A letter I wrote in response to David Brooks' Op-Ed

David Brooks recenly wrote an Op-Ed that I take issue with.

Here is the letter I sent him:

Everyone these days seems so eager to uncover the differences between men and women, boys and girls -- to study the fundamental differences between the sexes that will allow each one to learn better and understand each other. I must say I have serious doubts. Not only does such a research agenda sound extremely ambitious -- it sounds as one fueled by stereotypes that would only lead to more stereotypes. It seems as though, by proposing to study the innate differences between men and women, people are looking to classify the entire set of men in the world and the entire set of women in the world. The most likely scenario is that the set of women and the set of men are such rich classes incapable of being characterized, making it virtually impossible to find these "fundamental differences", if in fact, men and women are really as different as some believe.

Suppose that we were able to one day uncover the natural tendencies within a sex. Say that such a study states that men are better at math and science and women are better at art and humanities. What happens to the boy who likes art and the girl who excels at math? They will be treated as anomalies, because science says their gender was not meant for such subjects.

How does one even study the innate differences between men and women, boys and girls? From day one boys and girls are treated differently. Girls are rarely ever given tanks or G.I. Joe's for their birthdays, so its really no surprise that men prefer to read combat books over women (as you mention). Perhaps if girls were given such presents, they would also like to read combat books with the same frequency as men. Also you suggest the possibility that if boys were not required to sit still for so long, they might do better in the classroom setting. Is this not based on some stereotype that boys are rowdier than girls? If boys are in fact rowdier than girls, how do we know that it is not because we have the attitude that, "boys will be boys" while we expect our girls to be prim and proper? It seems that separating innate differences from differences that were the result of stereotypes will be an insurmountable task. Even your article, which tried to be free of stereotypes, could not.

Part of being socially responsible is asking questions we know can be answered and considering the impacts of such a study. In a society obsessed with classifications, a society where women are expected to be a certain way and men another, a society where we have names for masculine women and effeminate men, would such a study be a good thing? I am not convinced of this.