|
On October 17 2013 06:42 Slayer91 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 06:40 ComaDose wrote:
If a boy grows up being taught that fighting is cool and tough and feelings are for girls. then he prefers to write about being tough rather than feelings, dont you think its a pretty big stretch to assume biology has something to do with that? But the thing is, thats the assumption. I was never told any such thing, I imagine most people don,t its just you're drawn to it naturally.
Oh, bullshit. I will almost 100% call bullshit on this. Even if your parents never sat you down and said "you have to be a tough dude who hides his feelings", you grew up around male role models who were action heroes. And even if you didn't, you hung out with guy friends who did and acted like that so you grew to be like that. Or your aunt gave you a comic book for a gift because "that's what boys get" and you learned about super heroes instead of princesses.
Stop.
|
On October 17 2013 06:23 Requizen wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 06:20 Slayer91 wrote:
Why not? If male and female bodies and brains are different, they should act differently, and be happier under different circumstances. That's... what? Your sex (physical body parts) don't have any bearing on your brain's makeup. That's like making different medicine for women because "they have weak womanly hearts, unlike men". I think you just can't wrap your head around the fact that your identity can be different than the plumbing you have going on downstairs. oh good Lord I stepped into this conversation. Anyone have pictures of puppies?
The brains actually are made up differently. The majority is the same way, but there are differing details in biochemical processes.
There was an interesting study a few years back done on people identifying as the other gender "even though" their chromosomes showed a textbook clear example of XY (or XX but I think there were no biological women in this particular study but I'm trying to keep it PC here to reduce buttwoundery) and linking it to these exact differences in brain processes, IIRC there was a statistically significant correlation.
I wish I could remember details.
I do remember that studies in this field were stopped because of buttwounded feminists going on a rampage about this being incarnate evil (this was during the time when gender mainstreaming was the cool thing to do), which is how I heard about it in the first place.
There also is a lot of medicine that's sex-specific. And with a lot, I don't actually mean a lot, but it exists. Mostly when it comes to hormones, diseases caused by hormones, stuff like that.
Fact is, there are more differences than just people's "plumbing" and people ignoring that are pretty bigoted and need to be educated.
|
On October 17 2013 06:44 Requizen wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 06:42 Slayer91 wrote:On October 17 2013 06:40 ComaDose wrote:
If a boy grows up being taught that fighting is cool and tough and feelings are for girls. then he prefers to write about being tough rather than feelings, dont you think its a pretty big stretch to assume biology has something to do with that? But the thing is, thats the assumption. I was never told any such thing, I imagine most people don,t its just you're drawn to it naturally. Oh, bullshit. I will almost 100% call bullshit on this. Even if your parents never sat you down and said "you have to be a tough dude who hides his feelings", you grew up around male role models who were action heroes. And even if you didn't, you hung out with guy friends who did and acted like that so you grew to be like that. Or your aunt gave you a comic book for a gift because "that's what boys get" and you learned about super heroes instead of princesses. Stop.
Male role model? sure. Friends? wat. aunt gave me comic books? I had 7 older siblings, books and comic books all over the house. I always didn't care about presents because I never cared for material things like toys after I was like 7-8. Disney movies have both princesses and heroes.
But I'm sure you know more about my upbringing from across the atlantic ocean based on speculation and what supports your argument more than I do.
So say that I identified with the male part didn't have an effect, that's bullshit, sure. But I would say VASTLY overblown is the effect of nuture. (Maybe It's because nature side was vastly overblown before, who knows) I was told that when I was a kid I would cry constantly in a shopping centre and be calm as soon as I was brought outside to look at cars and such.
|
Teut is making an actual point and you guys keep lumping it into the "gender" agenda.
On the INTJ or whatever your dichtomies are E/I and F/T etc
If you identify with neither E or I does that make the INTJ test useless and nonsepecific and bigoted and w/e? Its still useful as a metric for a lot of people, and even for those it doesn't apply to the spectrum is still on that exists.
|
United States15536 Posts
On October 17 2013 06:48 xes wrote:
Teut is making an actual point and you guys keep lumping it into the "gender" agenda.
