Fine explores the boundaries between fair criticism and politicization of conflicts in the neuroscience of sex differences, pointing to ways in which the academic community can facilitate the former while protecting against the latter.

Using a multimodal approach, Mohr et al. ask how online women’s brain health campaigns position women as specifically at risk of developing Alzheimer's disease.

Shiralli et al. reveal novel patterns of gender-related stereotyping, with some corresponding to sex designated at birth and others corresponding to current gender identification. 

In this book chapter, Bluhm explores the nature of health, illness and disease in the philosophy of medicine in the context of feminist bioethics.

Schmitz explores the intersectional dimension of realizations and visions of neuro-technological developments, which she names TechnoBrainBodies-in-Cultures. 

How different are men and women's brains? The question has been explored for decades, but a new study led by neuroscientist Lise Eliot shows that the answer is: hardly at all. See the Tweetorial.

Lockhart argues that historical revisionism is a key means of establishing authority for scientists who advocate “essential sex differences,” undermining the credibility of their claims. A NeuroGenderings Book Club pick 2021

Rippon unpacks the stereotypes that bombard us from our earliest moments and shows how these messages mold our ideas of ourselves and even shape our brains. A NeuroGenderings Book Club pick for 2020.

Drawing on astonishing real-life cases and a probing analysis of centuries of scientific research, Fausto-Sterling demonstrates how scientists have historically politicized the body.

Drawing on the latest scientific evidence, including the groundbreaking results of her own studies, Joel explains that every human brain is a unique mosaic of "male" and "female" features. A NeuroGenderings Book Club pick for 2020.

Peragine et al. explore the impact of ovarian milieu on mental rotation of transgender men. They report that visuospatial ability of transgender men may not be sex- or gender-typical and is hormone-responsive.

Joel reviews reviews the relations between sex and brain in light of the binary conceptualization of these relations and the challenges posed to it by the ‘mosaic’ hypothesis.

Jacobson and Joel report that outside the clinical setting, there is a range of gender and sexuality experiences and no correlation between sexuality and gender identity. 

In their paper in NeuroImage, "Beyond “sex prediction”: estimating and interpreting multivariate sex differences and similarities in the brain," Sanchis-Segura and colleagues show why it's misleading to talk about "male" and "female" brains.

Sex/gender differences in the human brain attract attention far beyond the neuroscience community. Rippon et al. argue that researchers studying human female–male brain difference need to assume greater responsibility for the accurate communication of their findings.

The results of Alon et al. do not support the existence of ‘female’ and ‘male’ brain phenotypes but are consistent with other lines of evidence suggesting that sex category explains a very small part of the variability in human brain structure.

Fitsch and other members of the NeuroGenderings Network explore how we express solidarity and also hold ourselves accountable at the crossroads of science and social justice at this moment in history.

Fine and Sanchis-Segura explore the usefulness of the well-known and hotly contested categories of “male brain” and “female brain."

Fine et al. provide an excellent guide for academics, journalists, parents, gender diversity advocates, social justice warriors, tweeters, Facebookers, and everyone else.

Roy investigates science as feminism at the lab bench, bringing insights from feminist theory together with lessons learned from bacteria, subcloning, and synthetic biology. A NeuroGenderings Book Club pick for 2020.

Rippon outlines a temporal framework linking brain development to key stages of gender processing and of children’s endorsement of gender stereotypes in science.

Saguy et al. argue that gender ideology—the set of beliefs about the proper order of society in terms of the roles women and men should fill—is shaped by the way people think about gender differences as expressions of a predetermined biology.

Eliot takes a critical look at current assumptions about gender differences in aggression and their neural basis.

We are very pleased to announce our special issue in Frontiers, which was much inspired by the Neurogenderings Network Meeting in 2020 at the Lorentz Center in Leiden.

In an analysis of published studies from a range of biological specialties, Garcia-Sifuentes and Maney show that when data are reported by sex, critical statistical analyses are often missing and the findings are likely to be reported in misleading ways.

Drawing parallels between the fields of psychology and neuroscience, Duchesne and Kaiser Trujillo explore the potential benefits and risks of advancing an intersectionality-informed neurofeminism.

Rebecca Jordan-Young and Katrina Karkazis focus on what T does in six domains: reproduction, aggression, risk-taking, power, sports, and parenting. A NeuroGenderings Book Club pick for 2020.

In two papers (one, two), Bentley et al. explore the multifaceted interactions that shape brain structures, function, and behavior relating to sex/gender. 

Bryant et al. explore neuroimaging data, propose methodological interventions, and examine similarities and differences in brain structure between women and men, with the goal of greater transparency in sex/gender neuroscience.