The Essential Difference (Penguin Press Science) [Paperback]

After a lengthy and unwarranted disclaimer that his work isn't "sexist" [whatever that is], Baron-Cohen surveys the foundations of male and female minds. With a long clinical and teaching career, supported by an immense list of studies, he concludes that, in general, there are indeed "essential differences" in cognitive makeup between human genders. While there is a spectrum of characteristics, certain general frameworks exist attributable to men and women. For ease of analysis, he suggests that women are more empathic ["E" personalities] while men are more systematic ["S" personalities]. Each, he insists, has their role, with most people placed well within a median between extremes. The trends, however, are clear.

In a chatty style he likely uses speaking with patients, Baron-Cohen shows that women's empathic tendencies give them the power to quickly assess others' emotional states. Women more readily identify feelings in others, respond appropriately when sympathy is required and "reach out" in dealing with people. He stresses that this "intuitive sense" among women is almost universal and is rightfully well-regarded by all cultures. Men, on the other hand, operate under the need to understand "systems", organized conditions, mechanics, technology and are thus driven to know "how things work". This urge leads them away from the intimacy women have with others and, in the more extreme cases, are likely to become "loners". The most outstanding examples are those suffering from autism which is overwhelmingly a male condition.

Baron-Cohen has spent years studying autism, offering a range of examples. It may appear amusing that a five-year-old boy may be capable of memorizing dozens of car registrations and explain which car belongs to which house, but there are other factors to consider. Such boys grow into men who cannot readily converse, directly or over the telephone. They become the butt of teasing or hostility at their "withdrawn" state. If lacking compensation in other areas, such as a vocation that allows them to apply a narrow focus to tasks, they risk ostracism from society. Baron-Cohen offers an exceptional case of a mathematician whose genius brought him high awards, but who may fail to keep a lunch date due to some distraction. These are real problems affecting real people. Some of them may be your neighbours. One of them might even, unknowingly, be you.

This book challenges much misled thinking that has permeated gender studies over the past generation. Gender differences in outlook appear within a day of birth. Newborns shown a photograph of a face, or an object composed of facial elements resulted in girls preferring the face while the boys tended to select the object. This early division Baron-Cohen thinks may result from the testosterone surge baby boys undergo in the womb. "Maleness" and brain development are interlocked and continue to manifest with development. Baby girls, on the other hand, follow a different, parallel path. They appear to respond to distress in other people more readily than do boys. They will make eye contact with others more readily. The pattern continues through life, although at differing levels with individuals. Baron-Cohen stresses these differences don't represent "better" or "worse" values. Human males and females are overall equally intelligent. That intelligence is expressed in different ways. More to the point, men and women have both E and S traits, individually manifest over a wide spectrum. Extremes are few, but he notes extreme Es are more socially comfortable and acceptable than the autistic extreme S personalities.

Baron-Cohen doesn't limit himself to the results of clinical studies and calling for more research. He is keen to have readers begin to rethink how society should deal with those suffering from autism [Asperger's Syndrome]. He calls for a greater tolerance for "coldness" or "lack of sympathy". Self assessment is a good place to start building that tolerance. As a help to readers, a series of comprehensive tests is provided as Appendices. Take the tests and judge for yourself. But first, read the book to understand the issues involved. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

This is a book that I felt I should read for a long time and had to work myself up into reading. I shouldn't have been worried, it's actually really easy to read.

The Essential Difference, explores the possible differences between the male (systemising) brain and the female (empathising) brain, and also whether autism can be explained by being considered the extreme form of male brain. It is worth noting Baron-Cohen says that women can have male brains and men can have female brains.

The key to my enjoyment of this book was Baron-Cohen's tone and attitude, he is incredibly respectful of any differences and explains how these definitions shouldn't be used to limit people.

There are also four tests in the back of the book, so you can see what type of brain you have! I'm keeping mine a secret!

Highly recommended.

Before reading this book in its entirety I took issue with another reviewer's low rating as it seemed focused on the 'dishonest' marketing of the book.

Having now read it through and followed it up with Deborah Cameron's 'Myth of Venus and Mars' I'm actually rather more inclined to agree with SevenSister07's review.

I'm afraid that in spite of Baron-Cohen's pleas of mitigation that his work should not be seen in generalised terms, the sum effect is that difference is emphasised disproportionately. Worse still the starting point does appear to be from an awful lot of assumptions which are not backed up by any sort of thorough or objective research. Anecdotes of 'typical' male and female children hardly give credence when we can all think of exceptions - the idea I suppose is that the 'exceptions' can be written off when they don't match expectations - hardly an objective or scientific approach. There IS a massive contradiction inherent in this book - the 'male brain' is not restricted to men and the 'female brain' vice-versa. There is also implicit in Baron-Cohen's own findings [although frustratingly he doesn't give any sort of figures to indicate what relative proportions he's talking about] that there is actually FAR MORE variance within either the range of 'typical' male or female type brains than there is difference between the 'two types'.

This book for a supposedly science-based account, makes some very sweeping generalisations, which despite the author's stated intent to do otherwise, magnify differences between the sexes which are statistically very small and on an individual basis, indicative of precisely nothing. In later chapters he gets onto what is purportedly 'hard' biological evidence, but this too is misleading. Variations in activity and brain structures between the sexes [and even this is not a universal] are presupposed to indicate difference in talent at various activities - but again this is problematic since measurements in average linguistic abilities over a large number of studies [as cited in Cameron's book, for example] actually show incredibly low to insignificant variation cross-sexually in these.

The anthropological explanation of the root of these purported differences goes back many hundreds of generations to our ancestors' supposed hunter/gatherer dichotomy. Except of course current thinking is that the larger game hunt which males are posited to have specialised in, would count for a very small proportion of the groups' diet. It is now thought by many anthropologists gathering would have provided the vast majority of the sustenance, supplemented by smaller animal kills, which together with the gathering activities, it is likely BOTH sexes were engaged in for the bulk of their time. To compound this Baron-Cohen gives numerous candidates for different areas of the brain which MAY account for difference without actually being able to pin it down to anything specifically. The problem is that the conclusions are still very largely speculative and are used to support hypotheses based on nothing more tangible.

To be honest I'm not sure which is worse - the risible cod-psych of the John Gray variety, or something such as this, which whilst trying to distance itself from such a stereotypical approach actually shores it with what turns out to be largely spurious academic authority.

Read this book by all means, but please keep your sceptic's head on and think about what is actually being EVIDENCED. Some genetic and neurological research suggests that 'hard-wiring' can alter radically in only a few generations - and neural pathways are actually far more dynamic and alterable within the lifespan of an individual.

Our social and cultural evolution is progressing at a rate which [so far as we know] is unprecedented in human history. The assumptions of intellectual sex-difference are strongly rooted in a conservatism with the pace of such change. I'm not suggesting Baron-Cohen is deliberately assuming a place in the ranks of such social conservatism [I do think he would more than likely be appalled by the thought], but the emphasis on 'difference' when the real story is similarity, is socially retrograde.