So…. ya gonna bottle it or what?
I have some pranks in mind.
So…. ya gonna bottle it or what?
I have some pranks in mind.
Estrogen facilitates higher cognitive functions by exerting effects on brain regions such as the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus. Estrogen induces spinogenesis and synaptogenesis in these two brain regions and also initiates a complex set of signal transduction pathways via estrogen receptors (ERs). Along with the classical genomic effects mediated by activation of ER α and ER β, there are membrane-bound ER α, ER β, and G protein-coupled estrogen receptor 1 (GPER1) that can mediate rapid nongenomic effects. All key ERs present throughout the body are also present in synapses of the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex. This review summarizes estrogen actions in the brain from the standpoint of their effects on synapse structure and function, noting also the synergistic role of progesterone. We first begin with a review of ER subtypes in the brain and how their abundance and distributions are altered with aging and estrogen loss (e.g., ovariectomy or menopause) in the rodent, monkey, and human brain. As there is much evidence that estrogen loss induced by menopause can exacerbate the effects of aging on cognitive functions, we then review the clinical trials of hormone replacement therapies and their effectiveness on cognitive symptoms experienced by women. Finally, we summarize studies carried out in nonhuman primate models of age- and menopause-related cognitive decline that are highly relevant for developing effective interventions for menopausal women. Together, we highlight a new understanding of how estrogen affects higher cognitive functions and synaptic health that go well beyond its effects on reproduction.
Men dosing testosterone are called meatheads for a reason, they would logically throw off their other hormones and functionally retard themselves. Because this ONE time, you can trust the pill people. No IQ studies in testosterone supplementing men, I guess there’s a good reason. They just forgot?
The results are, unfortunately, controversial and puzzling. Dosing, timing, even the application route seem to considerably affect the outcomes.
You’re not trying to rig it at all, huh?
Reduction to dihydrotestosterone by 5-alpha reductase increases the androgen activity; conversion to estradiol by aromatase converts the androgen to estrogen activity.
Recently, the non-genomic effects of testosterone on behavior bypassing the nuclear receptors have attracted the interest of researchers. This review tries to summarize the current understanding of the complexity of the effects of testosterone on brain with special focus on their role in the known sex differences.
a very important study in rhesus monkeys showed that pharmacological castration reduced and testosterone supplementation normalized anxiety levels (Suarez-Jimenez et al., 2013).
on the other hand, in both men and women, testosterone supplementation leads to improvement of depressive symptoms (Pope et al., 2003; Miller et al., 2009). However, not all interventional studies confirmed the anti-depressant effect of testosterone. At least in one published randomized controlled trial, the effects of testosterone were comparable to placebo effects (Seidman et al., 2001). Similarly, not all observational studies show a consistent picture. At least in one small study, depressive women had higher testosterone (Weber et al., 2000).
Another experiment on intact rats revealed that the effect of testosterone on depression is dose-dependent (Buddenberg et al., 2009).
Over the counter won’t work.
During the productive ages and even in early adulthood, men generally outperform women in spatial abilities (Linn and Petersen, 1985)
Even for a few years you’re in college? Is that it?
Spatial thing is probably due to error, thus would be discounted under a valid method.
Error rate as well as the reaction time negatively correlated with testosterone (Hooven et al., 2004).
In another study, actual testosterone was not associated with spatial abilities, but prenatal testosterone correlated positively with spatial abilities in women (Kempel et al., 2005).
Congratulations, you’re on the female level. Apply your non-toxic internet cream.
In line with these findings is the lack of an association between actual salivary testosterone levels and mental rotation in men and women (Puts et al., 2010).
Actual science, no replication issue.
However, in a large observational study analyzing spatial abilities in adult men from various age categories, low testosterone was associated with better spatial visualization (Yonker et al., 2006).
Actual science, no replication issue.
Plus multiple ages in ADULT men, important.
In a very interesting study, it was found that in men, the pubertal concentrations of testosterone are negatively associated with mental rotation in the adulthood (Vuoksimaa et al., 2012). In the same paper, the comparison of twins is reported. The twin with higher testosterone scored worse in the mental rotation tests. The results are contradictory, but may depend on the test used for the assessment of spatial abilities.
