Women’s minds and stereotypes of difference. A story of a thousand clichés

We have built one of the longest-standing narratives in our history around the differences between women and men. From the diversity of our bodies, we have derived that of our minds and destinies, as if nature, having assigned the two sexes different roles in reproduction, had continued its work by determining everything else as well. But can biological differences really explain why women and men so often end up making different choices, occupying different roles and having different opportunities? Cartesian dualism, which separates mind and brain, has long since been consigned to the dustbin of history: our mental life arises from brain activity. If there were such things as a ‘male’ mind and a ‘female’ mind, we would therefore expect two distinct categories of brains. But this is where the story gets complicated. In 2015, Daphna Joel and her colleagues described the brain as a mosaic: characteristics that are on average more common in one sex or the other are combined differently in each individual.

The same applies to personalities, interests, attitudes and behaviours, which do not define two distinct profiles – one male and one female. In life trajectories, however, the differences become more apparent: in abilities, preferences, aspirations and choices. It is in the space between brains and life stories that we must seek the answer. Differences, too, have a life story. Some widen, others fade until they almost disappear. Experiences, opportunities and expectations contribute to who we become, leaving traces in the brain.

Let’s take two deeply held beliefs: that boys are better at maths and girls are better at understanding others. Differences in maths performance are already apparent in the first few months of school, and this early emergence can make them seem innate. However, a French study based on a large sample showed that during the Covid school closures, among children of the same age, the advantage held by boys did not emerge. If a difference depends on context, the fact that it appears early is not enough to attribute it to a biological cause. In subsequent years, the gap tends to widen, but not to the same extent everywhere: Luigi Guiso and his colleagues showed in 2008 that it varies between countries and tends to narrow where there is greater equality between women and men. There is also a paradox: in Finland and Norway, where girls and boys achieve comparable results in maths – and in Finland today, girls even perform slightly better – young women are less likely to choose STEM pathways. There are various explanations: a girl may have good mathematical ability, but even greater ability in other areas; interests and stereotypes may play a part, and these do not necessarily disappear with equality, whilst greater freedom may bring choices more into line with individual preferences. What about empathy? In questionnaires, women describe themselves as more empathetic than men. However, when empathy is assessed through behaviour or physiological responses, the difference is greatly reduced or disappears altogether. Expectations about how women and men should behave can influence both how we describe ourselves and what we actually do. In a well-known experiment, women and men were able to drop virtual bombs on an opponent: when they were identifiable, men dropped more than women; when anonymous, the difference disappeared. These differences have a history. The future begins when we stop mistaking it for destiny.