On the INTJ or whatever your dichtomies are E/I and F/T etc
If you identify with neither E or I does that make the INTJ test useless and nonsepecific and bigoted and w/e? Its still useful as a metric for a lot of people, and even for those it doesn't apply to the spectrum is still on that exists.
I think we acknowledged a couple pages back that no one had a problem with created binaries for a specific purpose (the morality of this in some cases is a different issue). This secondary discussion spawned off a long time ago about the fallacy of men/women as a true binary.
|
Oh common who can honestly believe that boys are biologically born to enjoy automotive machinery wat.
|
On October 17 2013 06:47 Slayer91 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 06:44 Requizen wrote:On October 17 2013 06:42 Slayer91 wrote:On October 17 2013 06:40 ComaDose wrote:
If a boy grows up being taught that fighting is cool and tough and feelings are for girls. then he prefers to write about being tough rather than feelings, dont you think its a pretty big stretch to assume biology has something to do with that? But the thing is, thats the assumption. I was never told any such thing, I imagine most people don,t its just you're drawn to it naturally. Oh, bullshit. I will almost 100% call bullshit on this. Even if your parents never sat you down and said "you have to be a tough dude who hides his feelings", you grew up around male role models who were action heroes. And even if you didn't, you hung out with guy friends who did and acted like that so you grew to be like that. Or your aunt gave you a comic book for a gift because "that's what boys get" and you learned about super heroes instead of princesses. Stop. Male role model? sure. Friends? wat. aunt gave me comic books? I had 7 older siblings, books and comic books all over the house. I always didn't care about presents because I never cared for material things like toys after I was like 7-8. Disney movies have both princesses and heroes. But I'm sure you know more about my upbringing from across the atlantic ocean based on speculation and what supports your argument more than I do. So say that I identified with the male part didn't have an effect, that's bullshit, sure. But I would say VASTLY overblown. I was told that when I was a kid I would cry constantly in a shopping centre and be calm as soon as I was brought outside to look at cars and such.
The point wasn't the specifics. The point was you were raised in an environment (as I was and I'm pretty sure a lot of people were) with pretty well-defined male/female gender roles, and that they affected you. You can't just brush that off and say "no I have a penis therefore I like cars and explosions and don't talk about my feelings".
|
However I think is it very very far fetched and unoriginal to state that it's all based from your upbringing, when we can observe the difference between male and female behaviour in the animal kingdom, and we aren't THAT far evolved. I mean the feminist early writers had to be extreme or nobody would pay attention. It's obvious that both your biology and your upbringing play a huge part. To try to make gender completely neutral is to ignore facts of your biology to some extent.
On October 17 2013 06:52 Requizen wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 06:47 Slayer91 wrote:On October 17 2013 06:44 Requizen wrote:On October 17 2013 06:42 Slayer91 wrote:On October 17 2013 06:40 ComaDose wrote:
If a boy grows up being taught that fighting is cool and tough and feelings are for girls. then he prefers to write about being tough rather than feelings, dont you think its a pretty big stretch to assume biology has something to do with that? But the thing is, thats the assumption. I was never told any such thing, I imagine most people don,t its just you're drawn to it naturally. Oh, bullshit. I will almost 100% call bullshit on this. Even if your parents never sat you down and said "you have to be a tough dude who hides his feelings", you grew up around male role models who were action heroes. And even if you didn't, you hung out with guy friends who did and acted like that so you grew to be like that. Or your aunt gave you a comic book for a gift because "that's what boys get" and you learned about super heroes instead of princesses. Stop. Male role model? sure. Friends? wat. aunt gave me comic books? I had 7 older siblings, books and comic books all over the house. I always didn't care about presents because I never cared for material things like toys after I was like 7-8. Disney movies have both princesses and heroes. But I'm sure you know more about my upbringing from across the atlantic ocean based on speculation and what supports your argument more than I do. So say that I identified with the male part didn't have an effect, that's bullshit, sure. But I would say VASTLY overblown. I was told that when I was a kid I would cry constantly in a shopping centre and be calm as soon as I was brought outside to look at cars and such. The point wasn't the specifics. The point was you were raised in an environment (as I was and I'm pretty sure a lot of people were) with pretty well-defined male/female gender roles, and that they affected you. You can't just brush that off and say "no I have a penis therefore I like cars and explosions and don't talk about my feelings".
