jamie
Member
Posts: 685
Location:
|
Post by jamie on May 22, 2011 1:08:32 GMT -5
OT here: From SNL, JT and Gaga @jtfansite: Here is the Digital short: bit.ly/l4Je19Is it just me or does JT have an uncanny resemblance to Cheeks in one of his videos here? |
|
|
|
Post by reihmer on May 22, 2011 1:14:02 GMT -5
I just got home from a lecture and see we are into genetics here!! haha. Now I am no medical expert but I believe the best explanation is that all fetus begin life the same default 'female' way...sort of. It is 'genetics' or DNA and chromozones that determine the sex of a child but not its orientation. That is caused by complex washes of androgens that subtly change the brain structure, etc. If a male sexed fetus does not get the 'appropriate' androgen wash at the appropriate time, it may end up with that 'default' female-ish brain. Ditto, if a female sexed child receives an extra wash of androgens she may end up with a 'masculined' brain....and orientation. There is more to it than just this...but I believe something along these lines is at the core. The female and male brains are structurally different...particularly in the thickness of the corpus collosum that allows messages to pass more easily between sides of the brain....that is why women tend to rebound from a stroke better than men as the other side of the brain can take over in an emergency, more effectively. Hope I haven't screwed this up....it has been a while since I 'knew' this..... Sounds about right to me mszue. Not an expert either but from what I've learned androgen flushes determine the size and structure of the hypothalamus particularly the interstitial nuclei of the anterior hypothalamus (INAH) 3. A scientist named LeVay dissected the brains of homosexual men in the 1990's and found that this part of the hypothalamus was similar to heterosexual women or something to that affect. Also I believe intersexed people have to be included in the human sexuality spectrum as a whole when talking about androgens. |
|
|
|
Post by mszue on May 22, 2011 1:23:19 GMT -5
I just got home from a lecture and see we are into genetics here!! haha. Now I am no medical expert but I believe the best explanation is that all fetus begin life the same default 'female' way...sort of. It is 'genetics' or DNA and chromozones that determine the sex of a child but not its orientation. That is caused by complex washes of androgens that subtly change the brain structure, etc. If a male sexed fetus does not get the 'appropriate' androgen wash at the appropriate time, it may end up with that 'default' female-ish brain. Ditto, if a female sexed child receives an extra wash of androgens she may end up with a 'masculined' brain....and orientation. There is more to it than just this...but I believe something along these lines is at the core. The female and male brains are structurally different...particularly in the thickness of the corpus collosum that allows messages to pass more easily between sides of the brain....that is why women tend to rebound from a stroke better than men as the other side of the brain can take over in an emergency, more effectively. Hope I haven't screwed this up....it has been a while since I 'knew' this..... Sounds about right to me mszue. Not an expert either but from what I've learned androgen flushes determine the size and structure of the hypothalamus particularly the interstitial nuclei of the anterior hypothalamus (INAH) 3. A scientist named LeVay dissected the brains of homosexual men in the 1990's and found that this part of the hypothalamus was similar to heterosexual women or something to that affect. Also I believe intersexed people have to be included in the human sexuality spectrum as a whole when talking about androgens. Yes...I agree....I almost came in and did an ETA re intersexed and/or transgendered people......I know I am not exactly on but this is the gist of it... |
|
|
|
Post by rihannsu on May 22, 2011 1:40:57 GMT -5
The intelligence level of this community is very stimulating indeed. I keep telling my roommates that I'm not just reading about Adam all the time but that we stumble off into all kinds of different directions. We finally figured out that the difference between me and Cat is that she tends to internet surf from a more generalized starting point (i.e. yahoo homepage) and then wanders off into all kinds of interesting directions from there whereas I start from ATOP and other Adam related sites or twitter and wander off in all kinds of interesting directions from there. She finally understood why pretty much everything we talk about ends up relating to Adam in some way shape or form. LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by mszue on May 22, 2011 1:54:55 GMT -5
One last somewhat 'heretic' statement that ties in with the above discussion. If you recognize two facts: 1. that fetus all start off the same and that 'same' is what we later call 'female' and, 2 if you realize that if you measure the sexes as you measure other species for evidences of evolutionary progression re brain size/development and externally, forehead length, it becomes obvious that the female of the human species has travelled further along the evolutionary trail than the male. [intersting concept isn't it?] If this is indeed the case, don't you think it is possible that religious scribes got it wrong and 'Adam' is the word for female and 'Eve' is male!
