The Biology of Blame, Part II

In my first post for Psychology Today, Biology and Blame, I focused on efforts to promote awareness of biological contributions to eating disorders as an attempt to mitigate stigma associated with these illnesses. Although increasing understanding of genetic contributions to eating disorders may reduce the extent to which affected individuals are blamed for their illness, embracing biological explanations for group differences when groups are based on biological and social distinctions may contribute to biological reductionism and reduce pressure on society to address social contributions to disorders.

As a specific example, we know that eating disorders are more common in women than in men. We also know that we can understand differences between women and men in terms of sex (a biological distinction) or gender (a social distinction). Historically, biological explanations of "sex" differences have contributed to arguments against women seeking social equality with men and have been used to let society off the hook for differences in pay and professional attainment between men and women. In contrast, a social explanation of "gender" differences tends to support a vision in which men and women can be equal.

What does this mean for understanding differences between men and women and their risk for developing eating disorders? Should we reject biological explanations because these would reflect a kind of biological determinism that would leave us helpless to reduce women's risk for eating disorders? Should we pursue social explanations in order to maintain efforts to reduce social pressures directed at women to attain a dangerously thin ideal of beauty? How does this approach work with attempts to reduce stigma by increasing awareness of the role of biology in the development of eating disorders?

I don't know the answers to these questions, but I do know that there is research supporting the relevance of gonadal hormones (i.e., estrogens, progesterone, testosterone) in understanding the development of eating disorders. This research could contribute to our understanding of why eating disorders are more common in females. I also know that recognizing a biological contribution to sex differences does not mean that we have to accept that difference as immutable. The problem with biological determinism is not biology, it is the determinism. It is the assumption that biological factors are unchangeable (and the implicit assumption that social factors are easily changed). Any established factor will be difficult to change. However, it is impossible to change a factor if we allow ourselves to remain ignorant of its relevance.