Our brains are gendered...

What you think about how you think.
Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26776
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby Matthew Ellard » Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:48 pm

OlegTheBatty wrote: More men may have hunted than gathered, and more women may have gathered than hunted, but both did both. Women fought in battles, too.
That is a fair comment.

I was trying to remember what the evidence was, for sexual division of labour in early humans, other than observing modern day hunter gatherers. I came up somewhat, empty handed. :lol:

I sort of remembered that you only see male hands in early human art work, ( not productive labour), but that fell apart when I checked the Venus of Willendorf. ( It has a child's fingerprint). It looks as though I might have to withdraw my "fact" until I can check my own evidence.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby Nikki Nyx » Thu Aug 10, 2017 1:29 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:I was trying to remember what the evidence was, for sexual division of labour in early humans, other than observing modern day hunter gatherers. I came up somewhat, empty handed. :lol:
Here's one possible such division:
Archaeological evidence exists for Mesolithic shamanism. The oldest known shaman grave in the world is located in the Czech Republic at Dolni Vestonice (National Geographic No 174 October 1988). This grave site was evidence of a female shaman.

In November 2008, researchers from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem announced the discovery of a 12,000-year-old site in Israel that is perceived as one of the earliest known shaman burials. The elderly woman had been arranged on her side, with her legs apart and folded inward at the knee. Ten large stones were placed on the head, pelvis and arms. Among her unusual grave goods were 50 complete tortoise shells, a human foot, and certain body parts from animals such as a cow tail and eagle wings. Other animal remains came from a boar, leopard, and two martens. "It seems that the woman … was perceived as being in a close relationship with these animal spirits", researchers noted. LINK

Apparently, there are exceptions to the hunter-gatherer division of labor:
Though not every hunter-gatherer population pinpoints females to gathering and males to hunting (most notably the Aeta and Ju'/hoansi), the norm of most current populations divide the roles of labor in this manner. Natural selection is more likely to favor male reproductive strategies that stress mating effort and female strategies that emphasize parental investment. As a result, women have been relegated to the low-risk task of gathering vegetation and underground storage organs that are rich in energy to provide for themselves and offspring. Since women provide a reliable source of caloric intake, men are able to afford a higher risk of failure by hunting animals. LINK
The link to the Aeta states that their female hunting groups are nearly twice as successful as their male hunting groups. :mrgreen:

There's also been an alternate theory proposed:
This classic theory of natural selection positing a difference in male and female reproductive strategies has recently been reexamined, with an alternate theory being proposed that promiscuity was encouraged among women and men alike, causing uncertainty among males of the paternity of their offspring, allowing for group cooperation in raising all offspring due to the possibility that any child could be the descendant of a male, similar to observations of the closest relative of humans, the bonobo. (same link)

Additionally, recent research has hypothesized that the division of labor is relatively recent:
Moreover, recent archaeological research done by the anthropologist and archaeologist Steven Kuhn from the University of Arizona suggests that the sexual division of labor did not exist prior to the Upper Paleolithic (50,000 and 10,000 years ago) and developed relatively recently in human history. The sexual division of labor may have arisen to allow humans to acquire food and other resources more efficiently. (same link)
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11138
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Aug 10, 2017 2:57 am

Excuse me?= = = = = = = Child birth, feeding, and raising?

....................and it ripples out from there. Eons of high sexual dimorphism until the brain got powerful enough to smudge some of the effort/time/specialization involved. But it still goes on today.

Why is the obvious being skipped over?

The famous "evidence" I still see being reported on is feminist single moms trying to raise their kiddies gender free but the boys still go for trucks and the girls still go for dolls. Again.....not 100%....just a tendency. That tendency comes from the genes and is expressed in abilities, attitudes, interests and so froth (sic) varying with the selected acitivy.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26776
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:09 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:....... but the boys still go for trucks and the girls still go for dolls. .

Gi Joe Commander 7.jpg

I'm not 100% sure of the sexual division before puberty.