I never said it had no effect. I just said that I don't think it had a huge effect. I was always pretty solitary and did most shit on my own anyways.
|
On October 17 2013 06:52 ComaDose wrote:
Oh common who can honestly believe that boys are biologically born to enjoy automotive machinery wat.
Boys are actually biologically born as a mutation. Yep, we're all mutants.
|
On October 17 2013 06:52 ComaDose wrote:
Oh common who can honestly believe that boys are biologically born to enjoy automotive machinery wat.
to enjoy use of tools? Preposterous!
|
On October 17 2013 06:53 Slayer91 wrote:
However I think is it very very far fetched and unoriginal to state that it's all based from your upbringing, when we can observe the difference between male and female behaviour in the animal kingdom, and we aren't THAT far evolved. I mean the feminist early writers had to be extreme or nobody would pay attention. It's obvious that both your biology and your upbringing play a huge part. To try to make gender completely neutral is to ignore facts of your biology to some extent.
Sure, I'm not denying that males are naturally a certain way from a biological standpoint. However, to say there's only 2 or that those traits are inherently tied to a gender 100% of the time is just blatantly false. Even if it's a small amount males who exhibit "female defined traits", that's who they are. The idea that all boys are one way and all girls are another JUST because of their physical sex is just as erroneous as saying it's all nurture.
It's not Nurture or Nature, it's both, is what I'm getting at. So when you imply that boys and girls should be separated into learning groups based on physical sex, that's mindboggling to me.
|
Well if you want to get into science what do you call people who are XXY or XXX?
|
On October 17 2013 06:56 Slayer91 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 06:52 ComaDose wrote:
Oh common who can honestly believe that boys are biologically born to enjoy automotive machinery wat. to enjoy use of tools? Preposterous!
yes... quite
|
On October 17 2013 06:59 xes wrote:
Well if you want to get into science what do you call people who are XXY or XXX?
klinefelter's syndrome and and triple x syndrome, respectively
|
On October 17 2013 06:59 Requizen wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 06:53 Slayer91 wrote:
However I think is it very very far fetched and unoriginal to state that it's all based from your upbringing, when we can observe the difference between male and female behaviour in the animal kingdom, and we aren't THAT far evolved. I mean the feminist early writers had to be extreme or nobody would pay attention. It's obvious that both your biology and your upbringing play a huge part. To try to make gender completely neutral is to ignore facts of your biology to some extent. Sure, I'm not denying that males are naturally a certain way from a biological standpoint. However, to say there's only 2 or that those traits are inherently tied to a gender 100% of the time is just blatantly false. Even if it's a small amount males who exhibit "female defined traits", that's who they are. The idea that all boys are one way and all girls are another JUST because of their physical sex is just as erroneous as saying it's all nurture. It's not Nurture or Nature, it's both, is what I'm getting at. So when you imply that boys and girls should be separated into learning groups based on physical sex, that's mindboggling to me.
I agree it's both. But it doesn't mean they affect the same thing. Morals and values and such are largely based on upbringing. Sexual preference largely genetic etc.
It's not preposterous that there would be a large trend as to how boys and girls would learn differently. It's not like there's a huge loss (other than socially) from splitting them boy:girl instead of randomly.
|
On October 17 2013 06:56 Slayer91 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 06:52 ComaDose wrote:
Oh common who can honestly believe that boys are biologically born to enjoy automotive machinery wat. to enjoy use of tools? Preposterous!
Technically women are the ones who are attracted to tools huehuehue
|
On October 17 2013 07:00 Vegetarian Wolf wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 06:59 xes wrote:
Well if you want to get into science what do you call people who are XXY or XXX? klinefelter's syndrome and and triple x syndrome, respectively
Please the only words we're allowed to use are Male and Female fktroll
|
On October 17 2013 07:03 xes wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 07:00 Vegetarian Wolf wrote:On October 17 2013 06:59 xes wrote:
Well if you want to get into science what do you call people who are XXY or XXX? klinefelter's syndrome and and triple x syndrome, respectively Please the only words we're allowed to use are Male and Female fktroll
ur just mad that im bio-styling on you fknoob
|
XXX is still purely female, note the lack of Ys.
