>>10809975Well, seeing as genes and their expression are so complex, it really seems like both.
there may be some innate differences that interact heavily with the environmental influences/exposures as with physiological responses in the body( example, a person with certain genes being at minor risk for anemia if they don't take care of themselves or a species of rabbit that changes fur color with seasonal changes).
Girls may have and slightly easier time developing emotional intelligence and more abstract thinking for example, but it's development is accelerated by the social roles they are given and expected(being moms, communication/being social, having nice, being passive aggressive/emotionally manipulative rather than physically aggressive).
Boys may have a slight propensity for more practical concepts and hand eye coordination but it's development is accelerated by their social roles.
Idk. I think the main thing the feminists and conservatives tend to disagree on is the implication of these things. Does it mean that girls can't do well in math, engineering, the business world, etc. if they study or work hard or be mechanics with the right tutalage? Does it mean they have to be the ones taking car of kids all or even most of the time?
Does it mean that most guys can't be good at kids or develop high emotional intelligence? Does it mean that strict gender roles are required for most people? I think not. At least from what I know about genes and the fact that we haven't even identified any specific ones that could be involved in this like we have for say addiction, or more physical differences between the sexes).
