominated by ideological denial of these truths, Sax is courageously on the right side of this battle. He doesn't shy away from sensitive topics and does so with a blend of scientific rigor and human compassion.
That said, not every section of the book is equally strong. While the overall argument is compelling, there are moments where the pacing slows or where the conclusions feel more debatable than definitive. I don't agree with every point Sax makes, but I am deeply grateful that he is elevating this conversation and reasserting the truth that boys and girls are, by design, different.
WHY GENDER MATTERS is an important read, especially for educators, parents, and anyone concerned about the future of our children in a culture that often blurs the lines of biological reality. Dr. Sax’s work reminds us that acknowledging the truth about sex is not regressive. It’s essential.
stricken
July 14, 2014Bogus. This is very simple: the difference in *average* between male and female is always less than the difference between the *range of normal* for either. [This is the same sort of crap science used to support the ideas behind racism.] If you try and base your parenting or your educating on the average for one gender, you're going to be wrong for the individual most of the time. and if you're going to be wrong most of the time, frankly, it's just easier to have one standard, rather than two.
July 23, 2019
This is the third book I have read by Dr. Sax. Most of this book seems straightforward however the following through me off in chapter 6 on differences between men and women in regards to sex, “In one carefully designed study a surprisingly high percentage, 35% of normal collage men said that they not only fantasizes about rape but would actually rape a woman if they had the chance and they were sure they wouldn’t be caught. In another study of normal college men more then half said they would actually rape a woman if they were assured of not being punished. Researchers have found that more then 80% of popular porn videos includes some form of degrading violence against women, most often the woman is slapped or gagged or spanked or has her hair yanked but the men who watch these videos are not necessarily Neanderthals. In fact researchers have found no association between a mans gender role beliefs and the likelihood that he finds rape sexually appealing. Some men who are strongly in favor of equal rights for woman who approve of women in leadership rolls and so on also say that they would rape a women if they had the opportunity....Men and women experience sexuality differently. A significant number of men may feel tempted to engage in sexual assault even if they are otherwise intelligent and believe in equal rights for women. Women are much less likely to feel a strong temptation to engage in sexual assault. These differences between men and women can be traced at least in part to biological causes including the differences between testosterone and oxytocin. A sensible common sense approach to preventing sexual assault would begin by recognizing these hardwired differences.”
I’m almost speechless as I write his words. This does not reflect my personal experience with men and the use of the word “normal” to describe these college age men is completely off base. This is psychopathic behavior. If the only reason why you aren’t raping is because you might get caught you are absolutely a psychopath unable to recognize another as a human being with feelings, and self-direction. If you would rape a woman you do not believe in her having equal rights-that is major cognitive dissonance. Perhaps this is common-not normal but common- among men who watch violent porn just as cancer is common among smokers.
I’m almost speechless as I write his words. This does not reflect my personal experience with men and the use of the word “normal” to describe these college age men is completely off base. This is psychopathic behavior. If the only reason why you aren’t raping is because you might get caught you are absolutely a psychopath unable to recognize another as a human being with feelings, and self-direction. If you would rape a woman you do not believe in her having equal rights-that is major cognitive dissonance. Perhaps this is common-not normal but common- among men who watch violent porn just as cancer is common among smokers.
February 4, 2014
Blech. I wish I hadn't assigned this, I knew it had an essentialist position (boys and girls are different, so they should be treated as though they're different) but I had no idea this guy was so lacking in logic or critical thinking. His conclusions are farfetched based on the evidence he provides, and he offers trite 'examples' which sound absolutely as stereotypical as possible, highlighting how absolutely different girls and boys (and men and women) can be...
I had no idea boys had to kill a living thing in order to feel self-esteem, did you?
Will never use this in class again- wanted my students to use it for critical thinking and the bits of good research it provides, but I overlooked his ridiculous writing style and agenda. Boo.
I had no idea boys had to kill a living thing in order to feel self-esteem, did you?
Will never use this in class again- wanted my students to use it for critical thinking and the bits of good research it provides, but I overlooked his ridiculous writing style and agenda. Boo.
February 18, 2009
Worth reading, but Sax goes way too far with the gender essentialism arguments. Often he does not provide enough evidence for a reasonable person to agree with him. He also gets too finger-wagging about teenage sexual culture and makes implausible claims about the damage it does. I found myself becoming increasingly skeptical of his claims towards the end of the book. He ends by making an absurd and unconvincing case for gender segregation in K-12 education. The science of gender difference certainly shows us that teachers must construct their lessons carefully, so that both boys and girls' needs are met, but gender segregation would do more harm than good.
May 15, 2008
I decided to read this because Sax's work was referenced in a very good NY Times Magazine article about single sex education...I am glad to be informed of Sax's views, but I do not agree with many of them. For example, Sax would view Owen as an "anomalous male" because he loves to cook and bake, and would encourage us as parents to deprive him of opportunities to be in the kitchen and instead sign him up for football, preferably tackle. This is in order to prevent "problems" for him in life later. Come on.
May 8, 2008
This book was so good. It went into quite a lot of scientific detail of how boys and girls develop DIFFERENTLY. It isn't that boys are "slower" at developing - it is that their brains / eyes / ears develop differently than girls do. The author provides a lot of advice on how to parent and teach boys vs girls (and especially on some difficult topics such as drugs and sex).
My mom would definitely approve on the section on discipline (she teaches middle schoolers and we talk about this topic a lot - especially as it relates to her students!!) - the author maintains that a lot of discipline problems today have to do with the shift of parental - child power. In previous generations, parents didn't "consult" or "ask" or "suggest" that their children do things - they expected it. Now, the trend is towards parents asking/consulting/suggesting, and never never putting their foot down and truly disciplining (i.e. TV's in bedrooms, computer privileges, expectations of behavior) because their child would get angry with them (what?! you, the parent, are afraid your child will be angry with you?!) I obviously agree with the author - sometimes my implementation may be flawed, but I definitely agree!!
One thing to note - I've seen over and over again where studies show that dinner time has a significant impact on how well children do. This author talks about that as well.
My mom would definitely approve on the section on discipline (she teaches middle schoolers and we talk about this topic a lot - especially as it relates to her students!!) - the author maintains that a lot of discipline problems today have to do with the shift of parental - child power. In previous generations, parents didn't "consult" or "ask" or "suggest" that their children do things - they expected it. Now, the trend is towards parents asking/consulting/suggesting, and never never putting their foot down and truly disciplining (i.e. TV's in bedrooms, computer privileges, expectations of behavior) because their child would get angry with them (what?! you, the parent, are afraid your child will be angry with you?!) I obviously agree with the author - sometimes my implementation may be flawed, but I definitely agree!!
One thing to note - I've seen over and over again where studies show that dinner time has a significant impact on how well children do. This author talks about that as well.
July 22, 2018
He claimed not to be politically motivated but rather fact and research based. Even so its impossible not to brush politics when evaluating transgender which dominated the end of the book. I believe him about his motivations though. He cited enough data to be pretty convincing unless he was totally making figures and studies. How is this information not out there? I think I need to hear the other side just so I can understand what is going though peoples heads. There is a sort of religious fanaticism about the subject of gender. And I'm talking about on both sides. How did this happen? When exactly? The author has a strong opinion, but he specifically works to prove it is based on data rather than emotion, even if he has emotion about it.
March 9, 2011
Complete and utter drivel. Sax jumped from an interesting hypothesis: biological differences between the sexes matter to how we teach and parent kids to a gender essentialist platform filled with his own prejudices and speculation. Choice gems include an endorsement of spanking (for boys only!), advice to avoid rape by never letting your daughter date someone more than three years older, and getting your sensitive son involved in team sports before age three or he may be condemned to being a "mission specialist on the space shuttle but never the pilot."
June 19, 2021
I could not finish this book. The science is sketchy, and twisted to favor the authors very biased, sexist views. His views on gender non-comforming children, and lgbtqia+ kids were frankly, appalling. Homosexuality, Bisexuality and gender non-conforming behaviors/identities are not diseases, or mental ailments that need to be "cured".
Avoiding this book would be an unparalleled act of self-compassion. If you tried to read it but couldn't, treat yourself to icecream, you did good. I spent roughly twenty minutes on this conservative wet dream, and am highly annoyed I won't be getting those twenty minutes back.
Avoiding this book would be an unparalleled act of self-compassion. If you tried to read it but couldn't, treat yourself to icecream, you did good. I spent roughly twenty minutes on this conservative wet dream, and am highly annoyed I won't be getting those twenty minutes back.
June 19, 2009
I loved Dr. Sax's other book (written after this one), Boys Adrift, but I really didn't care for this one.
The first few chapters WERE really interesting and contained information that the title led me to believe would be found within. Perhaps it is worth reading the book just for these very interesting chapters. But the rest of the book degenerated into a typical parenting book with lots of lectures and opinion, the focus on "difficult" children with "serious" problems.
Dr. Sax makes himself sound like one of those doctors who knows best--his examples were rife with hapless parents who were either set straight by the good doctor OR who disregarded the doctor's advice and rued the day.
Then there was the entire chapter teen sex and another on homosexuality in children, both troubling. This book walks in alarmist territory and states unequivocally that bad behavior is widespread. It talks too much about managing bad children and not enough about raising good ones.
And I have trouble getting past the impression that this book (after the first few chapters) is a collection of his opinions backed up by various research studies (and we all know that research studies are out there to back up just about ANY opinion). One of the reasons I liked Boys Adrift so much more is that I felt Dr. Sax was offering a point of view (supported by research, naturally) that the reader was free to believe or disbelieve. This book was much more opinionated. Didn't like that.
Read Boys Adrift, though--it was great!
The first few chapters WERE really interesting and contained information that the title led me to believe would be found within. Perhaps it is worth reading the book just for these very interesting chapters. But the rest of the book degenerated into a typical parenting book with lots of lectures and opinion, the focus on "difficult" children with "serious" problems.
Dr. Sax makes himself sound like one of those doctors who knows best--his examples were rife with hapless parents who were either set straight by the good doctor OR who disregarded the doctor's advice and rued the day.
Then there was the entire chapter teen sex and another on homosexuality in children, both troubling. This book walks in alarmist territory and states unequivocally that bad behavior is widespread. It talks too much about managing bad children and not enough about raising good ones.
And I have trouble getting past the impression that this book (after the first few chapters) is a collection of his opinions backed up by various research studies (and we all know that research studies are out there to back up just about ANY opinion). One of the reasons I liked Boys Adrift so much more is that I felt Dr. Sax was offering a point of view (supported by research, naturally) that the reader was free to believe or disbelieve. This book was much more opinionated. Didn't like that.
Read Boys Adrift, though--it was great!
December 28, 2014
Leonard Sax's Why Gender Matters sets out to persuade that biology plays a significant role in how gender works, that we are not born androgynous blank slates that are molded by societal expectations and enculturation alone, and purports to back up his claims with data from scientific studies.
Now, going wherever the evidence leads you to, particularly if it works against your interest is one of the most admirable intellectual endeavors one can embark on - so my intuition was that if it would turn out that the evidence uncomfortably pokes at our modern, ultimately noble, but potentially misguided egalitarianism (gender-blind being the term that crops up in the book), then so be it - and hope we end up all the better for knowing the truth. The author even voices his frustration with there seemingly being only two positions to be had - either the PC flavoured gender-equality-or-else stance and appealing to traditional roles for the sake of appealing to traditional roles. So far, so good.
The first few chapters of the book start with stories that have the air of verisimilitude, if not actual veracity on their side (I'll get to that soon enough).
The shortcomings of these chapters are significant, because they are the closest the author ever comes to the title's espoused rigorous scientific approach. As you read on, the tone uncomfortably shifts towards pandering the author's own various opinions and agendas (i.e. single-sex schooling) that all amounts to the all too tedious "I have many opinions, all of them correct, and here is how curious anecdotes and selectively chosen studies support them" that even the best among us invariably fall for time to time, but should be below par to anyone claiming to have thought deeply about the topic, and thus daring to go all prescriptive on his readership.
While I have my own issues with the book so far as I've read it (that I'll hopefully be able to address in a separate review in the best of all worlds) - Cordelia Fine's Delusions of Gender debunks the validity of most such research as is used here (even so far as specifically mentioning the fallacies of Sax's reasoning), in exposing how flawed most of the studies surrounding sex and gender differences are - from methodology, study sample sizes, and all the way up to interpretation of data and rather illogical jumps to conclusions about test results for rats somehow being significant to the inner workings of their human cousins.
As far as the anecdotes go - one of their purposes in popular science books is to breathe life into data and make it less of an abstraction to the reader. Sax uses the anecdotes presented here not to elucidate wildly esoteric data, but rather convince himself and the readers that his opinions represent an immutable reality.
