Scientific Evidence and Gender, Sex, and Transsexuality

[SabahTheLoner]

I disagree, brain scans show differences in male and female gendered people.

Yes but most people have a degree of androgyny within their brain, both in
physical structure and information processing. It is estimated that only six out of 100 people have a brain that is uniformly one gender.

Are Male and Female Brains Different?

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

Both articles claim that although there are patterns, most brains have characteristics of both genders.

 

[godnotgod]

The American prison system?

Yes, but an extreme example. What I am reading re: the experiment I cited is that humans perhaps have a psycho-sexual field which is broken down when living in the close quarters of urban environments.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that when the negative conditions which the lab mice were exposed to were removed, they all reverted back to heterosexuality.

 

[Polymath257]

This was formed from a derailing conversation I was having with @Alison Wonderland on another thread. But anyone is welcome to join in.

Does science have evidence about the issues of gender, sex, and transsexuality?

If it does what do they have to say?

First, of course it does.

The main problem is that *most* research in sociology (and hence, on gender issues) are specific to a certain society and have a very low confidence level (p<0.05). This should inspire a great deal of skepticism in any of the results obtained.

The main distinction made is between sex, which is the physical aspect, usually determined by genitalia, and gender, which is sociological.

Both aspects have fuzzy boundaries, however.

For example, it is possible to be *genetically* XY (i.e, male) and developmentally (physically) female. This happens in a condition called androgen insensitivity and if usually only discovered when the 'woman' attempts to get pregnant, fails, and further investigation is made.

It is also possible to be 'androgenous' with either both sets of genitals or neither. Often, surgery is used to resolve such cases to one sex or the other.

On the gender side, societies often change their gender roles: what is acceptable in one society at one time may not be acceptable in another society or even the same society at another time. An example of this would be males wearing hosiery. At one time in Europe, among the upper classes, it was almost required. Now, it is almost forbidden. Not that long ago, it was considered undesirable for a woman to be working outside of the home. Now, the exact opposite viewpoint is more common.

So, with the varieties of *both* physical and sociological aspects, it is to be expected that some people will be unhappy with the roles they find themselves in. The specifics of why this happens would clearly depend on the specific cases and we could expect a wide variety of impulses here also.

 

[viole]

This was formed from a derailing conversation I was having with @Alison Wonderland on another thread. But anyone is welcome to join in.

Does science have evidence about the issues of gender, sex, and transsexuality?

If it does what do they have to say?

Well, there seems to be some evidence that transexuals exist.

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

Good luck with your customer service jobs and pile of female rejections when you starting approaching 30. Maybe remind them of your philosophy degree.

LOL

Maybe I am not statistically relevant, but I think that F. Nietzsche was quite sexy. Plato and his most famous teacher were not so bad either. And I utterly love Parmenides and Epicure, especially the former. Not to speak of Democritus: he is a good laugh.

Would do anything to have a date with each of them; well, at least if I were single.

Perhaps it is not so bad if being a philosopher entails an automatic selection of the females who wants to date him. I mean, you might run the risk of someone like Paris Hilton, or one of the Kardashians sisters, wanting to date someone like Spinoza, otherwise. Poor Spinoza.

Ciao

- viole

 

[CogentPhilosopher]

Yes but most people have a degree of androgyny within their brain, both in
physical structure and information processing. It is estimated that only six out of 100 people have a brain that is uniformly one gender.

Are Male and Female Brains Different?

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

Both articles claim that although there are patterns, most brains have characteristics of both genders.

Who decided to label brains in that manner?

Brains that consistently form female personalities should considered female and vice versa for males. There are non-binary people but I consider non-binary to be a brain that does not have a large majority in favor of one type or the other compared to gendered brains.

 

[Mister Emu]

Does science have evidence about the issues of gender, sex, and transsexuality?

If it does what do they have to say?

Sex is more of a biology thing, but within Psychology, we have evidence that gender identity, and therefore trans-sexuality, develops during childhood from about 3 years old to about 8 years old with some give on either side of the range. After childhood this identity cements and becomes an immutable part of the person's self image.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I think that a Canadian Psychologist by the name of Olive Skene Johnson wrote quite an excellent book on this subject call "The Sexual Spectrum." I've read it and recommend it, although it's some years old now.

