ГЛАВА 2 «ПОЧЕМУ НУЖНО ПРЯТАТЬ ГОЛОВУ В БУМАЖНЫЙ ПАКЕТ, ЕСЛИ ХОЧЕШЬ СОХРАНИТЬ СЕКРЕТ ОТ ЖЕНЫ»
СОДЕРЖАНИЕ
СНОСКИ И ПОМЕТКИ АВТОРА.. 2
ВСТУПЛЕНИЕ. 2
ГЛАВА 1 «МЫ ДУМАЕМ, СЛЕДОВАТЕЛЬНО, ВЫ СУЩЕСТВУЕТЕ». 3
ГЛАВА 2 «ПОЧЕМУ НУЖНО ПРЯТАТЬ ГОЛОВУ В БУМАЖНЫЙ ПАКЕТ, ЕСЛИ ХОЧЕШЬ СОХРАНИТЬ СЕКРЕТ ОТ ЖЕНЫ». 5
ГЛАВА 3 «НА КАБЛУКАХ И ЗАДОМ НАПЕРЕД». 6
ГЛАВА 6 «ИСКЛЮЧЕНИЕ И ПРИВАТНЫЕ ТАНЦЫ». 12
ГЛАВА 7 «РАВНОПРАВИЕ НАЧИНАЕТСЯ (ИЛИ ЗАКАНЧИВАЕТСЯ) ДОМА». 14
ГЛАВА 8 «РАВЕНСТВО 2.0». 15
ГЛАВА 10 «ВО ТЬМЕ ЛОНА (И ПЕРВЫЕ ЧАСЫ ПРИ СВЕТЕ)». 19
ГЛАВА 11 «МУЖСКОЙ МОЗГ В ЖЕНСКОМ (ИЛИ ОБЕЗЬЯНЬЕМ?) ТЕЛЕ». 23
ГЛАВА 12 «ПОЛОВЫЕ ВОПРОСЫ И ПРЕЖДЕВРЕМЕННАЯ СПЕКУЛЯЦИЯ». 26
ГЛАВА 14 «НЕЙРО-ОБМАН». 30
ГЛАВА 15 «НЕСКРОМНОЕ ОБАЯНИЕ НЕЙРОНАУКИ». 33
ГЛАВА 16 «РАЗБИРАЕМСЯ В ПРОШИВКЕ». 34
ГЛАВА 17 «ДО И ПОСЛЕ РОЖДЕНИЯ». 36
ГЛАВА 18 «РОДИТЕЛИ С МЫШЛЕНИЕМ, ИЗМЕНЕННЫМ НАПОЛОВИНУ». 36
ГЛАВА 19 «ГЕНДЕРНЫЕ ДЕТЕКТИВЫ». 38
ГЛАВА 20 «ГЕНДЕРНОЕ ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ». 38
ГЛАВА 21 «САМОСОЦИАЛИЗАЦИЯ». 40
ЭПИЛОГ «НА СТА-А-АРТ!». 41
БИБЛИОГРАФИЯ. 42
СНОСКИ И ПОМЕТКИ АВТОРА
ВСТУПЛЕНИЕ
1 (Brizendine, 2007), pp. 166, 40, and 162, respectively.
2 (Brizendine, 2007), pp. 159 and 160, respectively.
3 http://www.gurianinstitute.com/meet_michael.php. Accessed December 2, 2008.
4 (Gurian, 2004), pp. 4 and 5, and p. 5.
5 (Sax, 2006), blurb.
6 (Gurian Institute, Bering, & Goldberg, 2009), p. 4.
7 (Gurian, Henley, & Trueman, 2001), p. 4.
8 (Gurian & Annis, 2008), jacket blurb.
9 (Gisborne, 1797), p. 21.
10 (Gisborne, 1797), p. 22.
11 (Baron-Cohen, 2003), p. 1. Emphasis in original.
12 (Levy, 2004), p. 319.
13 (Baron-Cohen, 2003), p. 185.
14 (Levy, 2004), pp. 319 and 320.
15 Mary Astell, The Christian Religion (1705). Quoted in (Broad, 2002), p. vii.
16 According to (Dorr, 1915).
17 Anon., ‘Biology and Women’s Rights’, repr. Popular Science Monthly, 14 (Dec. 1878). Quoted in (Trecker, 1974), p. 363.
|
|
|
18 (Kimmel, 2004), p. vii.
19 (Kane, 2006b).
20 (Pinker, 2008), p. 5.
21 (Pinker, 2008), p. 266.
22 (Moir & Jessel, 1989), p. 21.
23 (Brizendine, 2007), pp. 36 and 37.
24 (Moir & Jessel, 1989), p. 20.
25 (Belkin, 2003), para. 60.
