The Female Brain

The Epilogue and appendices expand upon topics not covered in the text, but relevant to the female brain. Brizendine reasserts her intentions, which she first announced in the introduction, explaining how the book can be useful to modern women. However, as with the rest of the test, she addresses a limited cisgender and heterosexual audience following a traditional lifestyle.

Brizendine suggests that her biological essentialism comes from her strong sense of morality and deep commitment to scientific rigor: “In writing this book I have struggled with two voices in my head—one is the scientific truth, the other is political correctness. I have chosen to emphasize scientific truth over political correctness even though scientific truths may not always be welcome” (210). This statement is intended to inspire the reader to trust Brizendine, but it is misleading and has been directly criticized as a blatant lie by Cordelia Fine, given Brizendine’s unethical manipulation of source material. The statement misrepresents the scientific process: Brizendine suggests that the studies she references are “scientific truth,” as if the conclusions she and others have drawn from individual studies are objective facts. However, in scientific research, studies and interpretations of data are not objective scientific truths until the same results are found across a breadth of scientific research, which is not the case for many of the studies cited throughout the text.

The final lines of the Epilogue are a call to action to create a more egalitarian world. Brizendine claims that female humans have been expected to adapt to masculine norms, and she argues that the world needs to be structured vice versa, too, with male humans adapting to female needs to create social change. The Epilogue thus reflects the feminist message at the core of The Female Brain, which posits that female humans have long been neglected by the patriarchy but that the oppression is surmountable.

The first appendix more deeply explores menopausal hormone therapy (HT), which was first introduced in Chapter 7. Hormone therapy is a controversial medical topic, as results from studies on such treatments are varied. As Brizendine points out, multiple studies—including those not directly aimed at studying HT in menopausal females—have found correlating positive effects, such as estrogen’s boost of the circulatory system or testosterone’s contribution to muscle and bone health. However, other studies have shown negative effects, such as the 2002 study that found an increased risk of severe medical issues. Brizendine also notes the cancer risks associated with estrogen-only therapy for people with uteruses, and the reduced benefits of estrogen when progesterone, which is necessary to combat estrogen-related cancer risks, is present. According to The North American Menopause Society (NAMS), not much has changed in regard to medical opinions on HT since the publication of The Female Brain. The medical community acknowledges both the benefits and the risks, which also include an increased risk of blood clots; they also acknowledge that not enough is known about hormone therapy. As such, each person’s risk factors and needs should be taken into consideration by a qualified medical professional, matching Brizendine’s advice (“Menopause Topics: Hormone Therapy.” NAMS).

Appendices 2 and 3 address subtopics which do not appear in the main body of the text. Although Brizendine explores depression multiple times and examines the neurological changes that result from giving birth, she does not address postpartum depression in her section on the “mommy brain.” The concept of postpartum depression does not align with Brizendine’s perspective of the neurological changes that accompany motherhood, which she presents as wholly beneficial. Brizendine acknowledges the stigma of postpartum depression, suggesting “Women are ashamed because they are expected to be so happy at the birth of their child” (236). Her emphasis on the idea that the stigma should be removed becomes unintentionally ironic, as Brizendine chooses to address postpartum symptoms only as an addendum to the book rather than incorporating the condition into her larger discussion on post-birth neurology. This positioning of the discussion makes it feels like an afterthought or an exception rather than a relatively common experience, possibly perpetuating the stigma rather than combating it.

A brief discussion on non-heterosexuality appears in the final appendix, where Brizendine supports the widely accepted view that sexual orientation is biological rather than a social construct. Although she shares a few relevant studies, Brizendine does not make declarative statements, reflecting her lack of expertise in the connection between neurology and sexual orientation. By separating queer sexuality from the larger discussion on female brains, Brizendine reinforces the idea that such individuals are other and implies that such individuals do not have “normal” female brains. Further, Brizendine plays into stereotypes and biases that suggest lesbians are all necessarily more masculinized, or that an excess of masculinity is connected to being a lesbian. Other cultural biases against the LGBTQ+ community are present, such as the erasure of bisexual men, who face a particular pressure to claim that they are either gay or heterosexual. This, along with the other biases, result in the overall text’s exclusionary tone and its perpetuation of damaging sex stereotypes.