I’m not sure, and I’m not sure either what Michael Gurion must be thinking about how we men think, at least based on the evidence he presented. I know I need more grains of salt at this point.

To draw conclusion purely on a neurochemical basis on how men think, as opposed to women, is at most tenuous. Men, as a class, cannot be stereotyped, as it would be for women. I have seen men behave like women, and women behave like men. How can Michael Gurion explain that?

As a man, as I assume it must be for a woman, I prefer the cold comfort of dwelling inside mysteries of how men and women think and behave rather than in flimsy, simplistic,and perhaps outlandish explanations of things that we can never understand.

And if Gurion, remotely, were right, what difference would it make? That would take the fun out of the games that men and women play. The last thing we need is another dose of psychobabble.

However, in the article, I don’t see anything about the number of scans made.

If it’s more than a thousand, I might believe it. If those men are chosen across sexualities, occupations, ages and ethnic origins (and not just hetero white med students), I might believe it. (And, of course, comparable research on women of all kinds must have been done.