Widespread sex differences in gene expression in the human brain (2013) • Hacker News Board

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

#101

Post by vacri » Tue, Feb 11, 2014, 10:59 PM UTC

phaer wrote: post #35

s_baby wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speak for yourself. I personally know a lesbian couple that forces their boy to wear dresses, play with dolls, and talk down anything traditionally "male". I completely agree with your original post but it's hard to deny there's a turd in the feminist kool-aid bowl and no one is willing to pull it out.

> Speak for yourself. I personally know a lesbian couple that forces their boy to wear dresses, play with dolls, and talk down anything traditionally "male". I am sorry, I don't see how that would be the same as "denying any difference between men and women". Do you really think, or even have proof which shows, that playing with dolls or wearing dresses is biologically, not socially, "male"? A lot of clothing convent…

I also played with dolls as a boy, if you count Lego minifigures. I played around with them in a fantasy world where they did things and interacted with each other socially.

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

#102

Post by vacri » Tue, Feb 11, 2014, 11:03 PM UTC

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…

You might want to roll your initial historical date forward a few hundred years... and then a few hundred more.

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

#103

Post by stefantalpalaru » Tue, Feb 11, 2014, 11:06 PM UTC

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…

> part of being a "feminist" was not discriminating against anyone because of their gender

If that were true, it would be called "humanism".

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

#104

Post by blacksmith_tb » Tue, Feb 11, 2014, 11:06 PM UTC

Filligree wrote: post #71

mikegreiling wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a feminist-led campaign on wikipedia to get tripe like this added to articles on human sexual differences: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sex_differences_in... "The smaller difference in lower body strength may be due to the fact that during childhood, both males and females frequently exercise their leg muscles during activities like running, walking, and playing. Males, however, are socially pres…

Isn't that actually true? Speaking as a male who feels no particular need for higher upper body strength, I've certainly felt pressured at times. Somehow my sister never is.

It's clearly true the social pressure is different, but there is certainly evidence that physiologies are as well, e.g.:

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/25/why-women-cant-do-p...

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

#105

Post by philwelch » Tue, Feb 11, 2014, 11:07 PM UTC

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…

The term "feminism" is derived from the Latin "femina," for "woman".

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

#106

Post by Crito » Tue, Feb 11, 2014, 11:09 PM UTC

phaer wrote: post #97

cwaniak wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sexual preference is hardcoded in genes, right? Aren't you homophobic when you state otherwise? ;-)

I don't think so, there's a vast amount of LGBT authors who advocate the idea of sexuality as a social construct, be it homo-, hetero- or other sexualities

It seems odd to me that sexuality is a social construct even though gender is not. We know that gender is not merely a social construct because we know that gender dysphoria is not merely a social construct. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity_disorder#Biolog...)

There isn't a logical conflict there of course, sexuality could be a social construct despite gender not being that simple, ...it just seems odd to me. I suspect that sexuality, like gender, is not that simple.

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

#107

Post by kapnobatairza » Tue, Feb 11, 2014, 11:12 PM UTC

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…

Seriously, this wasn't even a particularly dense paper to read. The only conclusions one can draw from this research is that "sex differences in gene expression in human brain relate and may even help explain well-recognised differences between men and women in disease incidence and presentation"... I.E. MS, Schizophrenia, AD & Vascular dementira, depressive & anxiety disorders, parkinson's, autism, etc.

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

#108

Post by s_baby » Tue, Feb 11, 2014, 11:13 PM UTC

yaddayadda wrote: post #83

s_baby wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

I was raised in the 70's and am FTM. I can't speak definitively for the movement at the time, but my mother was absolutely aware of MTFs and was fully supportive. She was aware of MTFs because of women's studies classes, and her definition of feminism came from those same classes. So there was at least a sizable feminist subset that subscribed to that definition. Frustratingly, FTMs still weren't widely acknowledged,…

I hear what you're saying. Let me show you how it looks from my perspective.

Imagine if the History department had an aggregation of white supremacists. They were allowed to have their own department, their own academic journals, and even held positions of power like Dean. Would their more inclusive peers not hold some responsibility in enabling these bigots? I know you're pointing out the good side of gender studies but you're also being apologetic and enabling radicalized feminism.

Every feminist and their mom is quick to point out how feminism is inclusive whenever this discussion comes up. Very few of them actually stand up to transphobia, misandry, and countless other forms of bigotry in their circles.

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

#109

Post by plg » Tue, Feb 11, 2014, 11:14 PM UTC

vacri wrote: post #99

toufka wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In hard science, the null hypothesis is often 'straw-man-like', and that's usually just fine. Because, oftentimes the straw-man haunts by being kind of true, sometimes. Reality is so strange that doing en experiment that controls well enough to (near-) conclusively exclude even a trivial hypothesis is a good experiment. Not the best experiment, but a good experiment.

You don't need a null hypothesis to do science. If you want to measure the strength of the Moon's gravitational pull, no-one's going to complain that you haven't outlined a null hypothesis. There's all kinds of good science done that doesn't use the null hypothesis - it's a myth that if one isn't presented, then it's "not science".

true ... but often (as in the case of this article) the results are presented as if they are a surprise... which implies a null hypothesis

anyway I agree with you, one doesn't need a null hypothesis to measure things

on the other hand to advance theories, in other words to test and reject (or fail to reject) hypotheses, one does need ... hypotheses[1]

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper

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

#110

Post by vezzy-fnord » Tue, Feb 11, 2014, 11:16 PM UTC

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…

This ignores the fact that "feminism" is not a coherent movement.

To be a feminist, one must advocate for women's rights at a bare minimum.

Everything else is completely up to the individual, and the fact is there exist lots of schools with contradictory opinions on major social issues. Sex-positive/sex-negative, pro-traditional femininity (lipstick feminist)/anti-traditional femininity, pro-trans/transphobic (TERF), political lesbian, separatist, postmodernist (the prevailing type of feminism in mainstream journalism and academia today), pro-life/pro-choice, complementarian and so on.

Bottom line is, let's stop treating feminism like some omnibenevolent movement for equal rights, and as if radicals are just "fringes who don't make a difference". This is not true anymore. Feminism got derailed decades ago. Go read any large feminist publication like Feministing or Jezebel, and it embraces the toxicity of postmodern feminism.