Now isn't that a hoot!!???
And we love us our Adam!! hahaha
|
|
|
|
Post by LindaG23 on May 22, 2011 9:43:57 GMT -5
I am sorry I missed this discussion and just wanted to thank lm2718, reihmer, and mszue for the information and insight you gave. I have read a few articles on the role of epigenetic factors not only in determining fetus characteristics but also changing our genetic makeup as we age. This really made me think as it is strips away the fatalistic notion that we can't help it because we were born this way. ( :  no reference intended). I have also read of the impact of female hormones in the development of the fetus and sexual orientation and agree with all of you that there is a great deal of complexity in determining orientation. Mszue, I loved this and how true: I think you would enjoy this article I read recently, it almost made me concerned that I had two boys but realized they would make their way in the world well and would be prepared for and benefit from having strong women to interact with. www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/07/the-end-of-men/8135/Again thanks for the discussion  , you guys are beautiful strong women. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Location:
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2011 9:58:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by SusieFierce on May 22, 2011 13:59:20 GMT -5
I thought this article very fascinating. My sister and I were having a similar discussion a few weeks ago. We were saying, "Where are all the men in the workforce?" She's a healthcare consultant who helps hospitals build and retain their nursing staffs. My brother-in-law works for the government and his office is dominated by women. In my small media company, we have about 65 percent women and in my department, there have been five women and one man for about three years now. Of course, the two top executives are men. Again, we're thinking, where is the TV dad who could manage to have a house, a car, support the entire family and have a wallet of cash at the ready on one average income? Does that dynamic even exist anymore? Recently, my sister went to a medical school graduation and the program had photos of all the graduates. It was overwhelmingly female and particularly, women of color. My publications do an issue every year where we pick the top students in the region. They are nominated by teachers, parents and administrators. In one region, girls were nominated about 5 to 1. We had to then actively search for boys for the list. As the article mentions, nursing is one of the industries that have heavily recruited men, but it's a constant struggle. My sister gets so frustrated with this because men really make fantastic nurses. The job is so physical now that a great deal of strength is a huge benefit. I interviewed a doctor not long ago (a man), who said he would discourage anyone from going into medical school, but would encourage them to go into nursing instead. He was referring to the consuming debt he faced upon graduation. This guy was a former professional football player. I think a shift needs to occur to get men to embrace industries that were formerly associated with women. They also make excellent teachers. I don't know what the solutions are, but if the achievement of the female students I see is any indicator of what's to come, there is a tsunami of powerful girls coming this way. There are quite a few amazing boys too, but from what I've seen, they are way outnumbered right now. |
|
|
|
Post by LindaG23 on May 22, 2011 14:19:34 GMT -5
Recruiting men into female-dominated jobs such as nursing and teachers, comes down I think to economics. Traditionally those jobs have not measured up in terms of pay and potential for advancement. Even if you start out as a clerk with low pay in a large business firm, the potential to become CEO is there. Teachers and nurses can look forward to a good solid modest livelihood and for some that is enough but these professions don't get the respect they deserve. Therefore, most of the satisfaction requires deriving value from serving others.
What I realized after reading this article is that conditions are indeed changing and for the better for everyone. I need to step back from my 'men rule the world' meme and start looking at society with a different viewpoint. In my life, I have advanced in a male-dominated field but just realized that I did not let go of some of the perceptions handed down to me from my mother.
