The nature vs. nurture debate about gender.

(Third post in a series on the book Matrocracy. Link to first post.)
So-called "gender" feminists assert a blank slate theory: that men and women are inherently the same. Apparent cognitive and behavioral differences between men and women are purely a product of women’s subordination in a repressive patriarchy, they say, and should gradually disappear as women rise to a more equal footing with men.

But if the opposite were true, it could mean that we've been doing feminism all wrong – which could explain a lot about the movement's widespread stall after more than thirty years of trying to realize its promise.

Neuroscience has revealed gender differences in every major part of the brain. Many studies show brain regions that manage emotions, reasoning and even motor control are not the same in men and women. There are also huge gender differences in hormones that affect brain chemistry. One theory asserts that gender differences in brain function and chemistry largely cancel each other out so as to preclude gender differences from being seen in behavior.

In contrast to the feminist model, matrocracy embraces the alternative concept that men and women are inherently different. Culture has not accentuated these natural differences, but instead largely has acted to impose gender sameness in thought and behavior. In this view, the goal of reforming patriarchal institutions to end cultural strictures would not be to eliminate gender differences, but rather to enable women’s unique nature to more fully emerge. Women’s decision making strategies and outcomes are different from those of men historically and currently in power. (See previous post.) Recognition of gender differences is not an impediment to social progress – it is the key to finding solutions to some of humanity’s most difficult problems.
Link to fourth post in the series.