101–110 of 257 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Was she part of the study?
If someone is left-handed, and left-handedness has been shown to be very strongly correlated with a different brain structure, would you challenge them similarly if they state that they have a different brain structure because they are left handed? Do you need to personally participate in studies to know anything about your body?
Is it possible that repeated exposure to elevated testosterone over a long time period is the cause? Could studies be done on steroid users?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Conversely it could help someone who is in denial and experiencing disphoria to come to terms with themselves.
That would have to be an incredibly precise test though; if someone is in denial and you tell them "This test says there's only a 5% chance you're right", they will probably stay in denial.
It's amazing that something so sexist could have been suggested without backlash. Imagine if studies indicated that low testosterone limited or in some way hindered another desirable human capability. People have been fired for it and reputations ruined. Suggesting men are emotionally stunted. Oh that's fine.
On the other hand, it has been an accepted truism for many decades that the female brain is less capable of many tasks, and I haven't seen firings and ruined reputations over this. The science of this is now being seriously questioned.
All of these groups in Western societies have been, and often still are, dominated by men. Looking at how things are changing, with women slowly gaining power in the workplace, I'm finding a lot of men are behaving differently than I remember 30 years ago. Whether or not this is due to gaining empathy, or due to fear of punitive measures, I don't know, but for me personally I feel it is the former.
It's amazing that something so sexist could have been suggested without backlash. Imagine if studies indicated that low testosterone limited or in some way hindered another desirable human capability. People have been fired for it and reputations ruined. Suggesting men are emotionally stunted. Oh that's fine.
There is still strong evidence that excess testosterone causes anger and other undesirable effects [0]. Why should there be a backlash when there is evidence? On the other hand, it has been an accepted truism for many decades that the female brain is less capable of many tasks, and I haven't seen firings and ruined reputations over this. The science of this is now being seriously questioned. [0] https://academic.oup.…
"other" could mean these from the linked article:
> The growing literature on androgenic anabolic steroid (AAS) usage suggests that some users can develop bouts of aggression known as steroid rage, mood disturbance, hypomania, irritability, and depressive episodes (9–15).
Whenever I think about ourselves, I think from an evolutionary perspective. All of the mentioned effects exist in species other than humans. I can list several reasons why the behaviors could be considered desirable.
Also note, the article says the only significantly increased emotion was anger hostility. Why does anger exist?
It's amazing that something so sexist could have been suggested without backlash. Imagine if studies indicated that low testosterone limited or in some way hindered another desirable human capability. People have been fired for it and reputations ruined. Suggesting men are emotionally stunted. Oh that's fine.
I can’t even see the title of the original paper since this one is paywalled. I was going to go try to quantify this “absence of backlash” you mentioned.
¹ It is sort of an interesting question, which majority of feminists that is. Some liberal, trans-inclusive, biological-constructivist feminists who believe in a notion of a “female brain” would potentially see no problem with the study. That is quite a minority though. The vast majority of liberal feminists would be “social constructivist” feminists who believe male/female brain differences are overblown and would view the study incredulously. Similarly, some biological-essentialist radical feminists do believe in comprehensive sex differences, and would be amenable to the finding. These would be your typical “man haters”, who are vocal online because their ideas are not welcome hardly anywhere. However, the vast majority of radical feminists believe the male/female sex differences have primarily to do with reproductive organs and, again, brain differences are overblown. And therefore would also be incredulous of the result. So all-in-all the vast majority of feminists would by default object to the study. But there is a sex-essentialist slice that cuts across the liberal/radical divide who would entertain the ideas.
On the MRA side too I believe there are sex essentialists who would be fine with the study, although many more liberal MRAs would object to it purely on the grounds of it portraying men in a negative light. I’m less familiar with the ideological divisions in that group though.
As a side note, this is part of why liberal and radical feminists are able to hate each other and talk past each other: both sides can credibly accuse the other of harboring biological essentialists.
What I'm more interested in seeing is whether or not being in a dominant group in society reduces empathy. Historically, we might have looked at the lack of empathy of specific groups and made assumptions about the group in general, but perhaps it simply has to do with whether or not that group finds itself dominant in society whether it be economically, politically, or socially. All of these groups in Western societ…
It's amazing that something so sexist could have been suggested without backlash. Imagine if studies indicated that low testosterone limited or in some way hindered another desirable human capability. People have been fired for it and reputations ruined. Suggesting men are emotionally stunted. Oh that's fine.
What’s your evidence there was no backlash? This kind of finding seems like the type of thing both MRAs and a majority of feminists¹ would object to. I can’t even see the title of the original paper since this one is paywalled. I was going to go try to quantify this “absence of backlash” you mentioned. ¹ It is sort of an interesting question, which majority of feminists that is. Some liberal, trans-inclusive, biologi…
I did hear about the president of Harvard being fired though. I read about The Bell Curve. Damore. The list goes on and on. You must know what I'm talking about.
Maybe I'm just biased so I filter bubble out evidence that sexism is sexist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trans woman here. Cisgender men and women have different brain structures, and transgender people's brain structures tend to resemble that of the gender that they identify as[1]. So, for example, a trans woman like myself who was born male will have a brain structure that resembles that of a cis woman, not a man. > I know a trans man who, after a few months of testosterone, claimed it was "night and day" in how they…
> Cisgender men and women have different brain structures, I'm skeptical of this to begin with. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/feb/24/meet-the-neu... https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00677-x https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/confirmed-theres-n... When it comes to brains, there is far more variation, on pretty much anything you choose to measure, within the group of 'men' or 'women', then t…
Are you claiming that there is zero biological influence on this well documented phenomenon that exists across cultures?