DNA can tell you whether someone is male or female

[Shadow Wolf]

No, the only problems that a mixed race person encounters due to being mixed is society's prejudices. My dad was black and my mom was white, so certainly I know all about that. People treating me and my mom cruelly over it (both black and white) caused me a lot of psychological trauma that caused me to be very resentful and racist myself until I personally underwent a healing process and reconciled my heritage with myself. Now I proudly say I'm mixed and don't feel a need to pigeonhole myself into "black" or "white". I'm just a human being. That stuff goes back to America's nasty history of racial obsession, which I don't really find in most other areas of the world, so it's a social issue. "Black" and "white" are made up racial caste labels and don't exist

Yeah. They way they talk being mixed is an issue and concern of itself, but as far as I can tell the problem is other people. And then I moved to California where Euro and Latin American pairing is common and no one cares about it. No confusion, no not knowing who they are, just none of the bull**** white MidWesterners frequently peddle.

 

[rational experiences]

If you weren't Living as the human you'd have nothing to say.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Yeah. They way they talk being mixed is an issue and concern of itself, but as far as I can tell the problem is other people. And then I moved to California where Euro and Latin American pairing is common and no one cares about it. No confusion, no not knowing who they are, just none of the bull**** white MidWesterners frequently peddle.

I do recall that I never really experienced racism myself until coming to the Midwest. No one in SF when I was very young bothered me, my mom or dad over race while we were there. But I come to Ohio and the ghetto black kids bully me over having a white mother, saying I was adopted, sending me home in tears demanding to know if it was true. Then my white trash relatives reject me. The Midwest seems to be full of racist blacks and whites, and they don't even have a culture or history like the South. How pathetic. They can shove their college football and cornfields.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I do recall that I never really experienced racism myself until coming to the Midwest. No one in SF when I was very young bothered me, my mom or dad over race while we were there.

That doesn't surprise me. Even the California hick town I live in now, it just doesn't compare to the MidWest (on many levels), to the point it was shocking the first time I went back to Indiana to visit.
And people here don't give me grief for being trans or presenting in more non-binary ways. They give me grief for being a woman, amd even a couple of women have been absolute pigs thinking it's ok because we're both women and she's not a guy doing it. Even guys honking their horns to get my attention and wave at me got old really quick, because, wow and damn, it seems like you can go from being unnoticed to turning heads and people letting you go first real quick when you have good hair and grow a pair of tits.
Oh, and then learning the male gaze isn't just an expression. Some old creepy professor looking guy reminded me of that the other day.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

You keep saying neuroimaging, but they've done more than just that, such as examining the brains of dead people.

Yes, and behavioral studies, genomics (and omics and bioinformatics methods), whole swathes of big data analyses on vast bioinformation databases, etc. Of course, most of these are more problematic and only indirectly measure variations within and among the populations of interest.
But the overwhelming majority of studies here involve neuroimaging technology & methods both structural and functional.

No, it doesn't, as it has been found men's and women's brains look different.

Let's accept this as unproblematic for a moment. The point you seem to be glossing over is that when "they" found this result "they" made the assumption that biological sex is independent of things like gender identity, culture, etc.
In other words, the research purporting to show that "men's and women's brains look different" assumes that "men" can be defined unproblematically by anatomical/biological sex, and the same with women. That's been a central criticism of the research, including criticisms from gender studies, women studies, etc., not just within neuroscience and the cognitive sciences more generally.
But once you assume (as this research does) that what enables one to speak of "men's and women's brains" is biological gender and nothing else, then the moment you assert that one can be biologically/anatomically male and have a brain that "looks female", you've erased or undermined the foundational assumption behind the claim that "men's and women's brains look different."
Think about it:
The claims about sex-based brain differences rest upon the validity of using biological sex as the sole determinate of whether an individual has the brain of a "man" or a "woman".
So, for example, under these assumptions it is impossible to show that an individual whose biological sex is male can have any brain under than that of a male. Likewise for women. It has been the guiding and foundational principle of research on sex-based differences in the brain that we can safely and validly assert that someone who is biologically "male" has a "male" brain.
If one then uses this research and finds individuals whose brains "look like" the sex they identify with, it means they do not have brains that "look" like they are supposed to according to the research claiming that men and women have different brains.
It is this binary assumption that is at the core of so many critiques of such studies in the literature:
Sex beyond the genitalia: The human brain mosaic
The Future of Sex and Gender in Psychology: Five Challenges to the Gender Binary (see attached)
Re-conceptualizing 'sex' and 'gender' in the human brain (see attached)

