The Female Brain

Leila is the young female child of Charles and Cara, one of Brizendine’s students. Leila has a male cousin, Joseph, who is similar in age. Leila is the first case study subject, introduced in Chapter 1 to illustrate the discussion of neurological sex differences in young children. Brizendine uses Leila’s playground interactions to emphasize differences in gendered play behavior: She played collaboratively with other girls, but their play was disrupted when Joseph and other boys joined in. The scene supports Brizendine’s claims that male children are inherently more aggressive due to their high levels of prenatal testosterone. Modern gender theory, however, posits that such gendered play behavior is predominantly caused by socialization.

Brizendine attributes Leila’s ability to behave in a restaurant to her femaleness, and she speculates that Joseph would not have been as self-regulated in the same circumstances—“These brief interactions show Leila picking up cues from her parents’ faces that her cousin Joseph likely wouldn’t have looked for” (39). Brizendine construes Leila’s sweet behavior and her empathy capabilities as being innate qualities of her femaleness; the discussion of female social skills implies that male skills are inferior. However, Brizendine attempts to mitigate misandrist implications by citing Leila’s commanding behaviors: her demand for attention and her bossiness while playing with her father.

Lauren’s teen daughter Shana is used to illustrate the effects of female puberty. Shana’s behavioral changes started when Shana turned 10 and started going to bed and waking up later, which Brizendine claims was a result of rising estrogen levels. By 15, Shana had developed acne and breasts, and she had engaged in sexual activity—proof of high androgen levels, according to Brizendine. Lauren’s concerns grew when Shana’s school performance declined and she started acting out. Shana’s behavior patterns aligned with her menstrual cycle, and she was diagnosed with PMDD and treated with birth control pills. While the hormones helped manage Shana’s aggressive outbursts, they did not curb her impulsivity, which, Brizendine explains, was caused by increased activity in the amygdala that the prefrontal cortex could not fully manage. Her impulsivity is demonstrated through her declarations of love for Jeff one day and her sexual activity with Mike the next. When Mike broke up with Shana, Shana developed depression—an anecdote used to emphasize the difference between female and male depression rates after the onset of puberty. Brizendine prescribed antidepressants, which were effective in managing the symptoms.

The portrayal of Shana not only supports Brizendine’s discussion of the female brain during puberty, but also demonstrates the importance of proper mental health care. However, Brizendine is incorrect to generalize Shana’s example as universal. Like many of the individuals in Brizendine’s case studies, Shana is presented as privileged: She has a cellphone, a computer, and access to high-level psychiatric care with Brizendine, a specialized neuropsychiatrist. Shana’s affluence is also demonstrated through her relationships with wealthy peers. Additionally, Shana’s behavior is largely attributed to her PMDD diagnosis—a condition which impacts only around 10% of females. Universalizing the extremes of Shana’s behavior reinforces the stereotype that female teenagers are uncontrollable and irresponsible.

Melissa is a patient who met her partner, Rob, while salsa dancing. Their relationship is used to discuss romantic relationships in Chapter 3. Their immediate attraction is used to explain the biological processes that drive female-male sexual attraction. Brizendine’s description of the development of the relationship supports stereotypical assumptions: Melissa was attracted to Rob because he “was taller, older, and appeared financially comfortable” (93), while Rob was attracted to Melissa because of her physical appearance. Brizendine attributes Melissa’s initial guardedness to the stress of meeting a stranger and to her father’s infidelity; Rob is portrayed as the typical chaser, while Melissa as the chooser. The progression of the relationship from passionate to calm and stable demonstrates the transition from more obsessive infatuation-love to an emotional attachment. Their relationship progressed again when Melissa feared that something was wrong when Rob forgot to call her one night.

The depiction of Melissa and Rob’s relationship develops the theme of the Reproductive Roles of Female Humans. Their choices, which subsequently develop the Neurological Causes of Gendered Behavior, are attributed to the overwhelming drive to procreate. Although Brizendine asserts their behaviors are caused by evolved biological processes, readers can see that Melissa and Rob’s relationship actually follows a stereotypical and socially approved sequence. Their traditional relationship reflects the limited perspectives portrayed throughout the text.

Two couples—Sarah & Nick and Jane & Evan—support Brizendine’s conversation on the differences in female and male emotional perception. Sarah detected Nick’s potential infidelity and could tell that he was lying to her when he initially denied the accusation. He admitted to feelings for a female coworker, but he did not consider his flirtations as cheating since he had not slept with the other woman. When he flirted with the coworker in front of Sarah, it caused another emotional upset; however, Nick argued that he was committed to his marriage with Sarah. Sarah’s emotional perceptions are intended to illustrate that female humans are adept at detecting hidden emotions.

Similarly, Evan is unable to interpret Jane’s emotional expressions—first unaware that she was uncomfortable with his pace in their relationship and later ignorant of her hints that she was ready for marriage. Stereotypes—women do not communicate directly, men are emotionally inept—run through their case study. The argument that male emotional memory is inferior is broadly extrapolated from the fact that Evan does not remember the turbulent emotional details of the relationship: “Women will know what he said, what they both ate, if it was cold outside or it rained on their anniversary, while men may forget everything except whether or not she looked sexy” (169). As with the other male-female differences Brizendine cites, these differences in emotional perception are ascribed to neurological, rather than social, causes. However, recent studies have shown that empathy capabilities are strongly impacted by socialization and gender stereotypes (Fine, Cordelia. Delusions of Gender. W. W. Norton, 2010).