The author's stories somehow manage to simultaneously support all the traditionally accepted notions, like the system-thinking vs. empathy aptitude discrepancies among the sexes, to some rather modern ones - i.e. that homosexual men are actually hyper-masculine and so on. I guess one has to be grateful the gay section of the book wasn't as overtly homophobic as it could've been - but, while admitting that the more effeminate men are in all likelihood not quite as representative of the gay community as most non-queer people might think, Sax still can't explain them away and have his opinions hold. Sure, he addresses the existence of what he calls anomalous males and females - but all his reassurances are invalidated by a whole rant on how parents should deal with these gender-atypical children (spoiler alert: Sax's method of choice - forcing them into conformity, usually via team sports).
For all his purported facade of even-handedness, his actual beliefs about masculinity and femininity plummet fast to the traditional end of the spectrum as you go deeper into the heart of darkness that are the later chapters of the book. You have to look no further than the rather ridiculous masculinity and femininity tests he provides, and it should be abundantly clear how context-specific and subjectively flavoured his ideas of those concepts are. Worse still than being merely traditional is how terribly confused they are - as he insists upon projecting the masculine-feminine dichotomy to domains which have nothing to do with gender in particular so far as I can muster.
As mentioned, he continuously prescribes team sports as a solution to a number of gender-atypical cases in the book - but to me, all of these came across as blatant attacks on introvert kids (they were described as bookish and shy to engage in social situations) under the excuse to cure them of their gender-nonconformity. When reading these sections, you'd think he was completely ignorant of the entire existence of an introversion vs. extroversion dimension of personalities, which is kind of perplexing for a psychologist, but I suppose illustrates how blind-sighted he is with seeing gender and sex everywhere he looks.
The author holds unfavourable opinions towards video games and other (in his mind) male-typical hobbies, but - again - this more than anything illustrates a profound ignorance on his part about the fiction (fantasy) vs. reality issue and (at this point) unsurprisingly has him equate it with gender issues. To use one of his own more disturbing examples to this effect - he mentions the following about men and rape fantasies:
One could go on about the myriad of ways this book fails to deliver on the promise of a scientific backing for significant biological differences in the sexes, but whatever science is there is faulty at worst, skewed to the author's fancy at best - and the rest of the book is a parade of the author's pet biases packaged to mislead you in believing it actually is part of some larger corpus of research the author has spared you of reading by distilling it into his advice.
To paraphrase Hanlon's razor - I won't assume malice and insincerity where ignorance would suffice in regards to the author's opinions, but the way he presents the data, and some of the perplexing misunderstandings of human nature on his part do cast shadows on considering him a worthwhile expert in the field. His intentions may have been good, but we all ought to know, that without the rigour to test one's beliefs on the strength of their own merits rather than on its holder's desire for them to be true, they are but only passable pavement material.
Now, going wherever the evidence leads you to, particularly if it works against your interest is one of the most admirable intellectual endeavors one can embark on - so my intuition was that if it would turn out that the evidence uncomfortably pokes at our modern, ultimately noble, but potentially misguided egalitarianism (gender-blind being the term that crops up in the book), then so be it - and hope we end up all the better for knowing the truth. The author even voices his frustration with there seemingly being only two positions to be had - either the PC flavoured gender-equality-or-else stance and appealing to traditional roles for the sake of appealing to traditional roles. So far, so good.
The first few chapters of the book start with stories that have the air of verisimilitude, if not actual veracity on their side (I'll get to that soon enough).
1) One story is about how a lack of either awareness of mindfulness of the differences in hearing ability between boys and girls at young ages could also result in a difference in how the (mostly female, the author stresses to point out) teachers treat them - i.e. mistaking a boy simply not hearing the teacher's commands for being disobedient.
2) Another, more flimsy, but still I-could-see-how-this-works story covers how boys think in verbs and girls - in nouns purporting to explain why children pick the toys they do and draw the things they draw in arts classes.For me, these comprise the book's strongest cases for its thesis in that at least the first one seems to rely on actual studies, and they both seem to be neutral enough at first glance to not have an agenda behind them. The devastating fact is that the second story can be detected to be a gross oversimplification even without all that much mental gymnastics (you don't need to fall back on biology to justify the author's chosen anecdotes even if you could go about it that way), and the first story is just plain wrong, if not even deliberately misleading.
The shortcomings of these chapters are significant, because they are the closest the author ever comes to the title's espoused rigorous scientific approach. As you read on, the tone uncomfortably shifts towards pandering the author's own various opinions and agendas (i.e. single-sex schooling) that all amounts to the all too tedious "I have many opinions, all of them correct, and here is how curious anecdotes and selectively chosen studies support them" that even the best among us invariably fall for time to time, but should be below par to anyone claiming to have thought deeply about the topic, and thus daring to go all prescriptive on his readership.
While I have my own issues with the book so far as I've read it (that I'll hopefully be able to address in a separate review in the best of all worlds) - Cordelia Fine's Delusions of Gender debunks the validity of most such research as is used here (even so far as specifically mentioning the fallacies of Sax's reasoning), in exposing how flawed most of the studies surrounding sex and gender differences are - from methodology, study sample sizes, and all the way up to interpretation of data and rather illogical jumps to conclusions about test results for rats somehow being significant to the inner workings of their human cousins.
As far as the anecdotes go - one of their purposes in popular science books is to breathe life into data and make it less of an abstraction to the reader. Sax uses the anecdotes presented here not to elucidate wildly esoteric data, but rather convince himself and the readers that his opinions represent an immutable reality.
The author's stories somehow manage to simultaneously support all the traditionally accepted notions, like the system-thinking vs. empathy aptitude discrepancies among the sexes, to some rather modern ones - i.e. that homosexual men are actually hyper-masculine and so on. I guess one has to be grateful the gay section of the book wasn't as overtly homophobic as it could've been - but, while admitting that the more effeminate men are in all likelihood not quite as representative of the gay community as most non-queer people might think, Sax still can't explain them away and have his opinions hold. Sure, he addresses the existence of what he calls anomalous males and females - but all his reassurances are invalidated by a whole rant on how parents should deal with these gender-atypical children (spoiler alert: Sax's method of choice - forcing them into conformity, usually via team sports).
For all his purported facade of even-handedness, his actual beliefs about masculinity and femininity plummet fast to the traditional end of the spectrum as you go deeper into the heart of darkness that are the later chapters of the book. You have to look no further than the rather ridiculous masculinity and femininity tests he provides, and it should be abundantly clear how context-specific and subjectively flavoured his ideas of those concepts are. Worse still than being merely traditional is how terribly confused they are - as he insists upon projecting the masculine-feminine dichotomy to domains which have nothing to do with gender in particular so far as I can muster.