I'm not trying to argue for or against the body of evidence (or some part of it, as it is quite diverse) supporting the existence of differences between male and female brains. Nor am I arguing for or against claims about the ways in which gender can manifest differently from sex in those whose biologically assigned sex is incongruent/differs from their gender identity.
My point is simply that you can't use a body of research that has depended almost entirely on the assumption that the only thing that makes male brains "male" and female's brains "female" is biological sex (and therefore those whose identity differs from sex would be classified according to this binary system) as evidence for transgendered brains with claims that contradict this foundational assumption. You can, of course, undermine the notions associated with binary sex classifications and/or their relevance to gender with such research. And people have.
But there is a basic problem of logic at play here. You can't go from the assumption that "men's and women's brains look different" when the research supporting this ignores anything other than sex assigned at birth or biological sex to support claims about individuals who have brains that "look" like anything other than biological sex.
Such claims would have to be considerably more nuanced to avoid what is bordering on a proof-by-contradiction that it is indeed possible to both have established "men's and women's brains look different" while asserting that one can have a brain that "looks male" when one's biological sex is female.

It's not known how the brains of transgender people develop as they do, but it's strongly believed it has to do with exposure to prenatal hormones that shifted to cause the body to go one way but the brain the other.

Such dichotomous thinking. If you accept that the interaction between brain development, sex differences in the brain, and sex and gender themselves are all more complicated than simple reduction to biological sex, then you are rejecting a core assumption underlying a vast majority of research supporting differences between male and female brains.
But regardless, the truth is that we actually know considerably less about the supposed differences in male and female brains than has been assumed, and the advantage of more nuanced studies and transgender studies is in part that we are better able to question the methods, findings, and interpretations of findings of previous work as well as ask better questions, new questions, and broader questions.
Neuroscience in transgender people: an update

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Yes, and behavioral studies, genomics (and omics and bioinformatics methods), whole swathes of big data analyses on vast bioinformation databases, etc. Of course, most of these are more problematic and only indirectly measure variations within and among the populations of interest.
But the overwhelming majority of studies here involve neuroimaging technology & methods both structural and functional.


Let's accept this as unproblematic for a moment. The point you seem to be glossing over is that when "they" found this result "they" made the assumption that biological sex is independent of things like gender identity, culture, etc.
In other words, the research purporting to show that "men's and women's brains look different" assumes that "men" can be defined unproblematically by anatomical/biological sex, and the same with women. That's been a central criticism of the research, including criticisms from gender studies, women studies, etc., not just within neuroscience and the cognitive sciences more generally.
But once you assume (as this research does) that what enables one to speak of "men's and women's brains" is biological gender and nothing else, then the moment you assert that one can be biologically/anatomically male and have a brain that "looks female", you've erased or undermined the foundational assumption behind the claim that "men's and women's brains look different."
Think about it:
The claims about sex-based brain differences rest upon the validity of using biological sex as the sole determinate of whether an individual has the brain of a "man" or a "woman".
So, for example, under these assumptions it is impossible to show that an individual whose biological sex is male can have any brain under than that of a male. Likewise for women. It has been the guiding and foundational principle of research on sex-based differences in the brain that we can safely and validly assert that someone who is biologically "male" has a "male" brain.
If one then uses this research and finds individuals whose brains "look like" the sex they identify with, it means they do not have brains that "look" like they are supposed to according to the research claiming that men and women have different brains.
It is this binary assumption that is at the core of so many critiques of such studies in the literature:
Sex beyond the genitalia: The human brain mosaic
The Future of Sex and Gender in Psychology: Five Challenges to the Gender Binary (see attached)
Re-conceptualizing 'sex' and 'gender' in the human brain (see attached)

