W.W. NORTON, JANUARY 2017There is a myth that male and female natures are distinct, shaped by ancient evolutionary pressures and transmitted faithfully and timelessly via sex chromosomes and hormones, against which equal opportunity laws and optimistic feminists are no match. This myth is so familiar that every reader can fill in the chain of argument required to get from “cheap sperm” to an explanation of why there are many more male than female Nobel Prize winners. What’s more, the issues I dissect in my latest book, Testosterone Rex: Myths of Sex, Science, and Society, are part of every scientist’s life. Of course only a subset of scientific research examines the often-contentious zone of how systems of sex, gender, or both impact the brain and behavior. But just about every researcher is, at some point, part of conversations and disagreements as to why men predominate in a particular scientific field, or why solid female representation at junior levels falls away with seniority.
The debates are ubiquitous, whether they concern gender gaps in science, senior leadership roles, or entrepreneurship. The “nature” side claims a small triumph or two: some hormonal effect, anatomical brain difference, or evolutionary principle that seems to prove the naturalness of a particular gender gap. But then the “nurture” side enjoys a few gains—a demonstration of workplace gender bias, an unfavorable comparison with a more egalitarian country, or a study showing that in some situations the sexes aren’t so different after all—that seem to finger stereotypes and sexism as culprits. And, of course, each side regularly challenges claims made by the other, dismissing the reliability, validity, or applicability of this or that finding.
Testosterone Rex seeks to transform the debate by taking a closer look ...