As mentioned, he continuously prescribes team sports as a solution to a number of gender-atypical cases in the book - but to me, all of these came across as blatant attacks on introvert kids (they were described as bookish and shy to engage in social situations) under the excuse to cure them of their gender-nonconformity. When reading these sections, you'd think he was completely ignorant of the entire existence of an introversion vs. extroversion dimension of personalities, which is kind of perplexing for a psychologist, but I suppose illustrates how blind-sighted he is with seeing gender and sex everywhere he looks.
The author holds unfavourable opinions towards video games and other (in his mind) male-typical hobbies, but - again - this more than anything illustrates a profound ignorance on his part about the fiction (fantasy) vs. reality issue and (at this point) unsurprisingly has him equate it with gender issues. To use one of his own more disturbing examples to this effect - he mentions the following about men and rape fantasies:
“Highly intelligent men are no less likely to fantasize about raping a woman than are men of below-average intelligence. The most common sexual fantasy in sex magazines is rape and/or bondage of a young woman.”Aside the fact of how reliable a source a sex magazine is, it is astounding that Sax can bulldozer over the whole issue and fail to see the difference between someone having a kinky fantasy and a desire to deliberately inflict harm to another human being. Given this, it may not be that surprising that he also fallaciously draws the conclusion that playing violent video-games results in violent players, watching films and TV shows about serial killers somehow unleashes your inner Hannibal Lecter, and indulging in sexual fantasies somehow makes you a pervert and a rapist (or worse still - maybe he was implying that the desire to rape is somehow natural to men?).
One could go on about the myriad of ways this book fails to deliver on the promise of a scientific backing for significant biological differences in the sexes, but whatever science is there is faulty at worst, skewed to the author's fancy at best - and the rest of the book is a parade of the author's pet biases packaged to mislead you in believing it actually is part of some larger corpus of research the author has spared you of reading by distilling it into his advice.
To paraphrase Hanlon's razor - I won't assume malice and insincerity where ignorance would suffice in regards to the author's opinions, but the way he presents the data, and some of the perplexing misunderstandings of human nature on his part do cast shadows on considering him a worthwhile expert in the field. His intentions may have been good, but we all ought to know, that without the rigour to test one's beliefs on the strength of their own merits rather than on its holder's desire for them to be true, they are but only passable pavement material.
January 15, 2018
(This book is categorized as both science and philosophy for me because while some parts are based in empirical studies, a lot is based in opinion or anecdotes.)
This book is interesting. High-speed crashes are also interesting. That doesn’t mean that they’re good. I read this book for a grad school class (I read the updated edition, with chapters on social media, sexuality, video games, and LGBT teens). I started with my assigned chapter to teach to the class, social media and video games, and found it interesting, if a bit limited—the social media aspects I found to be true with my own knowledge and experiences, but the video game portion dealt solely with boys, and solely with violent video games, as if there are not also girls who play, or people who prefer nonviolent games. Intrigued, I read the book from the beginning. Dr. Sax is nothing if not an antiquarian. He celebrates and believes in the strict binary of gender roles. He says repeatedly that we don’t need to go back to the 1950s because the time period was sexist and racist, but his book repeatedly celebrates the values espoused by the gender roles of that time, when girls were ladies and boys were gentlemen. He provides helpful guidelines for dealing with your gender-deviant boy who likes to read and draw (make him do sports) and for identifying whether your child is bisexual (they aren’t, because bisexuality is not really a thing). He laments the rise of hookup culture and the differences (valid) in how girls and boys view sex, but provides no useful commentary. He derides gender-neutral child rearing and education and claims that education favors girls. He notes that female friendships tend to be driven by conversation and emotions while male friendships are driven by convenience and mutual hobbies, celebrating the role of the female in romantic relationships for assuming the male’s emotional burden without recognizing that socializing boys to conceal and belittle their feelings causes men to have a longer and harder time recovering from breakups because they feel unable or unwilling to discuss the breakup with their (male) friends—their sole emotional support (the girlfriend) is gone.
Far from being a helpful study and guidebook into some valid and important differences in sex and how they can be addressed (i.e., people with the XX chromosome have more sensitive hearing), this book is a 317-page opinion piece on why the binary of gender roles is a Good Thing.
Also, Dr. Sax, gender and sex are not the same thing. Ffs.
This book is interesting. High-speed crashes are also interesting. That doesn’t mean that they’re good. I read this book for a grad school class (I read the updated edition, with chapters on social media, sexuality, video games, and LGBT teens). I started with my assigned chapter to teach to the class, social media and video games, and found it interesting, if a bit limited—the social media aspects I found to be true with my own knowledge and experiences, but the video game portion dealt solely with boys, and solely with violent video games, as if there are not also girls who play, or people who prefer nonviolent games. Intrigued, I read the book from the beginning. Dr. Sax is nothing if not an antiquarian. He celebrates and believes in the strict binary of gender roles. He says repeatedly that we don’t need to go back to the 1950s because the time period was sexist and racist, but his book repeatedly celebrates the values espoused by the gender roles of that time, when girls were ladies and boys were gentlemen. He provides helpful guidelines for dealing with your gender-deviant boy who likes to read and draw (make him do sports) and for identifying whether your child is bisexual (they aren’t, because bisexuality is not really a thing). He laments the rise of hookup culture and the differences (valid) in how girls and boys view sex, but provides no useful commentary. He derides gender-neutral child rearing and education and claims that education favors girls. He notes that female friendships tend to be driven by conversation and emotions while male friendships are driven by convenience and mutual hobbies, celebrating the role of the female in romantic relationships for assuming the male’s emotional burden without recognizing that socializing boys to conceal and belittle their feelings causes men to have a longer and harder time recovering from breakups because they feel unable or unwilling to discuss the breakup with their (male) friends—their sole emotional support (the girlfriend) is gone.
Far from being a helpful study and guidebook into some valid and important differences in sex and how they can be addressed (i.e., people with the XX chromosome have more sensitive hearing), this book is a 317-page opinion piece on why the binary of gender roles is a Good Thing.
Also, Dr. Sax, gender and sex are not the same thing. Ffs.
March 28, 2022
I went back and forth on this book. I angrily ripped my headphones out in disgust and rewound chapters to listen to the gold dust I was hearing again.
