She can't accept that boys' and girls' preferences, aspirations – and even their brains – are as different as we assume - hell, I can't myself and I'm no expert
Cordelia Fine in The Guardian, posted here.
Cordelia Fine interviewed by Salon
From an early age, I was incapable of reading Enid Blyton  books (which I adored) without offering up a scathing feminist critique  to anyone within earshot: "Oh, yes. Of course the boys go first! In  case it's dangerous." I vividly remember coming across a  sentence that so outraged me – a boy telling his companion that she  couldn't take part in some adventure because she was a girl – that I  stopped reading and spat on the offending lines.
Even today when  reading to my own children it's hard not to want to edit Blyton. When I  do, my eldest, even with his eyes closed, knows it immediately: "Mum,  are you swapping the characters around again?" he'll ask the instant I  put a girl behind the controls of the toy plane that will fly everyone  to safety.
But how is it that even before he went to school my son  was already so well versed in the different ways girls and boys are  expected to behave? And how do I, as someone who once proudly spat on an  Enid Blyton book, feel about how well these easy cliches thrive?
It  wasn't until I became a parent that my feminist fire, my "inner  spitter" if you will, was rekindled. At first, I was simply struck by  how parents seemed to see children through the "lens of gender", as the  psychologist Sandra Bem put it. Then, after the birth of my second  child, I was astounded one day at playgroup. About a dozen young  children were sitting eating and the playgroup leader's daughter, a  boisterous five-year-old, started to lead them in a chorus of shouting  and foot stomping. For some reason, only the other girls joined in; my  two sons and the few other boys carried on eating quietly. "Aren't boys  noisy!" one of the mothers exclaimed over the girlish uproar.
I  was also surprised – especially given how politically correct we all  supposedly are – by how quick parents were to chalk up their children's  behaviour and traits to some deep gendered core. When among our group of  friends the second crop of children came, a common question was, "Are  they different?" Of course, the answer was always yes. But while the  parent of two sons or two daughters would answer by talking lengthily  about the unique, idiosyncratic personalities that made up the essence  of Jack-ness or Sarah-ness, parents with one of each, I noticed, would  often say instead, "Oh yes. Boys and girls are so different."
Different  – I hear it all the time in conversations with other parents. And to a  casual observer it can often seem that boys and girls play in a very  different, easily defined way. But why does it happen and is it really  as rigid as we think?
The casual sexism of the Edinburgh primary  school my sister and I went to shocked my parents, too, at times. I can  recall coming home one day with the news that we were being taught how  to sew. "We" the girls, that is. The boys were doing woodwork. The next  day, my father was carefully dressed in his best suit and sent to visit  the head. The hastily purchased copy of the Daily Telegraph tucked under  his arm was intended to make the point better than mere argument. My  mother hoped the thought would strike that when even conservatively  dressed male Telegraph readers find your school practices sexist and  outdated, it's time to embrace progress.
It was only a partial  success. The sexes were put together in a single "craft" class, but  while the girls sewed pretty aprons, the boys were emasculated as little  as possible by being given felt space rockets and stars to sew on to  the black canvas of outer space. Undeterred, my mother [the writer Anne Fine]  went on to write Bill's New Frock, a still popular children's book in  which the different treatment and experiences of girls are made plain  through the eyes of Bill, who unaccountably wakes up one morning as a  girl. I loved that book, as my sons do now.
But gender wasn't a  topic I gave too much thought to during my teenage and early adult  years. When my own children came along, I became a voracious reader of  parenting books, and when they were about two and four I came across a  book claiming that differences between male and female brains have  important implications for education and parenting. Curious, I looked up  the studies used as evidence, and was shocked to discover how badly  neuroscientific data was being misrepresented. I looked at some of the  other popular books newly on the scene, also proclaiming important  neurological differences between the sexes. Same thing. Yet people,  educators – my son's kindergarten teacher! – appeared to be taking these  pseudoscientific claims seriously.
Next I read study after study  from social psychology, which built up a picture of a surprisingly fluid  mind in constant interaction with the environment around it. I found  out that when gender is in the background, the thinking and behaviour of  the sexes becomes remarkably similar. But when the context makes gender  salient – as social psychologists do in the lab and the real world does  constantly – stereotypes and social expectations start to influence our  self-perception, our interests and even our cognitive and social  abilities.
Then there was the research about children. Their  behaviour in many parents' minds is all the proof one could need of  hardwired sex differences. But a closer look at the social world into  which children are born reveals an environment in which gender is  emphasised above all social categories, from birth. How should children  ignore gender, not be influenced by the assumptions and expectations it  brings, when they continually watch it, hear it, see it; are clothed in  it, sleep in it, eat off it? Little wonder that children become "gender  detectives" eager for their behaviour to fall on the right side of the  all important social divide.
I'm pleased to say that the sheer  extensiveness of the scientific terrain I covered enabled me to be  tiresome in all sorts of different ways. Among friends, a well-timed  sentence beginning with "Interestingly …" became my favourite way to  spoil a perfectly pleasant conversation. "Interestingly, in humans  there's no clear causal relationship between testosterone and aggressive  behaviour," I would say casually to a parent describing a group of  boys' behaviour as "testosterone-fuelled". A dear friend was gently  rebuked with the same word when she mentioned having to stock up the  present cupboard with more "girl toys". I couldn't help myself.
"Interestingly,"  I remarked, "a recent laboratory study of children's play behaviour  found that girls spent twice as long playing with 'boy toys' as they did  with 'girl toys'."
But it's at the local toy shop that my  feelings really come to a head. The first time I shopped there I readily  accepted the offer to have the present I'd just bought for my nephew  gift-wrapped, not realising the agonies the shop assistant's next  question would put me in.
"Is it for a boy or a girl?"
I  realised that if I admitted that the gift was for a boy, out would come  the ubiquitous cars, space rockets, tools or sports paraphernalia –  reinforcing those as "for boys".
I hesitated so long before  answering that, by the time I finally did, two other assistants were  also waiting curiously for my response. "I'm not going to tell you," I  said, a small rebellion that turned my face bright red.
I know  it's just wrapping paper. But it's also a manifestation of something  pervasive and powerful. When I discovered research showing that  preschoolers are beginning to grasp not just the concrete correlates of  gender, but also the metaphorical cues – that what is soft or curved is  female, and what is hard or angular is male – I know that children are  getting the message conveyed to them (however inadvertently) from the  way their clothes and bedding, toys and crockery, greeting cards, and,  yes, even wrapping paper, comes gender-labelled from birth. And when  those gender labels lead five-year-old children to the conclusion that a  black, spiky My Little Pony has to be for boys, while a lavender satin  gun and holster set must be for girls, it becomes clear that these  gender cues pack a psychological punch.
Next time I visited the toy shop I was ready for "that question".
"It's  for a girl," I said. "But I really don't see why she shouldn't have  that space rocket wrapping paper. After all, it's not as if girls can't  grow up to become astronauts."
To my delight, a girl of about  eight standing by the counter chimed in. "I like space stuff. And so  does Charlotte. Mum, can we have her present wrapped in rocket paper  too?"
"Well, of course," her mother answered. "Why ever not?"
Why ever not, indeed.
 
 
Comentários