The Biological Foundation: Beyond Chromosomes
As we all know, at the chromosomal level, the difference between human females and males is only the difference in the 23rd pair of chromosomes. But what does this really mean for cognitive abilities and behavioral patterns?
The Rat Model: A Window into Brain Development
Rats share remarkably similar genetics to humans and are widely used in analogical experiments. Recent groundbreaking research has revealed fascinating insights about brain sexual differentiation.
Key Research Finding
Reference: WESTLEY, B., SALAMAN, D. Role of oestrogen receptor in androgen-induced sexual differentiation of the brain. Nature 262, 407–408 (1976).
Scholars have discovered that brain sexual differentiation in rats depends on early estrogen stimulation. In males, testosterone is converted to estrogen by enzymes. Without estrogen stimulation, the brain develops toward a female pattern. Conversely, if exposed to estrogen early, the brain develops toward a male pattern.
The Estrogen Paradox
Some researchers have successfully induced male brain patterns in female rats by injecting estrogen (you could understand this as creating homosexual orientation)!
You might wonder: female rats can synthesize estrogen themselves, so why don't their brains directly develop into male patterns, instead requiring artificial injection? The answer is: estrogen is degraded before entering the brain. However, testosterone in male rats is not degraded in the same way.
Revolutionary Insight
Brain sexual differentiation (including sexual orientation) is essentially just a biological flag! Most basic neural networks are minimally affected by gender intervention. You can boldly extrapolate this to the human brain.
The Complexity of Female Brain Features
However, why female-patterned brains exhibit female features, and what constitutes classic human female features, is a more complex topic involving evolutionary biology and psychology.
Early Education: The Decisive Factor
Masaru Ibuka, founder of Sony, wrote in "Kindergarten is Too Late": talent formation depends on prenatal education and family guidance during infancy. This is an observational conclusion based on samples. Whether it's true requires your own verification, but I believe it is true (around age 1, I was already dismantling Panasonic Easephone telephones and various household appliances daily).
The Heisei Era Control Experiment
As mentioned on the index page: after the Heisei era, boys who tinker with hardware are also gradually decreasing. This can serve as a gender-controlled experimental result, supporting evidence for the decisive role of family education.
Evidence Analysis:
- Control Group: Heisei-era boys with reduced hands-on encouragement
- Variable Group: Girls with traditional discouragement
- Outcome: Both groups show reduced engineering interest
- Conclusion: Family education, not biological sex, is the determining factor
Hope for Adults: Reactivating Dormant Talents
You might say: "I'm already grown up, family education cannot be redone, this is depressing."
Indeed, research shows that the number of brain neurons and the plasticity of neural networks decline with age. But this doesn't mean your early family education completely killed certain talents.
Think about it: complete suppression is unrealistic. Even if your parents forbade you from doing something, you would still do it secretly, like Crayon Shin-chan, right? Even if you didn't actually do it secretly, you must have had some fantasies, right?
Reigniting the Spark
Such talent sparks, though tiny, don't mean they cannot be reactivated. To reactivate them, you just need to try to remember now, then actually do it—face your true personality and don't care about others' opinions.
Scientific Conclusion
Based on biological and psychological evidence:
- Brain sexual differentiation is primarily a biological flag system
- Most cognitive abilities are not inherently gender-determined
- Early education and environment are the decisive factors
- Adult neuroplasticity allows for talent reactivation
- Social conditioning, not biology, creates the engineering gender gap