It's always hard to spend time listening to views that don't necessarily align with your own and I feel that I have felt that more than most. My views seems to make up my personality and any stray from that seems like some personal failing. Reading this book has showed me that views can change, I can agree with things I once actively disagreed with and I'm still me. The book didn't necessarily go out with the intent of causing an awakening in people but that's what it did for me.
Ultimately I didn't agree with 100% of it but that's okay. It gave me lots of food for thought on gender and the way we raise children. On why equality shouldn't mean equal opportunities because people need different things and that's okay. I'd love to reread this if I ever have children.
It's always hard to spend time listening to views that don't necessarily align with your own and I feel that I have felt that more than most. My views seems to make up my personality and any stray from that seems like some personal failing. Reading this book has showed me that views can change, I can agree with things I once actively disagreed with and I'm still me. The book didn't necessarily go out with the intent of causing an awakening in people but that's what it did for me.
Ultimately I didn't agree with 100% of it but that's okay. It gave me lots of food for thought on gender and the way we raise children. On why equality shouldn't mean equal opportunities because people need different things and that's okay. I'd love to reread this if I ever have children.
July 8, 2011
This book is phenomenal. The author talks about the emerging research into the fundamental differences between boys and girls. He also debunks a lot of commonly believed false differences. It's really amazing that psychologists and teachers had to go through forty years of unisex philosophy, thinking that boys and girls are different only because we raise them that way, when any parent of more than one gender can tell you that there are very distinct mental and emotional differences between them.
Even better than his explanations of the research, though, are his comments about how to apply the research to raising kids. The studies that point out that boys and girls are more confident and happier when they have a firm sense of gender identity are fascinating.
And I never expected to develop sympathy for the idea of gender-segregated schools, but his comments on the topic and why it's valuable make me wish that we had schools like that nearby.
Even better than his explanations of the research, though, are his comments about how to apply the research to raising kids. The studies that point out that boys and girls are more confident and happier when they have a firm sense of gender identity are fascinating.
And I never expected to develop sympathy for the idea of gender-segregated schools, but his comments on the topic and why it's valuable make me wish that we had schools like that nearby.
March 15, 2011
I really wanted this book to be good. The first few chapters were extremely good and i had high hopes. It already had me thinking this would be one of the more influential books for me on understanding children and such, and already had me insisting that Kate read it and talking about it with other people.
Then the rest of the book happened.
The author broaches the taboo subject that males and females might be intrinsically different, not just different by cultural training, choice, etc., in basic and fundamental ways. What's more, he attempts to show that this difference is more basic and pervasive than I had suspected.
In the first few chapters, he talks about differences in the brain, eyes, ears and extends those to learning styles and behavior. The expressed differences are credible and even actionable. This material promises to help you understand people of both sexes better and do a better job in raising kids through such awareness.
It is like a switch is flipped around the time that the author starts talking about sexuality. He starts with a rather bizarre and prudish outlook and interprets sex differences through that lens. Such a blind spot, while upsetting, isn't totally shocking. It happens. But it then gets much worse when he starts writing about controlling the sexuality of children. That part would be far too bad to even get through except with an author who had established such extreme credibility earlier in the book. It then gets crazy worse yet in talking about general discipline in children. Not only do his conclusions crumble throughout this part of the book, but even his facts are clearly wrong in some cases. Things are so bad that I find myself doubting the stuff I had previously liked in the first part of the book. While I was willing to give the M.D. / PhD the benefit of the doubt talking about types of cells in the retina, so much goes wrong later that I start to doubt nearly everything.
The book isn't a total loss. It did convince to think more carefully about intrinsic sex differences. There were some conclusions in the book that really resonated with me that I can focus on even if my overall faith in these conclusions isn't high because they're in the book. That's really quite a lot to get from a book. I'm just extremely disappointed that I didn't get more from a book that initially looked so promising.
Then the rest of the book happened.
The author broaches the taboo subject that males and females might be intrinsically different, not just different by cultural training, choice, etc., in basic and fundamental ways. What's more, he attempts to show that this difference is more basic and pervasive than I had suspected.
In the first few chapters, he talks about differences in the brain, eyes, ears and extends those to learning styles and behavior. The expressed differences are credible and even actionable. This material promises to help you understand people of both sexes better and do a better job in raising kids through such awareness.
It is like a switch is flipped around the time that the author starts talking about sexuality. He starts with a rather bizarre and prudish outlook and interprets sex differences through that lens. Such a blind spot, while upsetting, isn't totally shocking. It happens. But it then gets much worse when he starts writing about controlling the sexuality of children. That part would be far too bad to even get through except with an author who had established such extreme credibility earlier in the book. It then gets crazy worse yet in talking about general discipline in children. Not only do his conclusions crumble throughout this part of the book, but even his facts are clearly wrong in some cases. Things are so bad that I find myself doubting the stuff I had previously liked in the first part of the book. While I was willing to give the M.D. / PhD the benefit of the doubt talking about types of cells in the retina, so much goes wrong later that I start to doubt nearly everything.
The book isn't a total loss. It did convince to think more carefully about intrinsic sex differences. There were some conclusions in the book that really resonated with me that I can focus on even if my overall faith in these conclusions isn't high because they're in the book. That's really quite a lot to get from a book. I'm just extremely disappointed that I didn't get more from a book that initially looked so promising.
June 6, 2015
My friend recommended this book to me and it was beyond interesting to me. Four years later, it finally clicked why my oldest child who loves school, hated kindergarten. He loved preschool and loved first grade but not kindie. Why because he had a soft spoken teacher who wanted him to describe colors and read fiction and sit still. He does so good with loud teachers who allow him to stand at his desk instead of sit in a chair. But yet my daughter who always struggled in preschool thrived in kindergarten with a calm soft spoken teacher. (Those poor boys in her class.) On page 24, it said, "Girls draw nouns, boys draw verbs..." Oh golly, duh, never realized it but makes complete sense. I love hearing children describe their pictures before kindergarten, especially boys.
Since I just read a different book on neurology, I was surprised when he said males feel emotions in their amygdala while women experience it cerebral cortex. Which explains why my husband never wants to discuss his bad moods. Its hard to verbally express what is happening in the amygdala. Also I thought it was useful to hear the difference in how boys prefer to discuss books. Makes so many conversations with my husband or oldest son make so much more sense.
I also thought it was interesting when the book said, "Ironically, the result of her lack of awareness of gender differences is a reinforcement of traditional gender sterotypes." Accepting that males and females are different allow them to thrive beyond gender stereotypes.