It is my gut feeling that, at school, boys and girls play together but seem to separate just before puberty and then come back together again as potential sexual partners. I think this is hard wired into our heads.


Dolls are really interesting. I watch children play with dolls and talk on the doll's behalf. I think this has something to do with practicing language. It is interesting that there was a child's finger print on the 25,0000 year old Venue of Willendorf.
Venus.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11138
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:20 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:I'm not 100% sure of the sexual division before puberty.

Well.......that should be where it is most demonstrated, ie: before cultural/societal influences overcome the home environment? I assume the feminists consciously trying to be gender neutral are doing a fair enough job? An assortment of toys......not all trucks or all dolls for instance?

Lets assume that is true.

Now Matt: if it was statistically the case that a significant number of boys played with trucks and not dolls and the reverse for girls....would that be worthy evidence of anything?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby Nikki Nyx » Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:56 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Excuse me?= = = = = = = Child birth, feeding, and raising?

....................and it ripples out from there. Eons of high sexual dimorphism until the brain got powerful enough to smudge some of the effort/time/specialization involved. But it still goes on today.

Why is the obvious being skipped over?

The famous "evidence" I still see being reported on is feminist single moms trying to raise their kiddies gender free but the boys still go for trucks and the girls still go for dolls. Again.....not 100%....just a tendency. That tendency comes from the genes and is expressed in abilities, attitudes, interests and so froth (sic) varying with the selected acitivy.

Childbirth and breastfeeding obviously can't be done my men, but men are equally competent at raising a child, IMO, given a mother and father who both have an equal desire to do so. I was thankful I was able to stay home with my daughter until she was nearly five years old; leaving her to go back to work was incredibly difficult for me.

But it's my opinion that at least one parent should be home with a child during the first few years. I'm sure some feminists would call me a gender traitor, but sticking a newborn baby into daycare at two months old is a self-centered thing to do. What actual raising are you doing in that situation, when you're away for most of the baby's waking hours? How can you nurture your own child when you barely spend any time with him or her? It's guaranteed that no daycare is giving your child the attention you would, teaching the things you would, and caring with the depth you would. It's the child that suffers in this situation. (And, as I said, this isn't just directed toward mothers. Make a decision, but one parent should be home. A child is a lifetime commitment, not just after work or when you're not tired.)

I was a single mom, but I was manifestly uninterested in ensuring my daughter was raised "gender-free," whatever that means. As if gender is important to a four-year-old. What I was interested in is ensuring she didn't have toys that were not interactive, just a waste of time. She wasn't interested in dolls, but loved the dollhouse I built for her (from a kit). Mostly, she enjoyed activities that required her to use her imagination, like playing school, building things with Legos, drawing and painting, and making blanket forts for pirate ships/spaceships/etc.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26776
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:58 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote: Now Matt: if it was statistically the case that a significant number of boys played with trucks and not dolls and the reverse for girls....would that be worthy evidence of anything?

It all depends if we are examining cultural influences or innate genetics. Obviously there were no toy trucks 2000 years ago. I guess we could look at children's toys in ancient cultures and see if we can see any evidence if there was sexual differentiation back then.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10760
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby xouper » Thu Aug 10, 2017 4:03 am

Image

That reminds me of an old joke:

Mom takes her daughter to the store to buy some more stuff for her daughter's Barbie collection.

They are in the doll section and Mom grabs a Ken doll off the shelf and asks, "How about this one?"

Daughter says, "No thanks, I don't want a Ken doll."

Mom: "But honey, they are part of a set, Barbie comes with Ken."

Daughter: "No Mom, you don't seem to understand, Barbie comes with GI Joe."

:yahoo:

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29477
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby Gord » Thu Aug 10, 2017 4:21 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:...but that fell apart when I checked the Venus of Willendorf. ( It has a child's fingerprint)....

Do you mean the Venus of Dolní Věstonice?

