My index was 68 mm and ring 65, so 1.04. If I measured correctly. I went down to the crease on each finger. Most women have bigger hands then me and wrists as well. I guess there was a reason for being picked last in gym without fail.

2 7/8" index (both hands)

3 1/8" ring (both hands)

I/R = 0.92

Quote from: Orihime on March 11, 2013, 07:13:40 PM
"Comparison between right-handed individuals revealed that the right-hand 2D:4D in MFT is higher than in control males but similar to that observed in control females."

It looks to me like the mean for control males is 0.955 and MTF (and control females) is 0.970

N was about 60 for each group, which include FTMs.

Schneider HJ, Pickel J, Stalla GK (February 2006). "Typical female 2nd-4th finger length (2D:4D) ratios in male-to-female transsexuals-possible implications for prenatal androgen exposure". Psychoneuroendocrinology 31 (2): 265–9. doi:10.1016/j.psyneuen.2005.07.005. PMID 16140461.

Jeez...talk about splitting hairs! I thought the use of measurements to determine anything went out in the 1930's, you know...skull size = brain size = smarts.

Gotta link to the Wiki?

Quote from: Beth Andrea on March 11, 2013, 09:24:18 PM
2 7/8" index (both hands)

3 1/8" ring (both hands)

I/R = 0.92

Jeez...talk about splitting hairs! I thought the use of measurements to determine anything went out in the 1930's, you know...skull size = brain size = smarts.

Gotta link to the Wiki?

Here's the link and it has almost a 100 citations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digit_ratio

I'm not sure how much it matters it's just a correlation  that as a whole women have longer index fingers and this occurs at birth from day one and never changes. That's why it's considered a valid measurement: immutability. Some dispute it's worth and it would be a shame if things like this started to be used to weed out some trans women and creat a class of small handed trans women. Though I won't lie there is a huge part of me thI don't see that happeningat wants to be considered that wants to be considered part of an elite class of beautiful, small handed women.  If you replace beautiful women with ugly then maybe it could happen lol I accept it. That's what my ex used to say. You're going to an ugly woman. Don't do it.

Thanks for the link. I asked for it because several of the posts in this thread seemed to have contradictory instructions or information, so wanted to read it for myself.

For example, the mean and SD are not the same as mentioned earlier:

QuoteFrom a study of 136 males and 137 females:[13]

    Males: mean 0.947, standard deviation 0.029.
    Females: mean 0.965, standard deviation 0.026.

Assuming a normal distribution, the 10th and 90th percentiles for males are 0.910 and 0.984. For females: 0.932 and 0.998.

Mine are the same length to the mm

My Index Finger: 79 mm
My Ring Finger: 78 mm
2D:4D Ratio: 1.013

Honestly, I'm surprised that the average difference between women and men is so low. Because I've actually been randomly looking at people's hands while I'm at work, and it seems like every single man I saw has noticeably longer ring fingers, while every single woman I saw had ring and index fingers that looked exactly like mine, being about the same length. So I'm surprised that the difference in averages is so small.

And yeah, I've heard about this study. Quite interesting. I first found out about it when I was looking up information on the internet back in December about ways to determine if someone really is transgender or not, and there was one question that asked "do you have any physical characteristics that are far too female to be normal?" and the 2D:4D digit ratio was one of the seven that was listed, which eventually led me to the links to all of these studies that have been mentioned in this topic because I was curious about it. And yeah, I was fascinated by my feminine hand ratio, and spent probably the next week straight looking at the hands of every single man and woman at my poker tables. And even in that ENTIRE week of looking, I was still the only genetic male I saw who had a longer index finger than ring finger, out of a good 250 people or so that I observed, with maybe three or four who were close. (12 tables per day, 9 players per table, 3 days a week, with some slight overlap in terms of regulars.) So, yeah, that study really blew my mind when I first learned about it, and observing it in real life was really fun.

Isnt this interesting;
I have very small hands and my finger measurements are:
Left Hand
Index 72mm
Ring finger: 68mm

Right Hand:
Index: 72mm
Ring Finger; 69mm

Same on my feet theu are very small taking a

Size 10 in womens shoes

This al made it impossible for me to play Rugby or anything requiring big hands like Basketball.

0,9394, after you stung my curiosity. So much for my bear's paws. Aw well, t'was expected.

Quote from: Beth Andrea on March 11, 2013, 10:04:05 PM
Thanks for the link. I asked for it because several of the posts in this thread seemed to have contradictory instructions or information, so wanted to read it for myself.

For example, the mean and SD are not the same as mentioned earlier:

Oh I took my numbers from the figures in the German study, not from wikipedia.

Quote from: Joanna Dark on March 11, 2013, 09:44:46 PM
Here's the link and it has almost a 100 citations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digit_ratio

I'm not sure how much it matters it's just a correlation  that as a whole women have longer index fingers and this occurs at birth from day one and never changes. That's why it's considered a valid measurement: immutability. Some dispute it's worth and it would be a shame if things like this started to be used to weed out some trans women and creat a class of small handed trans women. Though I won't lie there is a huge part of me thI don't see that happeningat wants to be considered that wants to be considered part of an elite class of beautiful, small handed women.  If you replace beautiful women with ugly then maybe it could happen lol I accept it. That's what my ex used to say. You're going to an ugly woman. Don't do it.

I don't think it would be any sort of "test" because it is one among many factors that could lead to being trans.  And there are a bunch of other things on the list too.

.

I can't believe this chestnut is still getting around..

I fail most of these 'supposed' tests and I'm still clearly a trans woman..

My fingers on both hands are the same length almost.
Did I get an overdose?
I must have a problem!
Dose this make me a GIRL?

I hope SO!

What makes one a girl is what's between one's ears, not some [bleep] anthropometric test.

Quote from: muuu on March 12, 2013, 02:24:26 AM
Thanks for the info T_T cleared up any confusion I had

I'm not quite sure how you're supposed to measure...
Is it the lowest crease, lower one of the 2 bottom ones, on your ring finger? What about your index finger? Mine only have one lower crease, which is a bit above the part between two fingers... Are you supposed to just measure that crease?
that way both are about 7.1 cm, so a 1.0 ratio.

This means you have a female ratio. Lower ratios are in males. My post had a mistake in it, saying both are in females.

But seriously, those are just statistics. Women have male ratios and aren't any less women, and vice versa. Probably true for us too, eh?

The digit ratio is not some trans test. it doesn't even have to do with that. It's a factor that occurs at birth and the ratio is unchanged throughout life. That's why it is researched. They believe it has to with testosterone exposure in the womb because men have lower digit ratios, though results vary. But in the whole, it doesn't vary much.

Well, it might have something to do with being trans in some way, since a popular hypothesis for explaining our condition is sex hormone levels in the womb as well. But of course, I don't think we can even remotely tell how, if it's the case, and it may even be completely unrelated, too, as each might be related to a different moment of foetus growth.

ok just measured from the crease

index 77mm
ring 75mm

ratio 1.027

from the top they look the same

2D:4D
LH - 69:73 - 0.945
RH - 61:64 - 0.953
(I have an unmatched set, but they tally well.)

 ^-^I discovered in this exercise that using a PDF on a phone in actual size as a ruler was silly. I managed to photocopy my hands at work and used a ruler,

Right index 76mm
Right ring 77mm.

Ratio .987179