Since I only have small children I loved the beginning of the book. The chapter on teenage sexuality was beyond depressing. I hate the sexual revolution because it seemed that instead of empowering females it has turned them into objects by males instead of liberating them.
I'm always pleased to be reminded as a parent "Your job is not to maximize your child's pleasure, but to broaden her horizons." 172
Lastly the book mentioned in 1999 the Colorado state school board approved a resolution advising teachers not to recommend or suggest psychotropic medications for any student because they are utilized for discipline. I thought now I know why I love Colorado. I don't have a problem with medication as long as it is needed, but I think its used too early when diet and exercise can change lots. Not to mention active children are normal not sick.
Since I just read a different book on neurology, I was surprised when he said males feel emotions in their amygdala while women experience it cerebral cortex. Which explains why my husband never wants to discuss his bad moods. Its hard to verbally express what is happening in the amygdala. Also I thought it was useful to hear the difference in how boys prefer to discuss books. Makes so many conversations with my husband or oldest son make so much more sense.
I also thought it was interesting when the book said, "Ironically, the result of her lack of awareness of gender differences is a reinforcement of traditional gender sterotypes." Accepting that males and females are different allow them to thrive beyond gender stereotypes.
Since I only have small children I loved the beginning of the book. The chapter on teenage sexuality was beyond depressing. I hate the sexual revolution because it seemed that instead of empowering females it has turned them into objects by males instead of liberating them.
I'm always pleased to be reminded as a parent "Your job is not to maximize your child's pleasure, but to broaden her horizons." 172
Lastly the book mentioned in 1999 the Colorado state school board approved a resolution advising teachers not to recommend or suggest psychotropic medications for any student because they are utilized for discipline. I thought now I know why I love Colorado. I don't have a problem with medication as long as it is needed, but I think its used too early when diet and exercise can change lots. Not to mention active children are normal not sick.
August 13, 2010
This book started out so promising... The author says that it his goal to not make any statements on the differences between boys and girls without referencing a peer reviewed journal article. He believes that there are differences between boys and girls but that shouldn't be used to justify outdated gender stereotypes. The first 4 or 5 chapters were good. I thought wow, i can't wait to see how our understanding of the differences between boys and girls will change in the next 20 years. At this point i would have given the book 4 stars.
Then, there were chapters on Sex and Drugs that were disturbing and started to get away from the goal of outlining the biological differences between the sexes. Then a chapters on Discipline that just got into the standard approach for a parenting book. I don't like reading parenting books that tell me what I *should* do. I like to read parenting books that give me objective information that I then use in making my own decisions. The author has way to many stories that involved parents not doing what he said and it turned out badly... (regardless of if i agree with his recommendations)
I skimmed the chapters on homosexuality and children who exhibit the behaviors of the opposite sex and skipped the end chapter all together.
Then, there were chapters on Sex and Drugs that were disturbing and started to get away from the goal of outlining the biological differences between the sexes. Then a chapters on Discipline that just got into the standard approach for a parenting book. I don't like reading parenting books that tell me what I *should* do. I like to read parenting books that give me objective information that I then use in making my own decisions. The author has way to many stories that involved parents not doing what he said and it turned out badly... (regardless of if i agree with his recommendations)
I skimmed the chapters on homosexuality and children who exhibit the behaviors of the opposite sex and skipped the end chapter all together.
November 25, 2008
Sax's writing is very clear, interesting and informative. The overall thesis of his book can be summed up in one of the last lines of the book: "Our job now is to create a society that has the courage and the wisdom to cherish and celebrate the innate differences between the sexes while at the same time enabling equal opportunities for every child."
He is a proponent of single-sex education, and his arguments are very convincing. For most of us educating our children within the framework of the American public education system, single-sex education isn't really an option, however. He also advocates cross-generational single sex activities as a way to help children and teenagers grow into healthy, happy, well-adjusted and productive individuals. I couldn't agree more.
The chapters on education and discipline are really enlightening, and have already helped me understand my kids, especially my sons, better. The chapters on Sex and Drugs were a bit alarming, but a good wake-up call.
He is a proponent of single-sex education, and his arguments are very convincing. For most of us educating our children within the framework of the American public education system, single-sex education isn't really an option, however. He also advocates cross-generational single sex activities as a way to help children and teenagers grow into healthy, happy, well-adjusted and productive individuals. I couldn't agree more.
The chapters on education and discipline are really enlightening, and have already helped me understand my kids, especially my sons, better. The chapters on Sex and Drugs were a bit alarming, but a good wake-up call.
March 15, 2019
I wanted to read this to help expand my knowledge on gender differences as it's something I'm quite interested in, for no reason other than it's such a talked about topic in the media. At one point I wanted to stop listening as he was annoying me so much. Some of his parenting techniques feel incredibly American and conservative. However, a lot of it was also incredibly interesting, and food for thought.
I'm please I saw it through. And would recommend it to anyone interested in gender studies (or parents and teachers etc). But I would certainly say get ready to take it with a pinch of salt.
I wonder how much of it will feel outdated as time goes on.
I'm please I saw it through. And would recommend it to anyone interested in gender studies (or parents and teachers etc). But I would certainly say get ready to take it with a pinch of salt.
I wonder how much of it will feel outdated as time goes on.
July 23, 2008
The author, a family physician and psychologist, cites numerous studies and his own experience to support his assertions. There is so much food for thought in this book, all very interesting, some terrifying. I'm really glad I read this book, even if I didn't believe everything in it, and I plan to read his next one as well. It's worth reading even for those without children. Covers how we as a society raise and educate our children based on what we believe about gender and what common beliefs may or may not be accurate.
July 17, 2020
This book is a scientific and social study on the differences between males and females. It was easy to read and understand.
Things I learned:
• Be involved in your child’s life.
• If you are forced to send your child to school, choose a single sex one, not coed.
• Multiple reasons, which I will not name, to NOT send your child away from home to be educated by their peers. This was not the book’s intention, it just strengthened my resolve.
Things I learned:
• Be involved in your child’s life.
• If you are forced to send your child to school, choose a single sex one, not coed.
• Multiple reasons, which I will not name, to NOT send your child away from home to be educated by their peers. This was not the book’s intention, it just strengthened my resolve.