I'm not trying to argue for or against the body of evidence (or some part of it, as it is quite diverse) supporting the existence of differences between male and female brains. Nor am I arguing for or against claims about the ways in which gender can manifest differently from sex in those whose biologically assigned sex is incongruent/differs from their gender identity.
My point is simply that you can't use a body of research that has depended almost entirely on the assumption that the only thing that makes male brains "male" and female's brains "female" is biological sex (and therefore those whose identity differs from sex would be classified according to this binary system) as evidence for transgendered brains with claims that contradict this foundational assumption. You can, of course, undermine the notions associated with binary sex classifications and/or their relevance to gender with such research. And people have.
But there is a basic problem of logic at play here. You can't go from the assumption that "men's and women's brains look different" when the research supporting this ignores anything other than sex assigned at birth or biological sex to support claims about individuals who have brains that "look" like anything other than biological sex.
Such claims would have to be considerably more nuanced to avoid what is bordering on a proof-by-contradiction that it is indeed possible to both have established "men's and women's brains look different" while asserting that one can have a brain that "looks male" when one's biological sex is female.


Such dichotomous thinking. If you accept that the interaction between brain development, sex differences in the brain, and sex and gender themselves are all more complicated than simple reduction to biological sex, then you are rejecting a core assumption underlying a vast majority of research supporting differences between male and female brains.
But regardless, the truth is that we actually know considerably less about the supposed differences in male and female brains than has been assumed, and the advantage of more nuanced studies and transgender studies is in part that we are better able to question the methods, findings, and interpretations of findings of previous work as well as ask better questions, new questions, and broader questions.
Neuroscience in transgender people: an update

Again, a massive wall of text that ignores much, such as I am not referencing one study, and back again to neuroimaging you go with attempts to create problems that aren't there.

 

[We Never Know]

Phantom pain originates in the brain and in the spinal cord as a result of a miscommunication of nervous system signals between your spinal cord and your brain. The nerve connections are still there, but they're damaged and no longer attached to the amputated body part. Nerves in your spinal cord and brain basically end up having to re-wire themselves when they lose signals from the missing body part.

Phantom pain is no longer thought to be psychological in nature, is my point.

My finger tips can't hurt or itch if they are no longer there. That's reality.

 

[We Never Know]

This is literally a reduction to the absurd fallacy.

Really! If I am a native american person that feels/identifies as a man, woman or a dog or afroamerican, or asian, or etc,, ,,, is that ok?
Would you accept any or all

 

[We Never Know]

Phantom pain originates in the brain and in the spinal cord as a result of a miscommunication of nervous system signals between your spinal cord and your brain. The nerve connections are still there, but they're damaged and no longer attached to the amputated body part. Nerves in your spinal cord and brain basically end up having to re-wire themselves when they lose signals from the missing body part.

Phantom pain is no longer thought to be psychological in nature, is my point.

"Phantom pain originates in the brain"


Yep its in the mind

 

[Twilight Hue]

Really! If I am a native american person that feels/identifies as a man, woman or a dog or afroamerican, or asian, or etc,, ,,, is that ok?
Would you accept any or all

There a movement for trans ethnic rights.

 

[Aštra’el]

No, it doesn't, as it has been found men's and women's brains look different.

How are you going to sit there and tell us “men and women’s brains look different” when you can’t even define what a man or a woman even is?

 

[wellwisher]

If you look at the world various cultures, customs and behaviors of the world, learned and conditioned human behavior creates a wide range of options, yet we all have human DNA.These options are not in the DNA, since they are learned from the outside and reinforced by culture and/or subculture. Willpower and choice allows for learned group and individual options to exist, beyond a homogeneous one size fits all.

If you go deeper into the subcultures of all cultures, they all have their closet subcultures, which tend to roam the nights.

If you look at the differences between white and black races in the USA, why are we not treating races like we do transsexuals and attribute all differences to genetic differences? One can take a DNA test for Ancestry.com and they can trace your family tree from country to country since enough genetic difference exists even in cultures of the same color that live in next door countries. The reason is we know this is not a terminal choice, since humans can learn to be anything we wish or are given the opportunity.

You cannot have it both ways, unless you are from the Left.

Maybe an an exercise of the willful actor that is involved in many social choices promoted by the left, let us have a competition to see who can pretend to be someone else the most effectively. All it takes is the ability to copy behavior in stay in character. This can be made easier by social carrot and stick.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

How are you going to sit there and tell us “men and women’s brains look different” when you can’t even define what a man or a woman even is?