The other options are XXY and XYY
XXY usually resulting in an impotent man (there are other symptoms and he's not always impotent, but it's a man sexually.)
XYY (intrestingly this can also be XXYY) leads to a lot more testosterone, which usually results in teller men and more pronounced signs of testosterone (face being a crater during puberty, longer hands and feet, bigger ears, stuff like that)
|
On October 17 2013 06:44 Dandel Ion wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2013 06:23 Requizen wrote:On October 17 2013 06:20 Slayer91 wrote:
Why not? If male and female bodies and brains are different, they should act differently, and be happier under different circumstances. That's... what? Your sex (physical body parts) don't have any bearing on your brain's makeup. That's like making different medicine for women because "they have weak womanly hearts, unlike men". I think you just can't wrap your head around the fact that your identity can be different than the plumbing you have going on downstairs. oh good Lord I stepped into this conversation. Anyone have pictures of puppies? The brains actually are made up differently. The majority is the same way, but there are differing details in biochemical processes. There was an interesting study a few years back done on people identifying as the other gender "even though" their chromosomes showed a textbook clear example of XY (or XX but I think there were no biological women in this particular study but I'm trying to keep it PC here to reduce buttwoundery) and linking it to these exact differences in brain processes, IIRC there was a statistically significant correlation. I wish I could remember details. I do remember that studies in this field were stopped because of buttwounded feminists going on a rampage about this being incarnate evil (this was during the time when gender mainstreaming was the cool thing to do), which is how I heard about it in the first place. There also is a lot of medicine that's sex-specific. And with a lot, I don't actually mean a lot, but it exists. Mostly when it comes to hormones, diseases caused by hormones, stuff like that. Fact is, there are more differences than just people's "plumbing" and people ignoring that are pretty bigoted and need to be educated.
Going deeper on this, since I've read a really good book on neurobiology (We Are Our Brain by Dick Swaab, Neurobiologist and director of the Dutch Brain Institute):
Translated from the book:
MtF transsexuality is seen once for every 10,000 people, and FtM transsexuality once every 30,000. Gender issues arise very early in development, mothers tell that their son wore his mother's clothes and shoes from early on, mostly was interested in girl toys and mostly played with girls too. But not every child with gender issues will want to change their sex later on.
All evidence points to gender issues arising early on in the womb. Small changes have been found in genes that are involved in hormonal influence on brain development, that increase the chance of transsexuality. Abnormal hormone levels of the child during pregnancy and medicine that the mother takes during pregnancy can increase the odds of transsexuality too.
Sexual differentiation of the genitals happens in the first months of pregnancy, the sexual differentiation of our brain happens in the second half. Because these processes happen at different intervals, the theory exists that with transsexuality these processes have been influenced independently of eachother. If that were to be true you would see female brain structure in MtF transsexuals and male brain structure in FtM transsexuals. In 1995 we found such a structure indeed, in the brain of a deceased donor. We published that in Nature. It was the Bed Nucleus of the Stria Terminalis (BST), a brain structure involved in many aspects of sexual behaviour. The central part of this Nucleus, the BSTC, is twice as big for men and has twice as many neurons. MtF transsexuals had a female BSTC. The one FtM transsexual that we could study - even rarer material than the brains of MtF transsexuals - did indeed have a male BSTC.
When you publish something like that, people want an independent party to back it up. So Ivanka Savic in Stockholm published a study with functional brain scans on living MtF transsexuals. They didn't have surgery yet nor had they received any hormones. She gave female and male pheromones, which caused different stimulation patterns in the hypothalamus for the control group women and men. The stimulation pattern of MtF transsexuals was inbetween that of men and women. Last year Ramachandran came with a interesting hypothesis and preliminary research results on transsexuality. His idea is that for MtF transsexuals the representation of the penis is missing on the cerebral cortex and with FtM transsexuals the area for the breasts wouldn't have been created during development, and that is why they didn't recognize those organs as their own.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