26 Social psychologists have marshalled evidence that suggests that we have a system justification motive, ‘whereby people justify and rationalise the way things are, so that existing social arrangements are perceived as fair and legitimate, perhaps even natural and inevitable.’ (Jost & Hunyady, 2002), p. 119.
27 (Broad & Green, 2009), p. viii.
28 (Drake, 1696), p. 20. I’m grateful to Jacqueline Broad for bringing this quotation to my attention.
29 (Smith, 1998), p. 159.
30 E. L. Thorndike, ‘Sex in Education’, The Bookman, XXIII, 213. Quoted in (Hollingworth, 1914), p. 511.
31 (Mill, 1869/1988), p. 22.
32 Cora Castle, ‘A statistical study of eminent women’, Columbia University contributions in philosophy and psychology, vol. 22, no. 27 (New York: Columbia University, 1913), pp. vii, 1–90. Quoted in (Shields, 1982), p. 780.
33 (Malebranche, 1997), p. 130. I’m grateful to Jacqueline Broad for alerting me to this hypothesis.
34 See (Russett, 1989).
35 A phrase that originated with (Romanes, 1887/1987), p. 23. See (Russett, 1989), p. 36.
36 (Russett, 1989), p. 37.
37 See discussion in (Kane, 2006).
38 (Kitayama & Cohen, 2007), p. xiii.
39 M. R. Banaji, ‘Implicit attitudes can be measured’, in H. L. Roediger III, J. S. Nairne, I. Neath, & A. Surprenant (eds.), The nature of remembering: Essays in honor of Robert G. Crowder (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2001), pp. 117–150. Quoted in (Banaji, Nosek, & Greenwald, 2004), p. 284.
40 (Silverberg, 2006), p. 3.
41 (Grossi, 2008), p. 100.
42 (Fausto-Sterling, 2000), p. 118.
43 (Rivers & Barnett, 2007), para. 4.
44 See (Fine, 2008).
45 Quoted in (Pierce, 2009), para. 8.
46 A point made, for example, by (Bleier, 1984). She suggests that ‘Paradoxically, it is not our brains or our biology but rather the cultures that our brains have produced that constrain the nearly limitless potentialities for behavioral flexibility provided us by our brains.’ (p. viii).
|
|
|
ГЛАВА 1 «МЫ ДУМАЕМ, СЛЕДОВАТЕЛЬНО, ВЫ СУЩЕСТВУЕТЕ»
1 (Morris, 1987), p. 140.
2 Sociologists Cecilia Ridgeway and Shelley Correll point out that there is something curious about how our gender beliefs can be so narrow ‘since no one ever has the experience of interacting with a concrete person who is just a man or just a woman in a way that is not affected by a host of other attributes such as the person’s race or level of education.’ (Ridgeway & Correll, 2004), p. 513.
3 See (Rudman & Glick, 2008), chapter 4. This book provides a compelling and comprehensive account of the social psychology of gender.
4 (Ridgeway & Correll, 2004), p. 513. Much of the research discussed in this book, it should be acknowledged, is restricted to the white, middle-class, heterosexual wedge of society. But then, it is the disparity between the male and female halves of this privileged group that is most likely to be taken as evidence for the ‘naturalness’ of gender roles.
5 For overview see (Nosek, 2007a).
6 (Nosek & Hansen, 2008), p. 554, references removed.
7 For theoretical discussions, see for example (Gawronski & Bodenhausen, 2006; Smith & DeCoster, 2000; Strack & Deutsch, 2004).
8 For example (Banaji & Hardin, 1996). For brief overview see (Bargh & Williams, 2006).
9 To experience the Implicit Association Test yourself, and find out more about it, visit Harvard University’s Project Implicit Web site: http://implicit.harvard. edu/implicit/.
10 (Rudman & Kilianski, 2000).
11 Brian Nosek notes that correlations between implicitly measured social attitudes (such as towards minority groups) and self-reported attitudes are especially weak when participants are highly egalitarian university students, whereas in less egalitarian groups the relationships are stronger (Nosek, 2007a). The nature of the relationship between explicit and implicit attitudes and other constructs – to what extent are they distinct? – is still not clear, and subject to debate.
|
|
|
12 For example (Mast, 2004; Nosek et al., 2009; Rudman & Kilianski, 2000).
13 (Dasgupta & Asgari, 2004).
14 For example (Kunda & Spencer, 2003). Or see (Fine, 2006).
15 I was alerted to this quotation, in the context of understanding the self, in an interview with Brian Nosek.
16 See (Wheeler, DeMarree, & Petty, 2007).
17 This is especially predicted by John Turner’s self-categorisation theory, which is most explicit in distinguishing between personal identity and social identity. While both self-categorisation theory and the active-self account (and other similar models, such as the notion of a working self-concept) regard the self as dynamic and context-dependent, self-categorisation theory proposes that ‘the self should not be equated with enduring personality structure’ because an infinite number of different social identities could become active, depending on the social context (Onorato & Turner, 2004), p. 259. Evidence for self-stereotyping under conditions of gender salience comes, for example, from (Hogg & Turner, 1987; James, 1993).