Because I like this thing called science, and it turns out a lot of times when people die they get sliced up and examined, including the brain. Einstein's brain, for example, was studied after his death.
Amd you never asked me to define man or woman.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Maybe an an exercise of the willful actor that is involved in many social choices promoted by the left, let us have a competition to see who can pretend to be someone else the most effectively. All it takes is the ability to copy behavior in stay in character. This can be made easier by social carrot and stick.

That makes no sense. Are you suggesting we just need someone to model specific behaviors for us? Are you suggesting transgender people are making a choice?

 

[Aštra’el]

it turns out a lot of times when people die they get sliced up and examined, including the brain. Einstein's brain, for example, was studied after his death.
Amd you never asked me to define man or woman.

You said:

it has been found that men’s and women’s brains looks different.

By this... do you mean that an adult human male brain looks different than an adult human female brain? Or are you saying that the brain of an adult human of either sex who identifies as a man looks different than the brain of a person of an adult human of either sex who identifies as a woman?

Do the people running these tests share your definitions of “man” and “woman”?

At what point in one’s life does a brain begin looking like a “man brain” or “woman brain”?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

By this... do you mean that an adult human male brain looks different than an adult human female brain? Or are you saying that the brain of an adult human of either sex who identifies as a man looks different than the brain of a person of an adult human of either sex who identifies as a woman?

A male brain will look like a male brain. A female-to-male brain will look more like a male brain than a female brain. And vice versa.

Do the people running these tests share your definitions of “man” and “woman”?

Most of these haven't even been concerned about or considering transgender people. And keep in mind it's not just tests, but also things such as a detailed autopsies of brains.

 

[Revoltingest]

A male brain will look like a male brain. A female-to-male brain will look more like a male brain than a female brain. And vice versa.

Most of these haven't even been concerned about or considering transgender people. And keep in mind it's not just tests, but also things such as a detailed autopsies of brains.

People are too obsessed with defining "male" & "female".
When things can blur because of technical issues, there
might not be a good definition that covers all possible cases.
However, we can still identify a large fraction of people as
either "male" or "female" cuz of a preponderance of factors.

I speculate that the definition problem is being used as
a bogus argument....If you cannot offer a precise all
encompassing definition, then you cannot even discern
whether anyone is male or female.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I speculate that the definition problem is being used as
a bogus argument...

Yeah. They don't even look cromulent. Just attempts to poke holes and try to force something out of it (as evidenced by the numerous assumptions made in this thread).

 

[Aštra’el]

A male brain will look like a male brain. A female-to-male brain will look more like a male brain than a female brain. And vice versa.
.

I didn’t ask about male brains and female brains. I asked about men’s brains and women’s brains, which are the terms you used in the post I cited.

I mean to many people the words mean the same thing... but I was under the impression that the politically correct terminology uses “man” or “woman” to describe gender, and uses “male” or “female” to describe sex.

So which is it?

Yeah. They don't even look cromulent. Just attempts to poke holes and try to force something out of it (as evidenced by the numerous assumptions made in this thread).

No, but you keep using male/ man and female/ woman interchangeably when talking about people’s brains. I frequently see people rabidly lecturing others about how one word describes sex (male/ female) and another word describes gender (man/ woman). So when you talk about “men brains” and “women brains”, and “male brains” and “female brains” it made me wonder if you are referring to the person’s sex or gender, and what the people conducting these tests are referring to when they say male/ man brain or female/ woman brain.

People are too obsessed with defining "male" & "female".

I speculate that the definition problem is being used as
a bogus argument....If you cannot offer a precise all
encompassing definition, then you cannot even discern
whether anyone is male or female.

Revoltingest. If the argument is going to be made that there are “men’s brains” and “women’s brains”, is it not a legitimate question to ask what they mean by “man” or “woman”? I know what those words mean to me. I do not know what they mean to Shadow Wolf, or to the people allegedly conducting these tests.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I do not know what they mean to Shadow Wolf, or to the people allegedly conducting these tests.

If I'm using the terms interchangeably you could have just asked "do you use them interchangeably" if you need clarity instead of going on those who make a fuss out of not using them interchangeably.
I'm using them interchangeably, so I'm probably not too caught up in such a trivial manner.