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=15129276

Résumé / Abstract

The Venus of Dolní Věstonice I (Gravettian, 25, 000 B.P.) was discovered on July 13th, 1925 in Dolní Věstonice, South Moravia (Czechoslovakia), during Moravian Museum excavations. The figurine, made from fired clay, about 11.5 cm high, represents a woman with a plump figure. More than 75 years after its discovery, a fingerprint on the left side of the figurine back was analyzed. The dimensions of the fingerprint are 3x5 mm and it is possible to recognize seven lines. The structure was identified as a negative of human friction skin based on the minutiae, ridge breadth, and other markers. Epidermal ridge breadth correlates with the age during growth period of an individual. We elaborated the original method for age estimation from fingerprint ridge breadth and used it to estimate the age of the fingerprint owner. The ridge breadth varies from 0.34 to 0.43 mm with an average of 0.37 mm. The estimation of age is 11.13 years. With respect to the preciseness and limits of the method the age of the fingerprint maker was somewhere between 7 and 15 years. This estimation is valid if the age/ridge breadth relation in the Paleolithic was similar to the present day one. It is also important to realize that the maker of the fingerprint may not be identical with the creator of the artifact. It is quite hard to believe that such a figurine as the Venus of Dolní Věstonice I could have been a work of beginner or even of a child. However, this approach has great potential to specify social circumstances of ceramics production.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3307
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby ElectricMonk » Thu Aug 10, 2017 4:25 am

What is "traditional" is pretty much irrelevant when it comes to humans.

What sets us apart is how little is pre-programmed into our behavior compared to other animals. That is why it takes newborns so incredibly long to become even a little bit self-sufficient.
We have every reason to assume that if we transported a Homo Sapiens group from 200,000 years ago into today, newborn children of their would grow up and learn indistinguishably from our offspring.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29477
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby Gord » Thu Aug 10, 2017 4:26 am

Nikki Nyx wrote:Childbirth and breastfeeding obviously can't be done my men

I hear some men can lactate. Not my mine and not your men, but maybe somewhere out there there is a man who can breastfeed.

*shudder*

Sorry. I just remembered an episode of Family Guy....
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11138
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Aug 10, 2017 4:39 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote: Now Matt: if it was statistically the case that a significant number of boys played with trucks and not dolls and the reverse for girls....would that be worthy evidence of anything?

It all depends if we are examining cultural influences or innate genetics. Obviously there were no toy trucks 2000 years ago. I guess we could look at children's toys in ancient cultures and see if we can see any evidence if there was sexual differentiation back then.

Yes.........that is the point I am clearly aimed at. Seems to me you are avoiding the question. TODAY==>BOYS TRUCKS, GIRLS DOLLS. Is that worthy of showing sexual dimorphism or not?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26776
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:15 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote: Yes.........that is the point I am clearly aimed at. Seems to me you are avoiding the question. TODAY==>BOYS TRUCKS, GIRLS DOLLS. Is that worthy of showing sexual dimorphism or not?


What question am I avoiding? Can you write it in normal English?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11138
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:24 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote: Yes.........that is the point I am clearly aimed at. Seems to me you are avoiding the question. TODAY==>BOYS TRUCKS, GIRLS DOLLS. Is that worthy of showing sexual dimorphism or not?


What question am I avoiding? Can you write it in normal English?

Right there. Is that worthy of showing sexual dimorphism or not? so far, you have strongly implied no because it is too "modern" or some such dither.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29477
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby Gord » Thu Aug 10, 2017 11:35 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote: Yes.........that is the point I am clearly aimed at. Seems to me you are avoiding the question. TODAY==>BOYS TRUCKS, GIRLS DOLLS. Is that worthy of showing sexual dimorphism or not?


What question am I avoiding? Can you write it in normal English?

Mine: viewtopic.php?f=32&t=28490&start=40#p596692 :P
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26776
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:26 am

Gord wrote: What question am I avoiding? Can you write it in normal English?