Counting fluke correct answers and not errors to force a finding is scientism. Bad method.
When virtual Morris water maze was used, a positive correlation between testosterone and spatial navigation was found in women, but not in men (Burkitt et al., 2007). The size of the corpus callosum seems to add complexity in the relationship between spatial abilities and testosterone (Karadi et al., 2006). This might be one of the causes for negative findings in studies where some of the determinants are missing (Kubranska et al., 2014). Another cause is likely the selection of the tested population. In gifted children, a negative correlation between salivary testosterone and spatial abilities was found (Ostatnikova et al., 1996).
Negative findings are real science.
And that’s important.
In Chinese men, the accuracy in mental rotation tests was comparable to Americans, but the reaction times were longer indicating that cultural differences could add to the variability of published results (Yang et al., 2007).
No they didn’t rush the test out of boredom. Lower error rate, I’d bet.
Last but not least, genetic factors likely modulate the effect of testosterone. We have previously shown that at least in gifted boys, genetic polymorphisms influencing testosterone metabolism affect also its relationship to mental rotation (Celec et al., 2009, 2013). Especially, the CAG short tandem repeat in the exon 1 of the androgen receptor gene seems to be important for the action of testosterone and its metabolites (Nowak et al., 2014). Despite all complexity, the current picture indicates that the association between testosterone and spatial abilities is curvilinear and sex-dependent.
aka more is NOT better and it’s genetic, morons
In women higher testosterone is associated with better mental rotation, in men lower testosterone is associated with better spatial abilities. This seems to be true both for actual testosterone (Moffat and Hampson, 1996) and for prenatal testosterone (Grimshaw et al., 1995). Supplementation of testosterone in older men results in improvement of spatial abilities, but it is accompanied with changes in estradiol metabolism and it is likely that this interferes with modifications of spatial abilities (Janowsky et al., 1994).
They only studied spatial, not global, I checked.
Even in rats, testosterone administration affects the strategy of the animals in spatial tasks (Spritzer et al., 2013). However, the interaction between testosterone and mental rotation tests is bidirectional. It has been shown that mental rotation testing affects testosterone, at least in women (Durdiakova et al., 2012).
Doing smart things causes the brain to…. adapt? Really?
Does our pulse increase when we run? Some Sherlock Holmes do a fucking study.
Moreover, participants with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome presented with female-like neural activation pattern in the parietal lobe, indicating that gonadal hormone exposure rather than genetic sex itself plays role in brain functions (Van Hemmen et al., 2014).
Supplementing won’t work, you’re worse than the trannies. They don’t claim brain benefits.
The menstrual cycle and thus the involvement of sex hormones, including testosterone, in spatial abilities was further confirmed by Pletzer et al. In their study, error rates linked with deactivation of inferior parietal lobes and prefrontal lobes were higher during luteal phase for verbal tasks, while in the follicular phase, spatial abilities in females were confirmed (Pletzer et al., 2011).
One of the major factors that might explain the differences between the results of various studies is the variability of the examined populations. As mentioned above, the cultural differences, sex and age have all been shown to impact the physiological effects of testosterone.
Standardization in this area would surely improve our understanding of the neuroendocrinology of testosterone. More systematic research using the whole spectrum of available tools and looking at the various physiological aspects is needed. However, to be able to publish such research, journals should accept manuscripts based on the design and not on the results. Otherwise, the publication bias that is obvious in the so far published literature will continue to be a big issue. Many researchers in this field complain about negative results that are very difficult to publish in the relevant journals. The number of such unpublished observations and experiments is unknown. But based on our humble experience, the negative results will probably be more common than the published positive ones. And if the contradictory published findings are added, the picture gets even more confusing. Large systematic research projects with more cooperation between the most productive research teams is definitely needed.
You can’t because the low IQ men will complain if you publish negative findings.
