Tuesday, January 03, 2006

MONKEYS ARE VICTIMS OF THE PATRIARCHY TOO?

Male monkeys prefer toy cars, females like dolls

Just like human boys and girls, male monkeys like to play with toy cars while female monkeys prefer dolls, a research project has shown. This intriguing discovery is one of many signs of deep-rooted behavioral differences between the sexes that scientists are exploring with the latest tools of genetics and neuroscience. Researchers report significant differences in the structure and functioning of male and female brains — in humans and in animals — that show up in different behaviors.

The differences apparently date far back in evolutionary history to the time before humans and monkeys separated from their common ancestor some 25 million years ago, according to Gerianne Alexander, a psychologist at Texas A&M University in College Station, who led the experiment. "Human evolution has created two different types of brains designed for equally intelligent behavior," Richard Haier, a neuroscientist at the University of California-Irvine, wrote in the journal NeuroImage.

In the monkey experiment, researchers put a variety of toys in front of 44 male and 44 female vervets, a breed of small African monkeys, and measured the amount of time they spent with each object. Like little boys, some male monkeys moved a toy car along the ground. Like little girls, female monkeys closely inspected a doll's bottom. Males also played with balls while females fancied cooking pots. Both were equally interested in neutral objects such as a picture book and a stuffed dog.

People used to think that boys and girls played differently because of the way they were brought up. Now scientists such as Alexander say a creature's genetic inheritance also plays an important role. "Vervet monkeys, like human beings, show sex differences in toy preferences," Alexander wrote in the journal Evolution and Human Behavior. "Sex-related object preference appeared early in human evolution," she said. Alexander speculated that females of both species prefer dolls because evolution programmed them to care for infants. Males may have evolved toy preferences that involve throwing and moving, skills useful for hunting and finding a mate.

Besides observing behavior from the outside, scientists are using the latest brain-scanning techniques to examine what happens inside people's heads when they're thinking or acting. PET (positron emission tomography) and fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imagery) scans light up in regions of the brain that are most active while performing certain tasks. They've become a key tool of modern brain research.

Many studies have shown that men tend to be better at mathematics and spatial reasoning while women outdo men in verbal and language skills. For example, in a computerized maze-searching experiment, it took females five minutes longer than males to find their way to a goal, according to Scott Mowatt, a psychologist at Wayne State University in Detroit. But women outperformed men in a test of verbal fluency conducted by Wei-li Chang and colleagues at the National Institute of Mental Health in Bethesda, Md.

Haier, the University of California-Irvine neuroscientist, reported a striking difference in the structure of male and female brains. Men, he said, have much more gray matter in areas dedicated to general intelligence. Women, on the other hand, have far more white matter in those areas. Gray matter consists of the clusters of brain cells, or neurons, that process information. White matter refers to the network of specialized cells that support and connect the processing centers. Both are necessary for intelligence. "Men and women apparently achieve similar IQ results with different brain regions," Haier said.

Source



Abuse of Temporary Restraining Orders Endangers Real Victims

On Dec. 15, Santa Fe District Court Judge Daniel Sanchez signed a temporary restraining order against CBS late-night host David Letterman, requiring him to keep his distance from Colleen Nestler. According to Nestler, for more than 10 years Letterman has been sending coded messages over the airwaves that communicated his desire to marry her. (Nestler has also accused TV personalities Regis Philbin and Kelsey Grammer of communicating with her through televised code.) Letterman says he doesn't know the woman.

Nestler's TRO may be ludicrous, but it highlights a no-nonsense debate on the possible misuse of restraining orders. A restraining order is a court order "directing one person not to do something, such as make contact with another person, enter the family home or remove a child from the state." They are usually issued to women in regard to domestic violence, stalking and divorces in which violence is alleged. TROs are "often granted without notice ... until a hearing can be held to determine the propriety of any injunctive relief." Nestler's TRO was granted ex parte, meaning only one party was heard by the judge.

The purpose of a restraining order is to protect someone from a credible threat. But the Nestler case raises questions about whether restraining orders have drifted from their original intent. That permanent restraining orders require a hearing does not reassure skeptics. The judges and courts that issue TROs are the same ones deciding on whether to validate their prior decisions.

Judge Sanchez's reaction to unflattering press coverage is not reassuring, either. According to the newspaper Santa Fe New Mexican, "When asked if he might have made a mistake, Sanchez said 'no.' He also said he had read Nestler's application."

The application accused Letterman of causing mental cruelty, sleep deprivation and bankruptcy. Nestler requested that Letterman not "think of me, and release me from his mental harassment." Sanchez emphasized reading the application because lawyers in his district have alleged he "often doesn't read legal documents submitted." Since issuing a TRO is within a judge's discretion, it is difficult to say which scenario is more disturbing: an informed judge validating Nestler's delusions or a negligent judge not bothering to read what he signs.

Even more disturbing is whether frivolous or unfounded TROs are commonplace. Women's groups maintain that abuse of TROs is rare; they believe the issuance and enforcement of restraining orders must be strengthened to save women's lives. There have been heartbreaking cases. Jessica Gonzales obtained a restraining order limiting her estranged husband's access to their three children. Nevertheless, he murdered the children before being killed by police. In early 2005 Gonzales became a cause célèbre of organizations such as the National Association of Women Lawyers. She attempted to sue the police department for not taking her restraining order seriously. The Supreme Court ruled against her.

By contrast, men's and father's rights groups contend that restraining orders and TROs in particular have become standard paperwork in contentious divorces or cases alleging abuse. They consider many TROs to be merely a strategic move by which one adversary harasses the other or acquires leverage in matters such as child custody.

A litmus test of how vulnerable TROs are to abuse is how easy they are to obtain. Procedures vary from state to state, but the Superior Court of California in Sacramento is typical. The court advises "no filing fees are required. ... [Y]ou must present the application to the clerk no later than 2:45 p.m." The judge will make a decision on a TRO. Then, "you must personally appear at Window 3 of the Family Law filing counter at 4:00 p.m. [a little over an hour later] ... on the same day." The court's Web page advertises a regular, free class on filling out the application offered by the group "Women Escaping a Violent Environment," which advocates for female victims of domestic violence and sexual assault. In Oregon, DivorceNet provides advice on TROs. As in most states, an applicant need only assert a "fear" of violence even if none has occurred. Some applications can be made by telephone.

The seeming ease with which TROs are issued constitutes a problem for those who wish all restraining orders to be taken seriously. Any court order that can be obtained over the phone by stating a fear, or picked up at Window 3 in a little over an hour, trivializes the process. But a TRO is not trivial. It is a legal constraint upon another human being's freedom. It should be issued only in the presence of a real threat. False or frivolous applications should be viewed in the same manner as are false police reports.

The order against Letterman was lifted on Tuesday when a New Mexico judge ruled in his favor, but his prominence has placed him in a unique position to stir debate on the use and abuse of restraining orders. In the '90s he was stalked by a schizophrenic fan who committed suicide after spending years in prison for breaking into Letterman's home. Earlier this year, his baby son was targeted in an unsuccessful kidnapping-for-ransom scheme. It is unconscionable that an obsessed fan has obtained court approval to harass him further.

Nevertheless, I hope Letterman's legal vindication is not based on the technicalities advanced so far by his lawyers, technicalities such as the contention that the New Mexico court lacks jurisdiction. I hope his victory is based on the principle that all restraining orders must meet legal standards of fairness and evidence if they are to demand respect.

Source

No comments: