Brains have no gender, Israeli study finds

[Melech 9,900]

"In the mid-19th century, researchers claimed they could tell the s-x of an individual just by looking at their disembodied brain. But a new study finds that human brains do not fit neatly into “male” and “female” categories. Indeed, all of our brains seem to share a patchwork of forms; some that are more common in males, others that are more common in females, and some that are common to both. The findings could change how scientists study the brain and even how society defines gender.

“Nobody has had a way of quantifying this before,” says Lise Eliot, a neuroscientist at Chicago Medical School in Illinois who was not involved in the study. “Everything they’ve done here is new.”

As soon as scientists could image the brain, they began hunting for s-x differences. Some modest disparities have been reported: On average, for example, men tend to have a larger amygdala, a region associated with emotion. Such differences are small and highly influenced by the environment, yet they have still been used to paint a binary picture of the human brain, “even when the data reveal much more overlap than difference between males and females,” Eliot says.

Read more: http://news.sciencemag.org/brain-behavior/2015/11/brains-men-and-women-aren-t-really-different-study-finds

I guess now we can basically agree that Gender is a social construct

[Didymus 34,380]

I know I can't post AP in here (oops) so I guess I'll just laugh at the "Israeli" addition.

[Melech 9,900]

1 minute ago, Didymus said:

I know I can't post AP in here (oops) so I guess I'll just laugh at the "Israeli" addition.

It is AP? I didn't found it.

And don't see a problem with it considering it's added to a lot threads about studies. But have good time laughing. 

[Didymus 34,380]

Just now, Simon said:

It is AP? I didn't found it.

And don't see a problem with it considering it's added to a lot threads about studies. But have good time laughing. 

Well, I had to post something 'cause the report button doesn't work for me.

Anyway, I'm still gonna post some of my favorite posts in the other thread so we can discuss them here if this thread doesn't flop like it, that is:

"Not to make anyone upset, but religion played an important role in enforcing the idea of a couple consisting of a man and a woman." (bs by Gaga of Time who didn't respond to my reply)

"I don't mean to offend anybody but especially G in the LGBT+ community is known for employing very strict and rigorous gender roles/stereotypes/transphobia. I mean the concepts of masc4masc, "straight-acting", the "femme gay" stigma or how transgender women (especially those of color) are delegitimized & ridiculed, are great examples of that.

It has gotten better in the recent years, especially this year with Caitlyn Jenner coming out, but just because you are thrown together under one umbrella term doesn't mean that there is actual empathy or mutual understanding, which is a shame imo." (tea by amenvodka)

"Great but too bad it will take 2000 years for people to realise." (tea by faux)

[TimisaMonster 31,073]

That's stupid...that's like saying the stomach has no gender cuz it looks the same in both males and females....so there's no such thing as gender?

Flop...it's hormones and a chemical balance that make us male or female...it's not a made up word

Plus, the brain is the most complicated organ in the entire body so this seems like such a reach to rule out gender simply by LOOKING at a brain...mess

 

There ARE other organs that identify a person as male or female...

[Didymus 34,380]

9 minutes ago, TimisaMonster said:

That's stupid...that's like saying the stomach has no gender cuz it looks the same in both males and females....so there's no such thing as gender?

Flop...it's hormones and a chemical balance that make us male or female...it's not a made up word

All words are made up, though.

The point of this research is to determine if brain functioning is influenced by gender differences (indeed because of hormones and chemical processes and what not) or not. If not, and this is what the study shows, then the social constructs of gender are still 100% made up even if there is a difference in the body that doesn't determine anything else but those hormones and chemical processes.

The conclusion is: people, in theory, don't need to attach anything else to physical differences between men and women. In fact, you could go to the extreme and say that concepts like "man" and "woman" aren't even necessary. But even if you don't take it there, it's still important. A simple, deluded example: women are more emotional than men. Unfounded idea, yet it influences the daily life of people and even job opportunities for women to this day. Our society supports unfounded gender theories 100%. That's why this study matters.

[Manul 7,377]

I always knew that everyone is bis-xual. 