Testosterone plays a role in the organization of behavior during development. The authors examined whether testosterone could play a maintenance role in behavior as well. In a double-blind manner, verbal and visual memory, spatial cognition, motor speed, cognitive flexibility, and mood in a group of healthy older men who were supplemented for 3 months with testosterone were assessed. The increase in testosterone levels to 150% of baseline levels resulted in a significant enhancement of spatial cognition, but no change in any other cognitive domain was found.
You’ll be slightly more able to parallel park. Like when you were young.
Louder for the slow:
NO IMPROVEMENT IN MEMORY
NO IMPROVEMENT IN MOTOR SPEED
NO IMPROVEMENT IN COGNITIVE FLEXIBILITY
NO IMPROVEMENT IN MOOD.
Did I stutter?
Testosterone supplementation influenced the endogenous production of estradiol, and estradiol was found to have an inverse relationship to spatial cognitive performance. These results suggest that testosterone supplementation can modify spatial cognition in older men; however, it is likely that this occurs through testosterone’s influence on estrogen.
I’m sure the health effects will be golden.
“New research suggests that women’s brains stay energized well into old age, making their brains appear about three years younger than men’s of the same chronological age.”
Linked in first:
Men didn’t evolve to live long, so it isn’t so much remarkable that women live longer with healthier brains but men, to be competitive with other men in youth and war, age terribly simply because so few would survive there’s no evolutionary pressure.
Some tough choices ahead for the cooties crowd.
Stick to imaginary phantasms of 20th century masculine superiority solely intended to run up credit debt or actually be healthier.
Here comes the academese:
“Researchers remain uncertain why such metabolic differences exist”
“It’s not that women’s brains seem to age slower than men’s,”
Watch the twist.
“Rather, it seems that women’s brains start off at a younger age when they reach adulthood, and they keep that throughout the remainder of their adulthood, basically buying them a few extra years.”
Not how it works. At all.
It’s like saying you start a race at the finish line, words have meanings.
If they’ve reached adulthood, they’ve reached adulthood. You can’t change the meaning to be quantum. Women mature faster (partially from earlier puberty and slower, longer sum development time because of that) and go on to metabolically age better because testosterone is known to burn out the system.
Gradual puberty + lower T = good for long-term brain health.
aka Not women’s fault. Help your fellow men. Maybe that explains why celibates like Tesla (who, let’s face it, probably didn’t masturbate), who kept their T-levels low as a result, lived longer and stayed lucid. Maybe that’s why monks live longer too, staying sharp. Male chastity has observable benefits.
The autobiographies of genius seem to evidence longer average puberty, too. The sensitive kid who’s a later bloomer?
The Victorians called masturbation self-abuse because the compulsion/addiction would tend to be co-morbid with other mental problems, including depression. How many porn addicts are depressed?
And what do they do to self-soothe because (someone) tells them it’s unanimously ‘good for you’?
Even nuns tend to live longer which does point to lower testosterone being a pre-requisite for a long life, neatly explaining why male levels gradually lower. It isn’t like evolution is picking on men. Aggressive animals have shorter lifespans across species. This is the price of being the protector/provider sex.
“Overall, men with circulating testosterone levels between 9.8 to 15.8 nmol/L range tended to live the longest.”
Men are entitled to know what their healthy levels should be, study them!
Men age faster cognitively, he’s like a magician trying to switch your attention onto women when there’s a medical problem with men.
Assuming they want to live long and prosper.
Like, sorry, if that’s a sexist assumption.
“Previous studies have found that aging women often exhibit stronger reasoning, memory and problem-solving skills than males of the same age. But it’s unclear whether this trend is related specifically to metabolism or to a different aspect of brain function.”
“This might mean women are a little bit more resilient to certain aspects of brain aging in general, but it could also introduce certain vulnerabilities,”
Lying liar. Not even one example? How can you try to spin a youthful brain as a bad thing?
Women aren’t so much MORE resilient (although oestrogen helps) but men are MORE fragile.
“Having a younger brain for longer could make the brain more vulnerable to certain things as well.”
Still no mention of men? This isn’t a woman’s issue, there’s nothing new here as stated, women already perform better as a known overall finding*, he totally ignores what men need because it involves admitting they aren’t the best at something….
