Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Widespread sex differences in gene expression in the human brain (2013)

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 212 posts

Re: Widespread sex differences in gene expression in the human brain (2013)

#61

Post by bsdetector »

sp332 wrote: post #19
mudil wrote: post #12

That's exactly why we don't have many women in tech and most readers of HN are guys. All this political correctness and attacks on PG are simply BS: men and women are different. Not better, not worse, just different. It's evolution of sex, stupid. PS. My previous comment on this topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7041221

But you haven't even tried to make a connection between the physical differences and the social differences. You just assume that all social differences are explained biologically.

What we know for sure is that there are physical differences, and from this study we know there are mental differences.

The unknowns are how mental differences (expression of genes) are caused by environment or effect the environment.

This means we don't know whether a 50/50 split in some field is natural or a result of society railroading people into the field. It seems to me that the best way to handle policy is not to base it on unknowns, so that's why I favor policy that ensures opportunity to work in specific fields but doesn't try to balance them.

Re: Widespread sex differences in gene expression in the human brain (2013)

#62

Post by im3w1l »

adamnemecek wrote: post #42
phaer wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to elaborate?

"... couple that forces their boy to ..." Is that sufficient?

>Do you really want me to explain to you why those are different scenarios?

I basically agree with you. But, please do it anyway. It could be interesting.

Re: Widespread sex differences in gene expression in the human brain (2013)

#63

Post by phaer »

adamnemecek wrote: post #58
sjtrny wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"...eat their vegetables" is that abuse?

Do you really want me to explain to you why those are different scenarios? Would you think that it's child abuse if the parents made their kid wear a gimp suit with a gag ball? Also would you think it was abuse if they made the kid undergo some hormone therapy?

You don't need me to explain to you why your examples are completely different scenarios than letting your (male) child play with dolls or wear dresses, right? Please find some better examples if you are interested in a constructive discussion and you are not on some kind of crusade about your idea of parenting.

Re: Widespread sex differences in gene expression in the human brain (2013)

#64

Post by agentultra »

kyberias wrote: post #57
agentultra wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expected it but am no less disappointed. Anyone with an extreme emotional investment in the "gender respresentation" issue isn't even going to read the article before proselytizing HN with their beliefs. This is an article about gene expressions and their correlation to the development of various neurological disorders. However it mentions differences between males and females... so it's going to trigger a complete…

It mentions? Mentions? Come on now. It's stated in the beginning of the title of the article, and right in the beginning of the abstract, for crying out loud. "Widespread sex differences"

I beg your pardon then. Yes, the trigger is right in the title.

Re: Widespread sex differences in gene expression in the human brain (2013)

#65

Post by Fomite »

sliverstorm wrote: post #26
Fomite wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My field hasn't substantially in terms of it's goals, aims or methods - and if anything, has moved towards more male-dominated fields, yet has gone from "All men" to a slight majority of women.

And this field would be...?

Epidemiology. Though it applies for public health generally as a field, or honestly anything under the umbrella of "Biomedical".

Re: Widespread sex differences in gene expression in the human brain (2013)

#66

Post by Fomite »

powertower wrote: post #36
api wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kudos sir or ma'am. The same argument can be levied at racism. If you go back to the year 1000AD, it's obvious that Europeans are of vastly inferior stock. The Chinese and the Arabs were doing optics and stuff while the Europeans were basically playing in the dirt.

What are you talking about? By the year 1000 AD the Europeans had already built the most grandiose of structures that rival today’s standards, had the most extensive networks and cities, filled entire libraries with books on all manners of philosophy and science, explored all corners of the world, and so on and on. And it wasn't until about the 1900s (about 1920-1960), when the Western World (that primarily consisted…

I hate to break it to you, but by 1000 the Roman Empire was well and truly gone. As much as I am fond of the medieval period, I wouldn't hold up 1000 as a bright and shining year for "The West".

Hell, at that point, even the Eastern Roman Empire was struggling.

Re: Widespread sex differences in gene expression in the human brain (2013)

#67

Post by Fomite »

mudil wrote: post #28
mudil wrote: post #12

That's exactly why we don't have many women in tech and most readers of HN are guys. All this political correctness and attacks on PG are simply BS: men and women are different. Not better, not worse, just different. It's evolution of sex, stupid. PS. My previous comment on this topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7041221

Those of you who downgrade my comment should put that PC stuff aside, and consider reading about the evolution of sexuality. Such as "The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature" by Matt Ridley, and "The Mating Mind: How Sexual Choice Shaped the Evolution of Human Nature" by Geoffrey Miller. All your wishful thinking will never make women and men the same.

That's not what I downvoted you for sparky, nor has anyone particularly made that argument.

Re: Widespread sex differences in gene expression in the human brain (2013)

#68

Post by pessimizer »

discostrings wrote: post #34

It's disappointing to see so many people here read the title of the article and immediately start the see,-social-differences-are-the-result-of-vast-differences-between-the-binary-sexes wheel rolling again. It's nowhere near a valid conclusion from the article's content. There are racial differences in gene expression (though much smaller), too, but I doubt anyone would upvote it or start a similar conversation about…

People are excited to interpret any random observation in terms of their own prejudices.

>There are racial differences in gene expression (though much smaller), too, but I doubt anyone would upvote it or start a similar conversation about race if an article about it were posted here.

You've been here long enough to know that isn't true. Plenty of people on this site have a passionate belief in the simultaneous superiority of and tyranny of the inferior masses over white males within the civilization that they built with their own hands.

Re: Widespread sex differences in gene expression in the human brain (2013)

#69

Post by tdfx »

phaer wrote: post #37
adamnemecek wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds a bit like child abuse. And when I say a bit I mean a lot.

Care to elaborate?

They've made a determination that supporting their sociological viewpoints is more important than the high potential of social integration issues that will likely come from having raised their child that way. When you prioritize your opinions on social issues ahead of the welfare of your child, to that child's enduring detriment, that's definitely bad parenting. And, depending on who you ask, could be considered abusive.

Re: Widespread sex differences in gene expression in the human brain (2013)

#70

Post by s_baby »

yaddayadda wrote: post #54
stcredzero wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't say no one, but it's also true that the Men's Rights movement has a steep uphill PR struggle ahead of them. In part because of active attacks from parts of the feminist movement, and in part because they actively feed into the conflict. Also, it's a fact of life that men who lose their temper in any he-said-she-said conflict often receive a knee-jerk judgement from those around them, which makes it difficu…

I'm disappointed that there's a "Men's Rights" movement. My mother raised me as a "feminist" and part of being a "feminist" was not discriminating against anyone because of their gender. For example, feminists support a boy who wants to play with dolls or a father wants to be a stay-at-home parent. I hate that the label itself is gendered and I wish it would be changed, but the principles of "feminism" include "Men's…

>My mother raised me as a "feminist" and part of being a "feminist" was not discriminating against anyone because of their gender.

That's an idealization that's not congruent with the historical culture and behavior of many feminists.

Up until the 80's feminism was heteronormative and transphobic. In fact, transphobia is still a huge problem in the community.[1] These are just the more concrete examples. For most of its history feminism has been a straight white upper middle class movement. The perspective of those not fitting this demographic have been marginalized within feminism at some point.

>I hate that the label itself is gendered and I wish it would be changed, but the principles of "feminism" include "Men's Rights". Breaking "Men's Rights" out as a separate topic only muddies the waters, dilutes the efforts for the same goals, and introduces a divide that shouldn't be there in the first place!

Masculism was started by a group of feminists who were kicked out of National Organization for Women(N.O.W) for advocating equal custody in divorce. Gender Studies is inclusive in theory but not in practice.

1. https://www.google.com/search?q=feminism+transphobia

Post reply on HN