Mine: viewtopic.php?f=32&t=28490&start=40#p596692 :P[/quote]

I apologise to Gord for that. Gord stated the child's fingerprint was on Venus of Dolní Věstonice and not the Venus of Willendorf, as I said, and Gord is correct.

My venus was carved and cannot have fingerprints. Gord's venus is ceramic and can have fingerprints. I should have remembered that.
:D

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29477
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby Gord » Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:49 am

(Can we stop talking about our venuses, please?)
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7642
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby TJrandom » Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:10 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:... TODAY==>BOYS TRUCKS, GIRLS DOLLS. Is that worthy of showing sexual dimorphism or not?


I thought that was Walmart marketing....

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11138
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:46 am

TJ==it would be if a "Roll Back" tag were attached.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:37 pm

Gord wrote:
Nikki Nyx wrote:Childbirth and breastfeeding obviously can't be done my men

I hear some men can lactate. Not my mine and not your men, but maybe somewhere out there there is a man who can breastfeed.

*shudder*

Sorry. I just remembered an episode of Family Guy....
I've seen every episode of Family Guy! Love that show. Men who lactate...I guess there are always exceptions to the rule, and I would guess that a genetic mutation provided them with mammary glands, but not localized fat to actually give them breasts. Unless they also had moobs.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11138
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:41 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote:I've seen every episode of Family Guy! Love that show. Men who lactate...I guess there are always exceptions to the rule, and I would guess that a genetic mutation provided them with mammary glands, but not localized fat to actually give them breasts. Unless they also had moobs.


Depends on what the rule is.......or how you formulate the rule? Yes...genetic mutation required if there are only two highly differentiated sexes. No...if the sexes are seen more on a continuum with higher occurences at either extreme?

Now....we all know that "nipples" is a proof that god is not a perfect designer, an evolutionary artifact, and that a good number of men do get "breast" cancer...although that might be just cancer in that nipple area? But by nipples being an artifact of embryo development.....I wonder if mammary glands go right along with that....ie: more than just nipples? Is the breast cancer that comprises some 20% of the total breast cancers actually of male mammary glands?==>or not.

Yes, Family Guy has lots to teach us.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11138
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:12 pm

"19 Women Leading Math and Physics"

I wasn't going to post this because such exceptions are inherently part of the discussion already.

But read the punch line of the first paragraph. Made me laugh.

http://nautil.us/blog/19-women-leading- ... yndication
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:13 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Depends on what the rule is.......or how you formulate the rule? Yes...genetic mutation required if there are only two highly differentiated sexes. No...if the sexes are seen more on a continuum with higher occurences at either extreme?

Now....we all know that "nipples" is a proof that god is not a perfect designer, an evolutionary artifact, and that a good number of men do get "breast" cancer...although that might be just cancer in that nipple area? But by nipples being an artifact of embryo development.....I wonder if mammary glands go right along with that....ie: more than just nipples? Is the breast cancer that comprises some 20% of the total breast cancers actually of male mammary glands?==>or not.

Yes, Family Guy has lots to teach us.
My daughter told me this morning that someone put together the study I posted in the OP plus the other study which compared the sizes of the various brain regions in men and women, then came to the ridiculous conclusion that there are no gay people, only transgendered people who won't admit it.

Statistically (and I can only find comparable statistics from 2011 for the US):
• 3.5% of the population is openly lesbian, gay, or bisexual
• 0.3% of the population is transgender
For that person's theory to be factual, we would have to accept that 3.8% of the population carries a serious genetic mutation. The rate of autism is only 1.47%, and that's for the entire spectrum of disorders from high functioning to completely dependent on another's care.