These arrogant men are sex traitors. Their ego won’t let them admit men need help. So have fun with higher neurodegeneration risk because one guy won’t admit he’s not #1 at everything.
Men are not the control group, it’s the mean between both groups.
Basic category error and erroneous maths.
Hubris is a deadly sin. Treating male ill-health like it’s normal will literally kill men.
OT but relevant:
If we took men as the control, the shorter male lifespan is not only normal but hinted at being desirable, you don’t want to change the norm, with women being unusually longer-lived (greater distance from norm). Actually, the average is between the groups, again. The difference from the norm is smaller, easier to broach and bring those below it up to speed.
*Because unlike IQ studies, they can’t conveniently ‘exclude’ the left-side of the male bell curve to skew their findings dishonestly. This happens after they sample from middle-class academia pupils largely from suburban populations, a huge bias/filter itself.
Sure, throw other men under the bus and blame women for biology. Sexism both ways!
It’s that time of year for a study-dump. Read until the end.
Better-looking (on AVERAGE):
“Good-looking individuals are more likely to have right-wing political views than less physically attractive people, according to a university study.
The authors of the report, Rolfe D. Peterson from the US Susquehanna University and Carl L. Palmer from the Illinois State University, examined the connection between physical attractiveness and political beliefs, applying multiple surveys measuring people’s attractiveness.
“More attractive individuals are more politically efficacious than their peers and more likely to identify as conservative and Republican than less physically attractive citizens of comparable demographic backgrounds,” the report read.”
Comparable demographic background, an important control.
PDF at: https://about.illinoisstate.edu/clpalme/Documents/Peterson%20Palmer%20The%20Effects%20of%20Physical%20Attractiveness%20on%20Political%20Attitudes.pdf
“Controlling for socioeconomic status, we find that more attractive individuals are more likely to report higher levels of political efficacy, identify as conservative, and identify as Republican.”
SES control is important.
“Politicians on the right look more beautiful in Europe, the U.S. and Australia.”
How to tell May isn’t really right-wing.
They should also study disease load (emphasizing STDs, which do affect appearance) compared to partisanship.
Support meritocracy, oppose the cult of equalism:
“Higher self-perceived attractiveness (SPA) increased support for inequality.”
“The political sympathies of scholars can be accurately assessed from photographs.”
“In contrast to politicians, Right-leaning scholars were not more attractive.”
The scholars haven’t hired image consultants.
What, do you think a man buys an expensive suit just for the suit?
“Right-leaning scholars were better groomed.
Controlling for grooming, Left-leaning scholars were more attractive”
This is supposed to be looking at genetic attractiveness, true attractiveness, not clothing/haircare/make-up?
Okay, I’ll let them have that one. They’re better at faking it, a trait of narcissism.
Less likely to cheat when expected to cooperate:
“Political Orientations Are Correlated with Brain Structure in Young Adults”
“We found that greater liberalism was associated with increased gray matter volume in the anterior cingulate cortex, whereas greater conservatism was associated with increased volume of the right amygdala.”
So they’re more gender neutral in the brain?
Because the same IQ can still be produced by structural differences between the sexes.
“Researchers found major differences in the amount of gray and white matter in the brains of men and women of the same intelligence, suggesting that men and women may derive their intelligence in different ways.”
“”These findings suggest that human evolution has created two different types of brains designed for equally intelligent behavior,” says researcher Richard Haier, professor of psychology at the University of California, Irvine, in a news release. “In addition, by pinpointing these gender-based intelligence areas, the study has the potential to aid research on dementia and other cognitive impairment diseases in the brain”
Again, the same IQ score.
Man Card isn’t a MENSA card, accomplish something.
Sexual dimorphism didn’t stop at the neck.
But white matter is generally more important for HIGH IQ:
White matter could only be imaged recently.
“They found a strong correlation between the integrity of the white matter and performance on a standard IQ test.”
Although grey matter can matter too, white matter cannot be denied EITHER:
“Positive relationships were found between FSIQ and intracranial gray and white matter but not cerebrospinal fluid volumes. Significant associations with cortical thickness were evident bilaterally in prefrontal (Brodmann’s areas [BAs] 10/11, 47)
IQ so real you can scan someone’s brain, almost.
and posterior temporal cortices (BA 36/37) and proximal regions.