I think women of today may be able to move forward with more confidence that the boundaries which still exist are more fluid and not have to push so hard as we did. This is a good thing and it makes me proud.
|
|
|
|
Post by midwifespal on May 22, 2011 14:49:51 GMT -5
Yes, very interesting. I guess I'm of the "new generation" of more powerful women (lol, somehow I got skipped, employment-wise #freelancer #ownfault), so I thought I'd briefly (#lol #yeahright) share my feelings on the subject. Let me just preface what follows by saying that I'm mostly full of shit, and am not particularly well read on this topic, so take it all with a pinch of salt, and recognize that I realize I'm kinda bullshitting here! Also, I know that the article Linda posted was just accurately describing a current cultural and economic phenomenon rather than espousing specific phsychological/biological theories. So, with those disclaimers: Personally, I feel like there is a powerful wave of feminism out there, perhaps led most fiercely by a generation a little bit older than my own, that has been called "difference feminism." This form of feminism acknowledges key differences between men and women, but holds that those differences in some ways make women "superior" for lack of a better world (that is, its a reversal of the old ideology that put men on top--it follows that patter but puts women on top). (Just to be accurate, this is just one, dominant subset of difference-feminism, but it is the one I am focusing on.) Pop-psychology versions of this theory lead to such statements as "if women ruled the world, there would be no war." Also, the feminist version of "men are from mars, women from venus": that is, yes, we're different, and approach problems in a different way from men, but that way may be better, i.e. we talk things through, are more emotive, sensitive, thoughtful, nurturing, patient, analytical in certain ways, etc. etc. Within the academy, this viewpoint was most famously described and defended by Carol Gilligan in her famous book, In A Different Voice (a book I've only read brief excerpts of). So, my personal feelings? This runs contrary to all of my instincts. I strongly disagree with this view. My feelings tell me again and again that the differences between men and women, aside from obvious physical differences, are so minor as to be entirely negligible. None of the men in my life, not my husband, not my brothers, not my father, not my friends, fits the negative stereotypes associated with certain kinds of "difference feminism." Nor do I particularly fit the more positive type they lay out for women, so I'm not sure what to do with it. I've never particularly identified as female--I identify much more strongly as other things--as a member of my immediate family, as a liberal, as an Austinite, etc. etc. So the whole thing throws me for loop, and unfortunately I feel my skin begin to crawl countless times each day as our culture insists, often to the "benefit" of women, on the mars/venus divide. By the way, I am also deeply suspicious of any scientific study that lays out a supposedly proven behavior difference. When the minute a baby is born a doctor exclaims "its a boy!" and sticks a blue beanie hat on him, I doubt the validity of any study that tries to separate out cultural from biological differences. For those who are interested, there’s a longish and well-written response to Gilligan by Katha Pollit titled “Marooned on Gilligan’s Island” which expresses a lot of my feelings fairly well. docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:9j1pXqY6yzwJ:academic.evergreen.edu/curricular/hhd2005/WinterDownloads/GilligansIsland.pdf+marroned+on+gilligan%27s+island+pollit+feminism&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjv-CCVayQNAYOmOTDupmLvRPqVf3PvVsIAFRc6HZ_HEFbCfj6gy4eEoIaUG-Sq1BDjSdcBWhX3oJ6F7MecIKS2Ek7dkMcojD47s4IhlC-tlrgeGX_mMtJqzAYlzNoarP6rY3zW&sig=AHIEtbRAAeSfoZZoNhaP5BJGtjEkk7GVmwSo, all of this is just to say that it has been a very interesting experience for me belonging, with this board, to a community that is almost all female. It is the first time in my life that I have belonged to/identified with such a group. And of course I love it, but it has been interesting examining my own feelings about the female-ness of the group, and, for that matter, interesting how eagerly we all welcome any male who ventures into our midst! This has been on my mind a couple of times of late, as it has popped up in discussion—was there something particularly female about our wish to discuss the whole Durbin bruhaha in detail to help process it? (A number of posters jumped in saying: “well, I must be a boy cause I’m sick of it, lol.”) Was Bridesmaids a “chick flick”? If not, were we relieved? Etc. etc. Not knocking the conversation—just interesting. I’m certainly not insisting that there are no culturally-determined gender-differences, and I do think that there are interesting cultural (as well as sexual) reasons that draw women to Adam in particular, and perhaps particularly so women of a certain feminist generation. All very interesting. Okay, now I have as always gone on too long. Good thing it’s tucked away in this dead thread, lol. |
|
no reference intended). I have also read of the impact of female hormones in the development of the fetus and sexual orientation and agree with all of you that there is a great deal of complexity in determining orientation.