March 2, 2019
I acknowledge there are innate differences between my two kids- a boy and a girl- despite my best efforts to treat them similarly though not identically. The book that Sax sets out to write, if done with the highest scientific competency and a thorough understanding of the culture of patriarchy, would be very interesting. Indeed such a book might, as Sax claims, be beneficial to the education of boys and girls.
Unfortunately, Sax has a lot of difficulty differentiating things that are proven in the studies (more on the studies in a moment) such as a difference in sense of smell between males and females, or a difference in likelihood of risk-taking, from things that are almost certainly the result of culture- and not shown to be different by a study. So for his risk-taking example, he does not choose something uncomplicated like the probability of diving off a cliff into a pool of water but instead chooses a highly complicated example of how many sexual partners a man or a woman might flaunt (in the context of risking getting an std). It's an absurd example, and stating that it's similar around the world does nothing but prove that sexually-repressive patriarchies exist around the world.
Another example, when he says some of the pay differences can be accounted for by different professions such as engineers making more than teachers, he fails to account for long-term societal depression of wages specifically in female fields. Simply making something a "male field" leads to an increase in wages. Sax's universe is fun because it's like history never happened! But then when suggesting a "fix" for the problem he cites parents treating boys and girls differently with regard to risk- and they should treat them the same? It's a circular logical nightmare to wade through his unclear thinking.
Sax tells us that men ask for raises and women don't do so as much. Why not? Sax leads us to believe the only possible explanation could be an innate gender-difference in risk-taking. Sorry Sax, there have been studies on how women who ask for raises are perceived compared to how men in the same situation are perceived- and guess what- people view the women more negatively. That means it's actually a much bigger risk for women to ask, and even if they receive the raise, they might subsequently be perceived in a more negative light during their employment, all of that is cultural. Again, it's great that Sax is interested in examining real biological differences but the problem is that being completely ignorant of real cultural and misogynistic differences, he's totally unable to separate real science from made-up explanations of that science. If he can't understand the basic principle of "correlation is not causation" he has no business writing a book analyzing scientific studies.
As for the studies, I find them fascinating, but at a minimum, I need to know how many people were studied to determine if they had a statistically significant number of study participants. With such a delicate topic it's extra important to put this information in the text, otherwise, I don't know if this is just conservative propaganda or real science. Even when I google the studies (which I always attempt) you usually need to pay to get access to the information regarding how many study participants and what the actual conclusions of the studies were. (News reporting on these studies is famously unreliable because most are written by reporters without a significant background in science. In this case, some of the news articles I turned up while looking for the original studies were written by Sax himself.)
In conclusion, the stated goal of the book is a good one, the execution is extremely poor and ultimately infuriating. Poorly applied science can be very destructive.
Unfortunately, Sax has a lot of difficulty differentiating things that are proven in the studies (more on the studies in a moment) such as a difference in sense of smell between males and females, or a difference in likelihood of risk-taking, from things that are almost certainly the result of culture- and not shown to be different by a study. So for his risk-taking example, he does not choose something uncomplicated like the probability of diving off a cliff into a pool of water but instead chooses a highly complicated example of how many sexual partners a man or a woman might flaunt (in the context of risking getting an std). It's an absurd example, and stating that it's similar around the world does nothing but prove that sexually-repressive patriarchies exist around the world.
Another example, when he says some of the pay differences can be accounted for by different professions such as engineers making more than teachers, he fails to account for long-term societal depression of wages specifically in female fields. Simply making something a "male field" leads to an increase in wages. Sax's universe is fun because it's like history never happened! But then when suggesting a "fix" for the problem he cites parents treating boys and girls differently with regard to risk- and they should treat them the same? It's a circular logical nightmare to wade through his unclear thinking.
Sax tells us that men ask for raises and women don't do so as much. Why not? Sax leads us to believe the only possible explanation could be an innate gender-difference in risk-taking. Sorry Sax, there have been studies on how women who ask for raises are perceived compared to how men in the same situation are perceived- and guess what- people view the women more negatively. That means it's actually a much bigger risk for women to ask, and even if they receive the raise, they might subsequently be perceived in a more negative light during their employment, all of that is cultural. Again, it's great that Sax is interested in examining real biological differences but the problem is that being completely ignorant of real cultural and misogynistic differences, he's totally unable to separate real science from made-up explanations of that science. If he can't understand the basic principle of "correlation is not causation" he has no business writing a book analyzing scientific studies.
As for the studies, I find them fascinating, but at a minimum, I need to know how many people were studied to determine if they had a statistically significant number of study participants. With such a delicate topic it's extra important to put this information in the text, otherwise, I don't know if this is just conservative propaganda or real science. Even when I google the studies (which I always attempt) you usually need to pay to get access to the information regarding how many study participants and what the actual conclusions of the studies were. (News reporting on these studies is famously unreliable because most are written by reporters without a significant background in science. In this case, some of the news articles I turned up while looking for the original studies were written by Sax himself.)
In conclusion, the stated goal of the book is a good one, the execution is extremely poor and ultimately infuriating. Poorly applied science can be very destructive.
February 6, 2013
I was terribly conflicted on how to rate this book. Because the more negative feelings won out in the two star rating, I will start with the negatives.
First, the author claims at the beginning that he will be using "science" to prove his case that biologically-based gender differences create many of the stereotypes and gender-based issues that our society and educational systems are struggling with. That claim is misleading, as the author's true purpose is to deliver his advice on child-rearing and education, which inevitably leads to the scientific cherry-picking and pigeon-holing that many others have found fault with. That makes this a self-help book, not a science book, which makes the book subjective, and clouds the data that readers could otherwise be using to come to their own conclusions about the foundations and influences of gender.
Second, I am hugely distrustful of anyone who adopts the "good old days" mentality, that if we could just go back to "the way things were," everything would be fine. That in general is a huge, misguided fallacy. Sax would like to see a return to traditional gender roles in many different ways, and he recommends some pretty unsettling traditional methods of helping kids deal with gender struggles (send your "anomalous male" who loves playing the piano to Boy Scout camp to “break him” of his gender inappropriate interests? Yikes.) He also recommends an antiquated authoritarian parenting style, reinforcing that parents are entirely at fault for the way their kids turn out, adding to extreme pressure faced by modern parents, which I believe is the true cause of our era’s parenting difficulties. He purports to be part of the solution; I would argue that his approach (and all of contradictions therein) is clearly part of the problem.