Sex influenced regional relationships;
Before any sexist bitch goes to twist this, different does not mean inferior. This is a study of intelligence, NOT stupidity.
You can’t prove a negative and individuals are not groups?
The obvious pointed out? Okay, let’s continue.
women showed correlations in prefrontal and temporal association cortices, whereas men exhibited correlations primarily in temporal–occipital association cortices.
An idiot reading that would assume women are smarter, prefrontal doesn’t always mean smarter, necessarily, it’s just a group-level skew of structural difference. However, it does explain the higher female average.
In healthy adults,
important distinction, many brain studies are conducted on the undeveloped (teens) or pathologies
neither of which generalize to a HEALTHY, ADULT population
[sorry for the smart people tuning in, idiots twist what I type]
greater intelligence is associated with larger intracranial gray matter and to a lesser extent with white matter.
Plot twist: both matter.
Almost like we evolved.
Variations in prefrontal and posterior temporal cortical thickness are particularly linked with intellectual ability.
PF – registered as female strength, generally.
PT – registered as male and female strengths, generally.
This isn’t better/worse, it’s apples/oranges.
Even race overwhelms sex as a confound in IQ (so does class, education etc).
Sex moderates regional relationships that may index dimorphisms in cognitive abilities, overall processing strategies, or differences in structural organization.”
Trans. sex differences real yo.
Overall, key word.
Moderates, may index, differences. As in, these processes still occur but like a road trip, each take different paths different enough to map but not distinct enough to be unrecognizable.
Estrogen, which men also NATURALLY produce, also boosts brainpower.
Study here but my commentary explains it:
Whereas, everyone knows, testosterone (which women also produce) correlates to violence.
Nothing is all-good, all-bad in hormones.
“A moment of silence for all the women in history who married dumber men.”
They should study political economic wing and compare it to natural/un-supplemented hormone levels.
As in, a man who ‘needs’ steroids for vanity is less of a man.
They should also look at whether men going onto steroids drop in IQ score because it competes with their organic estrogen that makes them handle stressors better.
[Update: after checking, they did. Here it is.]
“long-term high-dose AAS exposure may cause cognitive deficits, notably in visuospatial memory.”
“These results remained stable in sensitivity analyses addressing potential confounding factors.”
The dumb jock stereotype is true!
It gets better!
Actually, it causes brain damage!
This is amazing!
Fake masculinity is really bad for men. You can’t cheat code becoming a man.
Long-term AAS use is associated with right amygdala enlargement and reduced right amygdala rsFC with brain areas involved in cognitive control and spatial memory, which could contribute to the psychiatric effects and cognitive dysfunction associated with AAS use.
The MRS abnormalities we detected could reflect enhanced glutamate turnover and increased vulnerability to neurotoxic or neurodegenerative processes, which could contribute to AAS-associated cognitive dysfunction.
Now the right amygdala enlargement sounds like the natural conservative difference but understand it’s rooted, not in experience and genuine masculine virtue, but chemical dependence. Without the drugs, it’ll shrink right back and possibly atrophy.
This would be like congratulating a tall guy who took HGH for his superior genetics. No. It’s a superficial, fake result.
The cognitive control is impaired, that’s regression. The meat head stereotype is true, biologically. Useless.
I wonder how many male suicides were on steroids? Both groups happen to be middle-aged men in fear of the Wall.
Whatever the details, it makes them biologically vulnerable compared to their natural state, the opposite of fitness.
Ironically, they’re more vulnerable to microplastics and xenoestrogens.
To further screw the point in… that brain region explicitly mentioned?
Right amygdala rsFC study:
“In high HA scorers, we also observed stronger right amygdala rsFC with the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC), which is implicated in negative affect regulation.”
It’s a girly brain thing to do with harm avoidance. [aka common sense]
“may represent a vulnerability marker for sensitivity to stress and anxiety (disorders).”