 

[siti]

@CogentPhilosopher and @Alison Wonderland...here's my take...

that tension between you two...that's sexual

the male/female insults you throw at each other as a result...that's gender

On the science and sex/gender...etc. thing...both homosexuality and gender-bending (is that a PC term? - not that I care much) are ubiquitous in the natural world. Many animals, from guinea pigs to giraffes (giraffes are decidedly gay it seems), have been observed to engage in homosexual behaviour, including all of these:

Human culture often makes the mistake of forcing gender based on sex - the natural world does not do this. E.g. if you keep chickens and say your rooster pops his clogs - one of the hens will, quite naturally, take on that gender role and stop laying. If a new rooster is brought in, she will revert, quite naturally, to her original role.

Point is, I reckon we are whatever we are sexually - and we are all variations of mixed gender which mix itself can change over time - some find their gender psychologically so opposed to their physical sexual characteristics that they feel the need to change their sex, and since we have the nip and tuck technology to do a sex change and no safe and reliable way to change a person's gender psychology, I see absolutely no reason why we shouldn't do it or why that should be a problem to anyone else.

I sincerely hope this helps - from a perfectly normal slightly gender-confused 50-something grandfather.

 

[Polymath257]

@CogentPhilosopher and @Alison Wonderland...here's my take...

that tension between you two...that's sexual

the male/female insults you throw at each other as a result...that's gender

On the science and sex/gender...etc. thing...both homosexuality and gender-bending (is that a PC term? - not that I care much) are ubiquitous in the natural world. Many animals, from guinea pigs to giraffes (giraffes are decidedly gay it seems), have been observed to engage in homosexual behaviour, including all of these:

Human culture often makes the mistake of forcing gender based on sex - the natural world does not do this. E.g. if you keep chickens and say your rooster pops his clogs - one of the hens will, quite naturally, take on that gender role and stop laying. If a new rooster is brought in, she will revert, quite naturally, to her original role.

Point is, I reckon we are whatever we are sexually - and we are all variations of mixed gender which mix itself can change over time - some find their gender psychologically so opposed to their physical sexual characteristics that they feel the need to change their sex, and since we have the nip and tuck technology to do a sex change and no safe and reliable way to change a person's gender psychology, I see absolutely no reason why we shouldn't do it or why that should be a problem to anyone else.

I sincerely hope this helps - from a perfectly normal slightly gender-confused 50-something grandfather.

If you want to go to the natural world, things can get *really* bent.

Many species of fish and amphibian will change *sexes* based on environmental temperatures. They will physically change, including different hormones. This is because in those species, sex is not genetically determined.

In mammals, the male is the sex with unlike chromosomes (XY instead of XX). In birds, the male is the one with *similar* chromosomes (AA instead of AB).

There are a couple of species of lizard that only have females. The females will, however, perform male mating 'rituals' to stimulate each other into parthenogenesis.

In fungi, there can be *hundreds* of different 'sexes'--breading types that can interbreed with any sex other than their own.

 

[CogentPhilosopher]

@CogentPhilosopher and @Alison Wonderland...here's my take...

that tension between you two...that's sexual

I've got standards.

 

[godnotgod]

From an Eastern POV, the masculine aspect is seen in balance with the feminine aspect within both male and female. IOW, the male has a minor feminine counterpart within, and the female a minor masculine counterpart within, ala Yin and Yang complementary arrangement. I wonder if there is anything similar from a scientific POV.

 

[godnotgod]

Especially when they're 20 years old and actually believe that life will unfold for them as they dream after they finish studying philosophy.

Good luck with your... um... life plans.

Don't be so coy...

Philosophy can, and in many cases is, a stepping stone to profound experiences in Higher Consciousness, experiences that can be priceless. When this occurs, philosophy becomes a feather in one's cap. I believe man should nurture philosophy as part of the pathway to spiritual nourishment in a world too often approached from a scientifically reductionist POV. As it is turning out, science is having a devil of a time actually latching onto anything at all on the sub-atomic level. It is appearing more and more to look like the maya the Hindus have pointed to for centuries.