On the other hand, the science contained in the book, before it is tarnished with Sax’s agenda, is mind-boggling, life-changing, and wonderful. The gender-based differences in neural processing, the senses, and all of the field’s other science-based findings caused me to rethink some pretty fundamental assumptions I have about the way people are, gender stereotypes and assumptions, the implications in society, and other very large and important ideas. If that’s what this book had been about, and I had been allowed to put those ideas in a larger societal and educational context, this would have been a five star book. Unfortunately, Why Gender Matters does not rise much above an easily refutable, debatable, and out-dateable parenting advice book.
First, the author claims at the beginning that he will be using "science" to prove his case that biologically-based gender differences create many of the stereotypes and gender-based issues that our society and educational systems are struggling with. That claim is misleading, as the author's true purpose is to deliver his advice on child-rearing and education, which inevitably leads to the scientific cherry-picking and pigeon-holing that many others have found fault with. That makes this a self-help book, not a science book, which makes the book subjective, and clouds the data that readers could otherwise be using to come to their own conclusions about the foundations and influences of gender.
Second, I am hugely distrustful of anyone who adopts the "good old days" mentality, that if we could just go back to "the way things were," everything would be fine. That in general is a huge, misguided fallacy. Sax would like to see a return to traditional gender roles in many different ways, and he recommends some pretty unsettling traditional methods of helping kids deal with gender struggles (send your "anomalous male" who loves playing the piano to Boy Scout camp to “break him” of his gender inappropriate interests? Yikes.) He also recommends an antiquated authoritarian parenting style, reinforcing that parents are entirely at fault for the way their kids turn out, adding to extreme pressure faced by modern parents, which I believe is the true cause of our era’s parenting difficulties. He purports to be part of the solution; I would argue that his approach (and all of contradictions therein) is clearly part of the problem.
On the other hand, the science contained in the book, before it is tarnished with Sax’s agenda, is mind-boggling, life-changing, and wonderful. The gender-based differences in neural processing, the senses, and all of the field’s other science-based findings caused me to rethink some pretty fundamental assumptions I have about the way people are, gender stereotypes and assumptions, the implications in society, and other very large and important ideas. If that’s what this book had been about, and I had been allowed to put those ideas in a larger societal and educational context, this would have been a five star book. Unfortunately, Why Gender Matters does not rise much above an easily refutable, debatable, and out-dateable parenting advice book.
March 29, 2022
The writing was subpar initially but somehow got better as the book progressed. The research got more spellbinding too. I am a little embarrassed there are so many things I had never considered/heard about prior to now and they just make sense when you evaluate tendencies between genders.
-audio and visual learning varies
-assessing and acting on risk differs
-school subjects are taught with gender bias
-hook ups are replacing relationships
-being gender anomalous most often creates a deficit for boys but not girls
-and for both, there are unnatural ADHD expectations for stillness put on children
Gender is complicated *and* gender matters.
I have poured over trans information and wondered about the increased prevalence - one has to read this to better understand what is happening from an expert in the field who works with LGBTQ+ individuals and is open minded about the normalcy and biology of being queer.
Here are a few profound excerpts:
Pronouns make normal identity seem boring -
“This may seem enlightened to some but it is not. It is harmful. It makes gender a problem. It makes being male or female the boring, conformist option. It makes being transgender the enlightened, creative option. It actively encourages kids to wonder about their gender identity, to be less content with their gender. Even though we have good evidence that kids who are likely less content with their gender are more likely to be anxious or depressed.”
The male female mistake: Gender is not one dimensional. And deciding you want to switch from one to the other suggests that it is. There is a lack of understanding of what gender can look like (feminine, undifferentiated, masculine, androgynous)…You don’t transition [just] because you *vary* on the spectrum of male and female tendencies.
Gender is connected to our transition into adulthood. (Let alone linked to brain connectivity and biological functions) it is not just a social construct…Ignoring gender has not created a utopian society. It has created a lot of confusion.
-audio and visual learning varies
-assessing and acting on risk differs
-school subjects are taught with gender bias
-hook ups are replacing relationships
-being gender anomalous most often creates a deficit for boys but not girls
-and for both, there are unnatural ADHD expectations for stillness put on children
Gender is complicated *and* gender matters.
I have poured over trans information and wondered about the increased prevalence - one has to read this to better understand what is happening from an expert in the field who works with LGBTQ+ individuals and is open minded about the normalcy and biology of being queer.
Here are a few profound excerpts:
Pronouns make normal identity seem boring -
“This may seem enlightened to some but it is not. It is harmful. It makes gender a problem. It makes being male or female the boring, conformist option. It makes being transgender the enlightened, creative option. It actively encourages kids to wonder about their gender identity, to be less content with their gender. Even though we have good evidence that kids who are likely less content with their gender are more likely to be anxious or depressed.”
The male female mistake: Gender is not one dimensional. And deciding you want to switch from one to the other suggests that it is. There is a lack of understanding of what gender can look like (feminine, undifferentiated, masculine, androgynous)…You don’t transition [just] because you *vary* on the spectrum of male and female tendencies.
Gender is connected to our transition into adulthood. (Let alone linked to brain connectivity and biological functions) it is not just a social construct…Ignoring gender has not created a utopian society. It has created a lot of confusion.
November 19, 2011
This was a fascinating book. So much of what this author wrote seemed to click in my mind and made sense. I now think differently about how boys and girls learn and the advantages of all-girls (or boys) schools. I know that this will effect how I raise my son. I loved the authors sample lesson for boys and girls. The girls' one definitely had me more interested! It makes me wonder if I would have liked science and math better if I would have been taught with a more girl-friendly approach. There was a lot of interesting parenting advice.
My few complaints are minor. I thought it would have been helpful to hear more of the debate against this theory. For example, I wish that he would have stated some of the benefits of co-ed schools. I think it would have given his argument more credibility. Also, he specifically states that ballet places too much focus on how a girl looks and in the next chapter he encourages girls to take ballet. That confused me a little bit.
Overall, I really enjoyed this book and I am SO glad that I read it. I think this is an excellent read for teachers and parents, if only to challenge existing beliefs on gender. I hope that I remember what I learned from this book.
My few complaints are minor. I thought it would have been helpful to hear more of the debate against this theory. For example, I wish that he would have stated some of the benefits of co-ed schools. I think it would have given his argument more credibility. Also, he specifically states that ballet places too much focus on how a girl looks and in the next chapter he encourages girls to take ballet. That confused me a little bit.
Overall, I really enjoyed this book and I am SO glad that I read it. I think this is an excellent read for teachers and parents, if only to challenge existing beliefs on gender. I hope that I remember what I learned from this book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 731 reviews