So the meat head with reduced volume (therefore not conservative*) is dumber, senses dulled by drugs and more likely to fail to get the brain signals to avoid trouble. Sounds like a future in handcuffs. They can’t perceive danger nor regulate negative emotions like anger or shame after rejection. Basically, they’re future chimp-outs waiting to happen, whatever their race**. Less able to CONTROL emotions, the broflakes.***
Hair-trigger temper calling out people for looking at him.
The guy who picks on people but never actually expects to get hit.
Will grab a woman and be shocked she slaps him. That’s the one.
*because, again “greater conservatism was associated with increased volume of the right amygdala.”
[as referenced above]
yet they have less?
So steroids make men more left wing. It isn’t the correct area and type to be considered otherwise.
ISN’T SCIENCE FUN, FELLOW RED PILLS.
ACCEPTING FINDINGS EVEN WHEN WE DON’T LIKE THEM, BRO.
My guess is it messes with their sexual reward system and produces impotence, porn addiction, dissatisfaction.
Steroids do cause impotence (PC term is ED). Does it lower sperm count?
DING DING DING WE HAVE A WINNER.
I am good at this.
“Infertility is defined by the WHO as the failure to achieve a clinical pregnancy after 12 months or more of regular unprotected sexual intercourse and a male factor is present in up to 50 % of all infertile couples. Several conditions may be related to male infertility.
Substance abuse, including AAS, is commonly associated to transient or persistent impairment on male reproductive function, through different pathways. Herein, a brief overview on AAS is offered. Steroids biochemistry, patterns of use, physiological and clinical issues are enlightened. A further review about fertility outcomes among male AAS abusers is also presented, including the classic reports on transient anabolic steroid-induced hypogonadism (ASIH), and the more recent experimental reports on structural and genetic sperm damage.”
hypogonadism = tiny balls
“In layman’s terms, it is sometimes called interrupted stage 1 puberty”
You’d have to be a moron already to think supplementing that shit makes you manly.
Nice muscles bro, shame you hit rewind on puberty!
They impair their body’s ability to naturally produce testosterone in future…. idiots.
Darwin Award category?
Big Pharma’s best customer? Like Israel’s Viagra use. Israel and America, top consumers.
**Logically we should restrict steroid use to lower the crime rate. We can’t have gorilla people chimping out and blaming da drugs.
***There are few things less masculine than a man who throws tantrums because Hulk RAGE entitlement. The mantrum has neurological correlates, as we can see.
As for the ACC lefty brain finding:
..I didn’t forget.
“Through these connections, the ACC is thought to be involved with a number of functions related to emotion including the regulation of overall affect, assigning emotions to internal and external stimuli, and making vocalizations associated with the expression of states or desires.
The ACC also seems to contribute to the regulation of autonomic and endocrine responses, pain perception, and the selection and initiation of motor movements. Additionally, there are other areas of the ACC that are involved in various aspects of cognition ranging from decision-making to the management of social behavior.”
And about sexual potency….
I order these for a reason.
Right-wingers more sexually satisfied:
“A new YouGov survey, which asked over 19,000 participants from the UK, France, Germany, Sweden and Denmark about both their politics and their sex lives, has found conservatives to be happier in the bedroom than liberals, with those identifying as “very right-wing” found to be the happiest.”
So much for the benefits of slutting. Muh experience. Yes, experiencing a burning sensation.
If you want a better sex life, don’t be a manwhore.
Chastity is a virtue. Less stress when single, hot sex when married.
I deserve an Ig Nobel for all this connection-making. It could save the West.
While I’m putting out fires imagined by shrill men.
They’re claiming 8% of the population now, the number keeps going up!
“Although epigenetic changes are usually temporary, they involve alterations in the proteins that bind together the long strands of DNA. Thus, they can sometimes be handed down to offspring. According to the hypothesis, homosexuality may be a carry-over from one’s parents’ own prenatal resistance to the hormones of the opposite sex.”
Great man, unusual number of homosexual offspring.
“The initial benefit to the parents may explain why the trait of homosexuality persists throughout evolution, he says.”
Evolution presumes the fit ones will breed more (reducing the downside loss to zero as 52:48 female to male birth ratio) and there’s no parasitism between high and low fitness.
There are other studies along these lines e.g. a review
“More recent research suggests that 2-6% of men in the United States, France and Great Britain have had homosexual experience”
It’s always the men being the most degenerate, generic finding of sexology.
And they wonder why they die sooner.
Big winners, bigger losers.
“This article reviews the evidence regarding prenatal influences of gonadal steroids on human sexual orientation, as well as sex-typed childhood behaviors that predict subsequent sexual orientation.”
But it doesn’t work the other way around, parent forcing a Barbie on your son.
And it isn’t 1:1, kids will play with most things if allowed.
“The evidence supports a role for prenatal testosterone exposure in the development of sex-typed interests in childhood, as well as in sexual orientation in later life, at least for some individuals.”
Yay, we can blame men! – feminists, if they had any balls
“It appears, however, that other factors,”
“in addition to hormones, play an important role in determining sexual orientation.”
“These factors have not been well-characterized,”
Pathogens, billions of pathogens.
“but possibilities include direct genetic effects, and effects of maternal factors during pregnancy. “
You can try blaming the woman but you’d be wrong. If women were responsible, nobody would be straight because everyone has a mother, and therefore a cause. We wrongly assume anything “wrong” with a baby is the mother’s fault. This is like blaming your food poisoning on the oven rather than the handling before that stage (paternal factors, research the other half too, paternal factors!) or once it comes out.
Paternal degeneracy would be an interesting factor. A very interesting factor.
Are promiscuous men* likelier to have gay sons, easy observational study.
You’d essentially be testing for r-selection. Homosexual men are extreme sexual r-types: high volume, low discrimination, nomadic patterning…
“Although a role for hormones during early development has been established, it also appears that there may be multiple pathways to a given sexual orientation outcome and some of these pathways may not involve hormones.”
Where’s the science, right?
How would it occur from father to germline like an STD, mother to child or both?
Have we seen pathogens change things about babies in other cases?
Wouldn’t there be a genetic brake on that?
A gene that can be compromised in mothers and lead to increased infection risk for the infant. Too little compromise and the mother suffers from carrying the foetus.
Start with the pathogens it encourages?
But where’s the science, I know, I know…
If only we had a clear-cut sign of societal sexual selection.
Say, weaker men sexually preferring masculinized women.
Should women be uber-feminine then? No, older women are hormonally and it causes pregnancy failure.
*we know there’s already a link with mothers, fathers constantly go under-studied, especially in terms of promiscuity outcomes.
It’s the oldest theory before we had neuroscience of structure and genes after that.
It would be like saying an empty wallet is the cause of poverty.
It’s more of an effect, isn’t it? It skips out on a lot of vital info there.
Ah, but you can’t sell people better genes…………………*
Most hormones aren’t sex-specific and amounts are rarely exclusive (even E and T).
Here’s a good book about how hormones influence the female brain though, sample chapter only.
Called The Female Brain, as it happens.
I wish Testosterone Rex, another generally good book on sex differences took the same approach and covered men and male psychology. There’s a need.
The biochemical is gene-mediated and environment also plays a role (think fight/flight). You can’t have epi-genetics without genes. Sexuality is such a large confound, as well as sexual strategy between sexes, that porous boundaries don’t really exist, you will naturally be more one category than another
There aren’t really books on neurogenetics yet.
Structural differences (mixed parental genetic) are close.
To blame hormones is sexist and wrong in every conceivable sense, whether it’s claiming a man can hit another because T or a woman can drown her baby because she’s too sensitive.
Genetic variations are either
*it’s weird how the men laughing at transgender hormonal treatments are obsessing over taking tons of ‘testosterone supplements’ like that’s good for you? What’s your excuse?
Could the levels be depleted by behaviour somehow?
Such as porn abuse?
Did you check adrenal function? In compulsive masturbators, the system is fine but the head’s wrong and eventually the glands pack up and give up.
The masturbators are not actually frigid, although their nervous system might be damaged with time. The idea that looping any addictive behaviour is fine for your health is Peak Boomer.
And by Jove, that title. It’s so true it’s painful.
The butthurt it shall produce, I should buy shares in painkillers.