[Didymus 34,380]

16 minutes ago, ****Eliza said:

I always knew that everyone is bis-xual. 

I'm reading a FANTASTIC book on the history of same-s-x relationships throughout history, starting from animals all the way up to the evolution chain from primitive man to the modern Western world.

It's shocking The conclusion basically is that bis-xuality (ambis-xuality is a better term) is actually nearly 100% universal among all species, including humans. Studies of primitive and ancient cultures are showing more and more frequency of ambis-xuality and a mindbending lack of exclusive hetero- and homos-xuality.

It ends by stating that Western forms of s-xuality are actually not just a deviation from natural functioning but also psychologically harmful. It's fantastic. Reading about Islamic desert clans whose men cared more about their underaged boy wh-res than their wives etc. was almost like reading p-rn fiction.

[colours 129]

Does anything fit 'neatly' into a category, though? It's all so stupid

[ゼレミ ノヴェリノ 370]

[Kattys 4,319]

As student of cognitive science I call this bulls--t.

Amount of grey/white matter is just one thing that you can say about brain. It's like saying saying Poland and China are the same because we eat dumplings. One feature is not enough to assume such things, sorry.

Assuming from this kind of data that gender doesn't exist is just pure stupid. 

[Manul 7,377]

33 minutes ago, Didymus said:

I'm reading a FANTASTIC book on the history of same-s-x relationships throughout history, starting from animals all the way up to the evolution chain from primitive man to the modern Western world.

It's shocking The conclusion basically is that bis-xuality (ambis-xuality is a better term) is actually nearly 100% universal among all species, including humans. Studies of primitive and ancient cultures are showing more and more frequency of ambis-xuality and a mindbending lack of exclusive hetero- and homos-xuality.

It ends by stating that Western forms of s-xuality are actually not just a deviation from natural functioning but also psychologically harmful. It's fantastic. Reading about Islamic desert clans whose men cared more about their underaged boy wh-res than their wives etc. was almost like reading p-rn fiction.

Isn't it ironic that they are the ones that oppose any form of homos-xuality more than anyone else. 

I never read any book about it though. My joke aside, I've always thought about it, genuinely. I think it has more to do with how one grows, how that person is influenced by society or relatives and the lack of experience as well as the fear of deviation from what is considered the norm (nowadays), that causes him/her to suppress his/her ambis-xuality and choose to follow an exclusive s-xuality instead.

Can you give me the name of the book here or PM please? Sounds super intriguing.

[Didymus 34,380]

Just now, ****Eliza said:

Isn't it ironic that they are the ones that oppose any form of homos-xuality more than anyone else. 

I never read any book about it though. My joke aside, I've always thought about it, genuinely. I think it has more to do with how one grows, how that person is influenced by society or relatives and the lack of experience as well as the fear of deviation from what is considered the norm (nowadays), that causes him/her to suppress his/her ambis-xuality and choose to follow an exclusive s-xuality instead.

Can you give me the name of the book here or PM please? Sounds super intriguing.

It is ironic indeed but I read a lot about the subject and the sad truth actually is that, although the Qur'an absolutely rejects homos-xual practice, homos-xual activity was mindblowingly widespread in the Islamic world for centuries. Tons of studies have been done about it but somehow they haven't reached mainstream consciousness, which is a pity.

Scholars conclude that it's actually increasing contact with Western society, including homophobia - an idea that is a Western invention, since the Islamic world systematically ignored homos-xual activity instead of talk about it at all - that shaped the current anti-homos-xuality stance in the Islamic world today. Very interesting stuff.

The book is called "The Origins and Role of Same-Sex Relations in Human Societies" by James Neill. If you're interested I can give you a PDF of it I recommend it to everyone.

[Better Day 5,766]

I believe you are either male or female. 

All the non-genders are just pretenious. 

[venusian 4,686]

4 minutes ago, MissRebelDolly said:

I believe you are either male or female. 

All the non-genders are just pretenious. 

you really dont have the right to tell people who dont fit in with male or female if they are valid or not. multiple studies have shown that they are real and valid. from non-binary to genderqueer.