Further, we would have to consider that 3.5% only includes people who are openly lesbian, gay, or bisexual, not people who are closeted or who are bisexual but currently in a heterosexual relationship. We could probably double that percentage at a minimum...and probably even triple it when we consider human sexuality is a spectrum, not an either/or proposition. It's even more ridiculous to think that 7% or 21% of the population is carrying a genetic mutation of that severity...and far more likely that the 0.3% is closer to reality, and that this idiot is just another homophobe misusing science in an attempt to prove his personal bias.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:14 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:"19 Women Leading Math and Physics"

I wasn't going to post this because such exceptions are inherently part of the discussion already.

But read the punch line of the first paragraph. Made me laugh.

http://nautil.us/blog/19-women-leading- ... yndication
Yikes.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11138
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:15 pm

"serious genetic mutation"==is a social construct. As is gender. Without social constructs........ a whole lot of science would be "data" without meaning.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7642
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby TJrandom » Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:54 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote: ... we would have to accept that 3.8% of the population carries a serious genetic mutation. ...


Or that the other 96.2% carry a serious genetic mutation.... ;)

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10532
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby OlegTheBatty » Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:35 pm

If it doesn't qualify as a serious genetic mutation if it doesn't affect the ability to reproduce. From what I've read, fecundity is not affected by orientation or gender dysphoria.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11138
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:42 pm

OlegTheBatty wrote:If it doesn't qualify as a serious genetic mutation if it doesn't affect the ability to reproduce. From what I've read, fecundity is not affected by orientation or gender dysphoria.

I've read just the opposite....that the gays are more fecund. Its why that trait has not been bred out of our species. Are the more base creatures "gay" because they copulate with the wrong "thing?" Not by definition I think. Screwing anything that moves....is not gay.......in my book......... that is not a gay book.......... I don't think.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10532
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby OlegTheBatty » Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:53 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
OlegTheBatty wrote:If it doesn't qualify as a serious genetic mutation if it doesn't affect the ability to reproduce. From what I've read, fecundity is not affected by orientation or gender dysphoria.

I've read just the opposite....that the gays are more fecund. Its why that trait has not been bred out of our species. Are the more base creatures "gay" because they copulate with the wrong "thing?" Not by definition I think. Screwing anything that moves....is not gay.......in my book......... that is not a gay book.......... I don't think.


It's the gay males' sisters who appear to be more fecund. Gay male fertility doesn't matter much. It is the female of the species that determines reproductive rates, even in humans.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11138
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Aug 11, 2017 8:01 pm

Oleg: so you are agreeing with me? and not with what you first posted???? Or what?????????

Glad to know that reproductive rates only involve the female. Takes the responsibility off me.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10532
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby OlegTheBatty » Fri Aug 11, 2017 9:27 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Oleg: so you are agreeing with me? and not with what you first posted???? Or what?????????

Glad to know that reproductive rates only involve the female. Takes the responsibility off me.


a sister shares a lot of genes with her gay bro, so the net effect, even if bro doesn't sire any bratlings, is most of bro's genes getting passed on. In effect, bro's genes are not deselected.

You were almost right, I was merely fine-tuning. If you are seeing a contradiction, you are likely not understanding something.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11138
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Aug 11, 2017 9:29 pm

More than some...........but you still didn't answer the base question: is fecundity unrelated to the gay or not?

Note: so far....you are kinda posting as if gay only applied to males. I know..........I had to unlearn that childhood prejudice myself.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sat Aug 12, 2017 3:49 pm

OlegTheBatty wrote:If it doesn't qualify as a serious genetic mutation if it doesn't affect the ability to reproduce. From what I've read, fecundity is not affected by orientation or gender dysphoria.
Well, it is in the sense that someone who is gay or lesbian won't have sex with the opposite gender. Bit difficult to reproduce without doing so. :P
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11138
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Aug 12, 2017 5:10 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote:
OlegTheBatty wrote:If it doesn't qualify as a serious genetic mutation if it doesn't affect the ability to reproduce. From what I've read, fecundity is not affected by orientation or gender dysphoria.
Well, it is in the sense that someone who is gay or lesbian won't have sex with the opposite gender. Bit difficult to reproduce without doing so. :P

