Susan's Place Logo

News:

According to Google Analytics 25,259,719 users made visits accounting for 140,758,117 Pageviews since December 2006

Main Menu

If there is a genetic and biological basis for gender...

Started by Olivia P, June 06, 2014, 12:22:22 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

helen2010

Quote from: peky on June 20, 2014, 05:35:49 PM
so, yeah, what I posted above is still pretty techie but if you dispense of the detail the gist of it is that gender identity, sexual orientation, and other gender specific behaviors and attributes, are due to hard-wired structures on the brain. This circuits are wired under the influence of drugs, hormone, and genes, in the womb, and shortly after birth.
Peky

Many thanks for both postings.   The first to demonstrate authority and the second as a plain English summary.

Now I hate to ask this but I have an insatiable curiousity so will ask any way!

What are the major criticisms that were directed at this research - was it experimental method, sample size, sample selection or something more surprising! 

In other studies which attempted to identify differences in brain morphology I understand that a lot of the research was based on post mortem analysis of TS brains and there was concern that the samples were too small and the brains  may have already been impacted by the use of cross sex hormones.  I have also heard that the imaging devices are still a little primitive. 

I have read some of Allan Schorre's work on affect regulation and the paper you posted appear to be consistent with his views so I think that I am slowly understanding elements of this research. 

Like Jill, at the personal level I tend to the view 'it is what it is, let's treat it' and not over think this, but I certainly see the need for 'medical and scientific evidence' to influence policy and law makers.   

Unfortunately theories and paradigms just seem to take ages to be challenged, questioned, rejected and replaced.  In the meantime, we wander around a little lost, confused, invalidated and not well understood.

Fascinating stuff indeed.

Sincere thanks for sharing.

Aisla
  •  

Stochastic

Quote from: peky on June 20, 2014, 04:49:04 PM
Research of the past 14 years had produce a body of evidence that indicates that gender identity and sexual orientation are biological determined.

However, the brain centers involved in gender identity are different than the centers involve in sexual orientation, that is there are two different systems.

These discoveries first accepted and embraced by the endocrinologist, neurologists, neurobiologists, geneticist, and pediatricians, and later on by surgeons, have not sway some of the psychiatric and/or psychology establishment, who still hold to rather obtuse and outdate psychobabble theories of gender identity and/or sexual orientation development... that is not surprising as these field are empirical fields

Hi Peky. I appreciate your contributions to the forum. There is a recent opinion(synthesis?) in the Transgender Studies Quarterly (page 42). My opinion of this paper changes every time I read this. I would be interested in reading your interpretation of this paper.

Brain Imaging - C. Armes Gauthier
Transgender Studies Quarterly
http://tsq.dukejournals.org/content/1/1-2/42.full.pdf
  •  

peky

Quote from: Stochastic on June 21, 2014, 07:37:41 AM
Hi Peky. I appreciate your contributions to the forum. There is a recent opinion(synthesis?) in the Transgender Studies Quarterly (page 42). My opinion of this paper changes every time I read this. I would be interested in reading your interpretation of this paper.

Brain Imaging - C. Armes Gauthier
Transgender Studies Quarterly
http://tsq.dukejournals.org/content/1/1-2/42.full.pdf

I fingered through a few pages, read one topic (imaging the brain), then looked up two authors...

Seems they are: psychologists and/or sociologists involved in gender studies and ethics. They sound scientific but they are not, they are what they are: social studies people trying to explain biological phenomena in a verbose and pedantic language that may seem scholastic to some but not to me.. no cigar, not even close

Personally, this type of studies in general end up giving me a migraine and/or nausea... who can believe their BS ???
  •  

helen2010

Quote from: peky on June 21, 2014, 07:11:40 PM
I fingered through a few pages, read one topic (imaging the brain), then looked up two authors...

Seems they are: psychologists and/or sociologists involved in gender studies and ethics. They sound scientific but they are not, they are what they are: social studies people trying to explain biological phenomena in a verbose and pedantic language that may seem scholastic to some but not to me.. no cigar, not even close

Personally, this type of studies in general end up giving me a migraine and/or nausea... who can believe their BS ???

Peky

I love it!  Short and succinct.  Pithy and provocative.  Waiting for the response from the social scientists.

Having said this - human interaction does help drive and modify human behavior so they do have something to offer ;)

Aisla
  •  

Stochastic

Quote from: peky on June 21, 2014, 07:11:40 PM
I fingered through a few pages, read one topic (imaging the brain), then looked up two authors...

Seems they are: psychologists and/or sociologists involved in gender studies and ethics. They sound scientific but they are not, they are what they are: social studies people trying to explain biological phenomena in a verbose and pedantic language that may seem scholastic to some but not to me.. no cigar, not even close

Personally, this type of studies in general end up giving me a migraine and/or nausea... who can believe their BS ???

Thanks for your input. Confusing is my polite way of describing the paper although I will not disagree with your characterization ;). The author's conclusion that new theories are needed that support the data gathered. However, the author does not specifically state what the existing problems are and does not prescribe a solution to the problems. I am surprised the work was approved by the editors.
  •  

peky

So, to be fair I must acknowledge that the studies supporting the biological origin of GID are indicative but the whole story is in its infancy.

Like many other human biological phenomena we suffer from a large sample size, and thus any statistical conclusion may be weak.

More  important is the fact that the highest brain mapping resolution is now 1 cubic millimeter, not good enough to get a really good picture of how things work and are related. Remember that there are about 50,000 neurons in 1 cubic millimeter of brain tissue, which translates into 100,000,000 connections.

However, help is on the way...

http://www.humanconnectomeproject.org/


  •