I would only add that in a more mature state of spiritual development, the world and its 'life plans' can take on the appearance of insignificant fiction rather than of the overly-serious importance we so often assign to them. Any good philosophy must include a light-hearted view of the world to be authentic. And we do find this very precious key in the ideas of lila and maya in Hinduism.

Descartes cogito ergo sum, besides being logically flawed, is too intellectual to qualify...ha ha ha.....Conversely, though, it is a good source for a a good laugh at oneself.

footnote: Zen would jokingly ask of the cogito: "So when not thinking, one then does not exist?"

 

[CogentPhilosopher]

Wow. I was going to keep having fun with you, but now I actually feel sorry for you.

I have a strong distaste for people who have experienced too little, think too much of themselves and go looking to the internet to attempt to forge some avatar as a profound intellectual. Especially when they're 20 years old and actually believe that life will unfold for them as they dream after they finish studying philosophy.

Btw - I debate for a living; a damn good living to boot.

Good luck with your... um... life plans.

Do you have to try to bully people to feel better about yourself?

 

[CogentPhilosopher]

From an Eastern POV, the masculine aspect is seen in balance with the feminine aspect within both male and female. IOW, the male has a minor feminine counterpart within, and the female a minor masculine counterpart within, ala Yin and Yang complementary arrangement. I wonder if there is anything similar from a scientific POV.

Are you trying to imply there is no scientific point of view in the east?

 

[Alison Wonderland]

Do you have to try to bully people to feel better about yourself?

I'd be lying if I said I wasn't having fun with you but no; it has nothing to do with my self esteem and, as stated clearly in my above post, I have a strong distaste for people who have experienced too little, think too much of themselves and go looking to the internet to attempt to forge some avatar as a profound intellectual. Which is what drove me to hone in on you in the first place.

For instance: you started this thread purely to start a pissing match with me. You deleted your own obnoxious comments towards me on the other aforementioned thread.

You value "knowledge and debate"? Please... who doesn't? And, like I said, debate is a pivotal part of my profession - something that, more often then not, results in clashes, compromises and decisions; you're getting spoon fed units on philosophy by academics and, from what I can tell, don't have much going on outside of that; probably why you appeal to an internet forum to derive your self esteem.

I'm just amazed at your stark honesty regarding your personal life. I know the internet attracts damaged individuals but you really torched yourself with that post.

 

[godnotgod]

Are you trying to imply there is no scientific point of view in the east?

Of course not; I am simply asking if Western-based science proposes a similarly balanced view. I don't know that it does.

 

[Alison Wonderland]

Of course not; I am simply asking if Western-based science proposes a similarly balanced view. I don't know that it does.

You seem to be discussing an incredibly generalized form of science.

Gender studies for instance can be considered to be a form of junk science in many cases and completely contrary to scientific study of biological sex.

 

[Alison Wonderland]

I'm glad I have a full ride through college and am planning to teach as a professor and am actually trying to study rather than party all of the time.

Maybe unlike you, some women value intelligence.

Wow - can't believe I overlooked this gem.

A person can't survive in the profession I work in without valuing intelligence, logic and an astute tune into cultural progress.

However, the world could do with a lot less philosophy majors and professors.

 

[CogentPhilosopher]

I'd be lying if I said I wasn't having fun with you but no; it has nothing to do with my self esteem and, as stated clearly in my above post, I have a strong distaste for people who have experienced too little, think too much of themselves and go looking to the internet to attempt to forge some avatar as a profound intellectual. Which is what drove me to hone in on you in the first place.

For instance: you started this thread purely to start a pissing match with me. You deleted your own obnoxious comments towards me on the other aforementioned thread.

You value "knowledge and debate"? Please... who doesn't? And, like I said, debate is a pivotal part of my profession - something that, more often then not, results in clashes, compromises and decisions; you're getting spoon fed units on philosophy by academics and, from what I can tell, don't have much going on outside of that; probably why you appeal to an internet forum to derive your self esteem.

I'm just amazed at your stark honesty regarding your personal life. I know the internet attracts damaged individuals but you really torched yourself with that post.

I love how many assumptions that you try and fail to make.

Really your projections about your own state in life are adorable.

Some dark part of me wants to play with you like a cat does a mouse.