I don't know for sure, assume Oleg does, that "the facts of the matter are" that gays may not have as much hetero sex, but the hetero sex they do have produces more gays. thats why across time and culture, the gay population stays at around 6%? Its NOT bred out because of non-reproducing. Can make you scratch your head, if not anything else?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sat Aug 12, 2017 6:01 pm

Population control? It's not very effective, though, is it?
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7642
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby TJrandom » Sat Aug 12, 2017 6:01 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Nikki Nyx wrote:
OlegTheBatty wrote:If it doesn't qualify as a serious genetic mutation if it doesn't affect the ability to reproduce. From what I've read, fecundity is not affected by orientation or gender dysphoria.
Well, it is in the sense that someone who is gay or lesbian won't have sex with the opposite gender. Bit difficult to reproduce without doing so. :P

I don't know for sure, assume Oleg does, that "the facts of the matter are" that gays may not have as much hetero sex, but the hetero sex they do have produces more gays. thats why across time and culture, the gay population stays at around 6%? Its NOT bred out because of non-reproducing. Can make you scratch your head, if not anything else?



Quite doubtful that `gays begat gays`, I searched – and found this. I am sill doubtful, and note that this research came out of Kansas (apologies to the researcher if I am wrong on this).

I would point out that a higher incidence of `accepting` a gay outlook for 20somethings in a gay-parent household seems only normal in comparison to gay-hating parent households.

Someone with a real interest might try to look at the data.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sat Aug 12, 2017 6:15 pm

I would think that "higher incidence" probably has more to do with acceptance of sexual orientation than anything else. There are still many families that refuse to accept anything other than strict heterosexuality in their children.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11138
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:05 pm

I see no reason at all that "gay lifestyle" could not be a matter of choice for quite a few. Those more neutral than those hard wired to be more normative. Nothing wrong with that. pros and cons. Its an individual recognition.

I don't see how the acceptance of life style would affect the presence of the trait in society/species. If so....its more again that social construct issue than an issue of dna? If dna based homosexuality is not based on increased fecundity of gays...then that should mean that producing gay is a natural function of reproduction...kind of like a wild card that is constantly being produced "in case its needed." Or, maybe "good" for the gene pool as a whole? Did gays create everything that advanced our culture until recent times while the normative hetero's were out hunting?? Could have? Probably more a mix of everything???

Can't we all just get along?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:22 pm

My daughter brought up the idea of genetic intervention, initially for the purpose of correcting for heritable diseases and mutations, but then wondered, given human nature, where the line would be drawn. She pointed out, correctly in my opinion, that Beethoven's compositions might be quite different had he not been deaf, that Van Gogh might not have been the genius he was without depression, and that, since we don't know what inspires creativity, we might well be engineering it out of the human race if we're not careful...in the name of perfection.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10532
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Our brains are gendered...

Postby OlegTheBatty » Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:34 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Nikki Nyx wrote:
OlegTheBatty wrote:If it doesn't qualify as a serious genetic mutation if it doesn't affect the ability to reproduce. From what I've read, fecundity is not affected by orientation or gender dysphoria.
Well, it is in the sense that someone who is gay or lesbian won't have sex with the opposite gender. Bit difficult to reproduce without doing so. :P

I don't know for sure, assume Oleg does, that "the facts of the matter are" that gays may not have as much hetero sex, but the hetero sex they do have produces more gays. thats why across time and culture, the gay population stays at around 6%? Its NOT bred out because of non-reproducing. Can make you scratch your head, if not anything else?


I've not seen anywhere where gay men sire more gays than straight men do. The few references I've seen say there is no difference. None of that referred to studies; it was just bloggers blogging.

It would stand to reason, though because there is no gay gene, it s a combination of genetics and epigenetics - possibly changes in mom's reproductive chemistry from pregnancy to pregnancy, as later born children are more likely to be homosexual than first borns.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero


Return to “Brain, Mind, & Consciousness”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest