Question for the Ladies, Men Can Answer as well if they want to

[MehGuy]

There was a study a while back in which a selection of gender-intended children's toys were distributed to chimpanzees. All of the chimpanzees, male and female, were initially interested in the "boy's toys" (toy trucks). But only the female chimpanzees were interested in the toy dolls, and the female chimpanzees continued to be interested in the toy dolls for considerably longer than either was interested in the toy trucks.

Interesting. I remember Gad Saad talking about such a study. Didn't know the specifics.

It seems like for each genus there is a "normal" ratio of brain mass to body mass, but if one species of the genus has even a slightly greater percentage of brain above that normal ratio, it becomes an amazing "genius." Crows and certain other black birds, for instance, have only a slightly greater brain to body mass ratio compared to pigeons...but are incredibly more intelligent, and more intelligent than many animals with much greater absolute brain mass.

Yeah. Men and women are roughly equal in intelligence. Men have a slightly larger brain and skull, yet women have a slightly higher brain to body mass ratio. I do find it fascinating how a brain to body mass ratio compared to sheer brain size can contribute to intelligence.

 

[Sammy-San]

Interesting. I remember Gad Saad talking about such a study. Didn't know the specifics.



Yeah. Men and women are roughly equal in intelligence. Men have a slightly larger brain and skull, yet women have a slightly higher brain to body mass ratio. I do find it fascinating how a brain to body mass ratio compared to sheer brain size can contribute to intelligence.

Does this have to do with reproductive functions?

 

[MehGuy]

Does this have to do with reproductive functions?

Human neoteny results in a larger brain to body mass ratio. Men are the ones who select for neotenous traits, thus women are slightly ahead on this curve. Yet men benefit in the long run as a byproduct. As far as having men having larger brains than women, that's probably a consequence of simply having a larger skeletal structure. Although like I said, most IQ tests find women and men to be roughly equal in intelligence. The odd 1 or 2 point differences are negligible.

 

[Sammy-San]

Human neoteny results in a larger brain to body mass ratio. Men are the ones who select for neotenous traits, thus women are slightly ahead on this curve. Yet men benefit in the long run as a byproduct. As far as having men having larger brains than women, that's probably a consequence of simply having a larger skeletal structure. Although like I said, most IQ tests find women and men to be roughly equal in intelligence. The odd 1 or 2 point differences are negligible.

All that has to do with reproductive function?

 

[MehGuy]

All that has to do with reproductive function?

Not sure what you mean by reproductive function. I already stated why the reproductive realties of men and women probably resulted in human neoteny.

 

[Sammy-San]

Not sure what you mean by reproductive function. I already stated why the reproductive realties of men and women probably resulted in human neoteny.

So it indirectly has to reproductive realities?

 

[Sammy-San]

Not sure what you mean by reproductive function. I already stated why the reproductive realties of men and women probably resulted in human neoteny.

God is a jealous God but he knows we are but flesh. So you think the existence of people as male and female is because of that? I think femaleness and certain degrees of maleness exist because of that.

 

[MehGuy]

So it indirectly has to reproductive realities?

As I had to repeat often, sperm is cheap and eggs are not. Not sure how many times I need to repeat myself. I think we're just on two different wave lengths. You're looking at things through a more spiritual lens and I am looking at things through a more evolutionary one. You don't seem to believe in evolution so maybe concepts of neoteny are just too new for you. Even I have a lot of questions about neoteny myself. I don't have everything worked out, but I do know the concept of neoteny is important when it comes to men and women.

 

[MehGuy]

God is a jealous God but he knows we are but flesh. So you think the existence of people as male and female is because of that? I think femaleness and certain degrees of maleness exist because of that.

I'm an atheist. Are you just messing around with me? Lol.

 

[RDKirk]

As I had to repeat often, sperm is cheap and eggs are not. Not sure how many times I need to repeat myself. I think we're just on two different wave lengths. You're looking at things through a more spiritual lens and I am looking at things through a more evolutionary one. You don't seem to believe in evolution so maybe concepts of neoteny are just too new for you. Even I have a lot of questions about neoteny myself. I don't have everything worked out, but I do know the concept of neoteny is important when it comes to men and women.

This is one of the areas where the rubber meets the road and the bible actually gets quite practical. It acknowledges "sperm is cheap and eggs are not" in the requirement repeated in both the Old and New Testaments that protection of widows (who may well still be of child-bearing age) and fatherless children (that is, single mothers) is a primary responsibility of the believing community. In fact, the OT asserts that the specific reason God allowed Israel to go into Babylonian captivity was because they did not care for their widows and single mothers.