18 (Chatard, Guimond, & Selimbegovic, 2007).
19 Quoted in (Horne, 2007).
20 (Sinclair, Hardin, & Lowery, 2006).
21 (Steele & Ambady, 2006).
22 (Steele & Ambady, 2006), p. 434.
23 (Garner, 2004), p. 177.
24 William James (1890), The Principles of Psychology, p. 294. Quoted in p. 529 of (Sinclair, Hardin, & Lowery, 2006).
25 (Sinclair, Hardin, & Lowery, 2006; Sinclair et al., 2005; Sinclair & Lun, 2006), p. 529.
26 (Davies, 1989), p. 17.
27 (Galinsky, Wang, & Ku, 2008).
28 (Sinclair et al., 2005).
29 For a sociological perspective on this idea, see (Paechter, 2007).
ГЛАВА 2 «ПОЧЕМУ НУЖНО ПРЯТАТЬ ГОЛОВУ В БУМАЖНЫЙ ПАКЕТ, ЕСЛИ ХОЧЕШЬ СОХРАНИТЬ СЕКРЕТ ОТ ЖЕНЫ»
1 (Brizendine, 2007), p. 161.
2 A claim made in the blurb of Brizendine’s book.
3 (Baron-Cohen, 2003), p. 2.
4 The Autism Research Centre was the source of the Empathy Quotient and Systemizing Quotient questionnaires: http://www.autismresearchcentre.com/tests/default.asp.
|
|
|
5 See (Baron-Cohen, Knickmeyer, & Belmonte, 2005), table 1, p. 821. Sixty percent of men report an S-type brain, compared with 17 percent of women. (Percentages include ‘extreme’ E and S brain types.)
6 (Schaffer, 2008), entry 3 (‘Empathy queens’), para. 5.
7 (Eisenberg & Lennon, 1983).
8 Quoted in (Schaffer, 2008), entry 3 (‘Empathy queens’), para. 8.
9 (Davis & Kraus, 1997), p. 162.
10 (Ames & Kammrath, 2004), p. 205; (Realo et al., 2003), p. 434.
11 (Voracek & Dressler, 2006).
12 Both the EQ and the Reading the Mind in the Eyes test, also from Simon Baron-Cohen’s lab, ask participants to state their sex before beginning the questionnaire. As will become clear later in the chapter, it’s possible that the correlation between the two arises because the salience of gender-related norms increases both self-reported empathy and empathic performance, to a greater or lesser degree in different participants.
13 (Ickes, 2003), p. 172.
14 (Levy, 2004), p. 322.
15 (Voracek & Dressler, 2006). If you used information about whether someone scored below or above average on the test to try to guess his or her sex you would be correct barely more often than chance.
16 These and further details of the PONS and its interpretation, as well as the IPT, are summarised in (Graham & Ickes, 1997). To give you an idea of the size of the gender difference on the PONS, which Graham and Ickes describe as ‘respectable’ (p. 123), the average woman on this test (scoring at the 50th percentile) is equivalent to a slightly superior man (scoring at the 66th percentile for the male population). In their discussion of the greater female advantage for ‘leaky’ channels of communication, they are referring to the work (and term) of R. Rosenthal and B. DePaulo, ‘Sex differences in eavesdropping on nonverbal cues’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37 (1979), pp. 273–285.
17 (Brizendine, 2007), p. 160.
18 This hypothesis again refers to the work of Rosenthal & DePaulo, cited in (Graham & Ickes, 1997).
19 (Graham & Ickes, 1997), p. 126.
20 (Ickes, 2003), quotations from pp. 125 and 126, respectively.
21 (Ickes, Gesn, & Graham, 2000).
22 (Ickes, 2003), p. 135.
23 (Klein & Hodges, 2001). Men also scored equivalently to women when the sympathy rating was requested after the empathic accuracy test.
24 (Thomas & Maio, 2008), p. 1173. This effect was only found for an easy-to-read target, not a difficult-to-read target.
25 (Koenig & Eagly, 2005), p. 492.
26 (Marx & Stapel, 2006c), p. 773.
27 (Seger, Smith, & Mackie, 2009), p. 461.
28 (Ryan, David, & Reynolds, 2004). Gilligan’s work and critiques summarised here also.
29 This claim also found support in (Ryan, David, & Reynolds, 2004), study 1.
30 (Ryan, David, & Reynolds, 2004), pp. 253 and 254, respectively, references removed.
Дата добавления: 2019-02-22; просмотров: 159; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!