Those were the days that a woman needed a man to care for her as a mother and as an old woman. Care of widows of child-bearing age is the specific reason God ever commands a polygamous marriage (when a man's brother has died without leaving a son to care for his widow). In one case, God killed a man who refused to impregnate his brother's widow and thus provide her with a means for old-age care. In fact, this is the one reason a wife is given to divorce her husband: If he refuses to impregnate her so that she has children to care for her in her old age.

All that sounds crude and sexist in this modern day, but that was back before Social Security or public assistance. If a woman didn't have family to care for her, she was destined to a short life or a notorious one. God's requirement was that if all these provisions to provide a male relative fell through, it was then responsibility of the believing community to care for those women.

Men? No such provisions for men. Men could feed pigs.

 

[MehGuy]

This is one of the areas where the rubber meets the road and the bible actually gets quite practical. It acknowledges "sperm is cheap and eggs are not" in the requirement repeated in both the Old and New Testaments that protection of widows (who may well still be of child-bearing age) and fatherless children (that is, single mothers) is a primary responsibility of the believing community. In fact, the OT asserts that the specific reason God allowed Israel to go into Babylonian captivity was because they did not care for their widows and single mothers.

I agree. The Bible, especially the Old Testament meshes with evolutionary psychology topics rather well. I usually find myself having more in common with social conservatives and conservative Christians when it comes to the topic of gender and how people act. Although it does help if they also believe in evolution. Despite being an egalitarian. I used to be more in the gender is a social construct camp during my early atheist days. Conversing with a Christian friend and being exposed to feminist hypocrisy changed my mind.

Just that when posts start mentioning sexless angels and demons, I think the wavelengths may be too different to have a productive conversation. There seems to be a certain mindset I just cannot relate too at all.

All that sounds crude and sexist in this modern day, but that was back before Social Security or public assistance. If a woman didn't have family to care for her, she was destined to a short life or a notorious one. God's requirement was that if all these provisions to provide a male relative fell through, it was then responsibility of the believing community to care for those women.

Men? No such provisions for men. Men could feed pigs.

I also agree with this. It is too easy to view ourselves as morally superior compared to past cultures, yet if we found ourselves in similar circumstances as our ancestors I doubt many of us would do much better.

I used to watch a cartoon called Recess as a kid. They had a clever episode about the Recess society finding a rule book. The king of the Recess playground decided since the book was old it was therefore wise and must be law. So he adopts it. The kids discover how bizarre and weird the rules are, until they discover the rule book was written during the great depression. They realize the rules had a logic for the time and were not weird and strange when they were written. Although not very applicable for today.

 

[Sammy-San]

As I had to repeat often, sperm is cheap and eggs are not. Not sure how many times I need to repeat myself. I think we're just on two different wave lengths. You're looking at things through a more spiritual lens and I am looking at things through a more evolutionary one. You don't seem to believe in evolution so maybe concepts of neoteny are just too new for you. Even I have a lot of questions about neoteny myself. I don't have everything worked out, but I do know the concept of neoteny is important when it comes to men and women.

male and female neotony looks different. One evokes maleness one evokes femaleness. Transgenders have a neotony that looks intermediate of male face and female face.

 

[MehGuy]

male and female neotony looks different. One evokes maleness one evokes femaleness. Transgenders have a neotony that looks intermediate of male face and female face.

I wouldn't say transgenders look intermediate by default. The reality is some trans people pass more easily than others. People born as men with high neotenous features will have an easier time passing as a trans-woman compared to men born with more masculine features. The Gamestop trans-woman doesn't look anywhere near intermediate. Although in her case, she doesn't act feminine at all either, lol. I'm not going to say I know what's going on the inside, but she is a sadly someone who conjures up a caricature of a trans-woman in many people's minds.

Most trans-men look like really noetenous men, or just teenagers. Which gives me a laugh when feminist outlets trout out specific handpicked male-trans men to tell a story of how much better they are treated when they are a man as proof of rampant sexism and misogyny. Even though in reality the experience of such a highly neotenous man isn't the same as a normal looking man. There are trans-men who report discovering the downsides of being perceived as men but they're ignored by such outlets. I suspect these trans-men were born as women with less neotenous features giving them a more authentic experience of the average man.

 

[Sammy-San]

I wouldn't say transgenders look intermediate by default. The reality is some trans people pass more easily than others. People born as men with high neotenous features will have an easier time passing as a trans-woman compared to men born with more masculine features. The Gamestop trans-woman doesn't look anywhere near intermediate. Although in her case, she doesn't act feminine at all either, lol. I'm not going to say I know what's going on the inside, but she is a sadly someone who conjures up a caricature of a trans-woman in many people's minds.

Most trans-men look like really noetenous men, or just teenagers. Which gives me a laugh when feminist outlets trout out specific handpicked male-trans men to tell a story of how much better they are treated when they are a man as proof of rampant sexism and misogyny. Even though in reality the experience of such a highly neotenous man isn't the same as a normal looking man. There are trans-men who report discovering the downsides of being perceived as men but they're ignored by such outlets. I suspect these trans-men were born as women with less neotenous features giving them a more authentic experience of the average man.

Based on what you said about highly neotonous looking men and typical women there is an intermediate.

 

[MehGuy]

Based on what you said about highly neotonous looking men and typical women there is an intermediate.

Some could be classified as such, not all. Not sure what your point is.

There is certainly even a spectrum between disposable and non-disposable men and cherished and protected and disposable women. Even among the cis population. Biology isn't a black and white issue, although the averages still amount to something.

 

[Sammy-San]

I wouldn't say transgenders look intermediate by default. The reality is some trans people pass more easily than others. People born as men with high neotenous features will have an easier time passing as a trans-woman compared to men born with more masculine features. The Gamestop trans-woman doesn't look anywhere near intermediate. Although in her case, she doesn't act feminine at all either, lol. I'm not going to say I know what's going on the inside, but she is a sadly someone who conjures up a caricature of a trans-woman in many people's minds.

Most trans-men look like really noetenous men, or just teenagers. Which gives me a laugh when feminist outlets trout out specific handpicked male-trans men to tell a story of how much better they are treated when they are a man as proof of rampant sexism and misogyny. Even though in reality the experience of such a highly neotenous man isn't the same as a normal looking man. There are trans-men who report discovering the downsides of being perceived as men but they're ignored by such outlets. I suspect these trans-men were born as women with less neotenous features giving them a more authentic experience of the average man.

What you said about highly neotonous men in the first and second paragraph and about normal looking men in the second paragraph and about how women with less neotonous features still look like women if they arent trans supports what I said about distinct male and female faces.

 

[MehGuy]

What you said about highly neotonous men in the first and second paragraph and about normal looking men in the second paragraph and about how women with less neotonous features still look like women if they arent trans supports what I said about distinct male and female faces.

I think for the vast majority of people's faces most people could correctly get the sex right. Doubt a 100% success rate even with a fairly normal looking population. In extreme cases I've heard from women born with very masculine features that they occasionally genuinely get mistaken as trans-women despite dressing feminine and all that. Something which really bothers them. You can in fact still be cis and suffer with dysphoria. Even if probably fairly rare.

 

[Sammy-San]

Some could be classified as such, not all. Not sure what your point is.

There is certainly even a spectrum between disposable and non-disposable men and cherished and protected and disposable women. Even among the cis population. Biology isn't a black and white issue, although the averages still amount to something.

It has to do with what I said about distinct male and female faces, that I believe people notice for reasons more than reproduction. So if people werent but flesh and all had the gift of singleness we would all be sexless or genderless people or sexless or genderless men and women.

Cisgender implies that the face and genitals normally do match. Gender identity is bibically supposed to match birth sex means its not godly for men to have makeup, meaning genitals and face do have an aligned appearence naturally.

 

[Sammy-San]

I think for the vast majority of people's faces most people could correctly get the sex right. Doubt a 100% success rate even with a fairly normal looking population. In extreme cases I've heard from women born with very masculine features that they occasionally genuinely get mistaken as trans-women despite dressing feminine and all that. Something which really bothers them. You can in fact still be cis and suffer with dysphoria. Even if probably fairly rare.

This supports what I said about faces and genitals matching.

 

[Sammy-San]

I think for the vast majority of people's faces most people could correctly get the sex right. Doubt a 100% success rate even with a fairly normal looking population. In extreme cases I've heard from women born with very masculine features that they occasionally genuinely get mistaken as trans-women despite dressing feminine and all that. Something which really bothers them. You can in fact still be cis and suffer with dysphoria. Even if probably fairly rare.

Still supports what I said.