Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

chicks and dudes


MoonBaby

Recommended Posts

Tigger said
you get 'butch' females who know the ins and outs of machinery and tools, and then you get males who seem very femine

There is a large scale of femine and masculin.

This scale has alot of gray areas. At one end of the scale lets put a man and on the other you have woman.

Now in between these two extremes you have feminine males, butch women, gay men, gay women. You also have gender confusion, where people feel they are a different sex on the inside then on the outside. Hermaphidites would fit in here as well.

It seems that in the womb hormonal activity or the lack there of will render a person anywhere on this scale. I believe this has a lot more to do with nature than nurture.

which is exactly what i wrote in my post

and it leads us to believe more so that being gay is a contributing genetic factor.... a recessive gene or a mutation etc.....

but on the topic of hermaphrodites..... a being containing both sex organs.... it depends on how much more of one hormone they have in their body to contribute to which gender they would be more akin too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • MoonBaby

    10

  • Falco Rex

    5

  • Chauncy

    5

  • Seahorse

    2

Hi, I've looked at these areas as I am studying, and this is what I think.

The fact that females do better isn't really a big deal. Males actually get more degree and higher degrees than females.

But if you look at inequality. The biggest correlation with education is class, not gender.

And though burture may be a big factor, the fact that animals have clear segregated roles shows that gender differences are also largely biologically motivated, though culture does have a alrge affect too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really dont think we need "leaders" like politicians.

Those who lead by example are better leaders than a guy who half the country hates and the other half voted for because they didnt like the other guy.

Prime Ministers and Presidents are a bad idea, they have way to much power.

I think women can lead the country better than men can, because men are more violent and are more likely to invade other countries for reasons noone really comprehends.

Wasnt there that guy who commited suicide recently who was born a male but raised a girl as an experiment?

Or something..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you have little clue! I cite the example of Margret Thatcher, the UK's first, only and worst ever prime minister..... you know, the one that pressured argentina into a conflict, ordered the sinking of the belgrano dispite the fact she was told it was heading OUT of the conflict zone.... etc....

Women can be just as bad as men when it comes to politics, gender makes NO diffrence in that area!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tigger said

and it leads us to believe more so that being gay is a contributing genetic factor.... a recessive gene or a mutation etc.....

but on the topic of hermaphrodites..... a being containing both sex organs.... it depends on how much more of one hormone they have in their body to contribute to which gender they would be more akin too

Absolutely, homosexuality is an orientation people are born like that, it is pure ignorance when someone says that it is a choice.

With the hermaphrodites having both organs, doctors usually wait until they become sexually mature enough to relay what gender they are on the inside. When this is revealed then surgery usually takes place if the person so wishes.

I often speculate that Hermaphrodites might have actually been twins if there was no mutation......but thats pure speculation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dudes, I must have only known some really big b****es in my life (as far as chicks go) because the thought of women running America by themselves scares the T-total crap out of me.

Males actually get more degree and higher degrees than females.

Dudes did used to be the ones that got the higher degrees, but now I believe just as many (or close to as many) chicks are getting their doctorates and whatnot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Males actually get more degree and higher degrees than females.

Dudes did used to be the ones that got the higher degrees, but now I believe just as many (or close to as many) chicks are getting their doctorates and whatnot.

Actually the statistics in New Zealand show that allthough females tend to do better academically for the most part , when it comes to graduating males tend to graduate with higher marks and better degrees . Of course I personally put that down to the increase in teenage pregnancies . It's only statistics and the variation in ratios of males to females at graduartion stage must have an impact .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to think that all differences between men and women were down to nurture, and that other than the obvious sexual/anatomical differences, we were the same.

Then I met my boyfriend and realized how off the mark I was, lol. laugh.gif

I think it's most likely a combination of nature and nurture. I've also read about those studies in which girl children tend to pick "girl" toys and boy children tend to pick "boy" toys. There does seem to be an inherent tendency for girls to want to role-play and work with others while playing, and for boys to tend to play "war", etc. I read one study in which girls and boys were put together in a room, and the only toys available were little Matchbox-type cars and trucks, along with some little houses (but no dolls). The boys did their usual drive & crash into each other's cars and the houses sort of thing, whereas the girls pretended that their were people in the cars and had them talk to and interact with each other, drive "home" to one of the little houses and talk to their families, etc. Sort of the reverse of that little boy using the Barbie doll as a gun! laugh.gif

As for homosexuality and transgender/intersexed issues, I do think that homosexuality is at least partly determined by biology and genetics. What really p***es me off is this -- who CARES which it is, or if its both, either way there's just no excuse for going around gay-bashing, telling gay people they're damned to hell, and all that crap. I mean, we're each entitled to our own opinion, of course, but it's really no one's business who anyone else is having sex with, so long as they're having sex with a consenting adult(s).

Transgendered/intersexed individuals can become that way through a variety of factors, many of which do involve being exposed to incorrect levels of testosterone and other hormones in the womb. True hermaphrodites are very rare, although there are a number of syndromes which mimic it, such as androgen insensitivity syndrome (here's a link to a website on that: Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome)

There are plenty of others as well, though I'm by no means familiar with them all -- I just watch a lot of Discovery Channel and Learning Channel programs. huh.gif

Here are a couple of websites on being intersexed:

Intersex Society of North America

UK Intersex Society

That may have gone somewhat off-topic, sorry if so. I just find it a very interesting topic, although rather sad.

Oh, and as for that man who recently killed himself: he was actually not born intersexed, his condition resulted from a botched circumcision, in which they essentially cauterized his poor little penis right off! dontgetit.gifsad.gifblink.gif He had a twin brother, and as you can imagine the parents didn't have his circumcision done at that same hospital; the baby who eventually grew up to kill himself just had the extremely poor luck to have gone in first. His name was David Reimer, and he eventually grew up, became as male as possible, married, had (step)kids, and wrote a book called As Nature Made Him, about what happened to him.

His parents tried to raise him as a girl, on the advice of doctors, which was a mistake. A "doctor" called John (?) Money was involved, I don't remember if he was a medical doctor, a psychiatrist, or both, but he essentially abused those kids in order to serve his pet theory, which was that identifying as male or female was all down to how you were raised, and that kids could be trained either way.

I'll stop going on about it; here's a link for those who are interested: David Reimer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What really p***es me off is this -- who CARES which it is, or if its both, either way there's just no excuse for going around gay-bashing, telling gay people they're damned to hell, and all that crap. I mean, we're each entitled to our own opinion, of course, but it's really no one's business who anyone else is having sex with, so long as they're having sex with a consenting adult(s).

Right on homie! grin2.gifthumbsup.gif What ticks me off even more though, is how it's "cool" and "sexy" for a girl to be bi-sexual or a lesbian, but if it's the same for a guy, that's "disgusting".

On that subject, here's a link I think is very interesting. Tell me what ya'll think.

his condition resulted from a botched circumcision

That's crap. If I have a son one day he will never be circumcised. Besides, most of the nerve endings that are in a male's penis are located in the foreskin. You chop that off and the little dude's not getting all of the feeling he should. Off the topic, but does anyone know why that ritual was started in the first place?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was started by Desert Tribesmen in the Holy Land and adopted by the Jews. It actually made a lot of sense. It was started as a hygienic measure. Anyone who's been to the beach knows that sand gets into everything..

If you live your entire life in a tent in the desert then, well...

Sand thats trapped between the foreskin and the head is a severe irritant and can lead to infection..

There isn't as much need for that nowadays, but on the whole circumcision is more sanitary than not..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moonbaby,

Thanks for the "thumbs up", lol! grin2.gif It really does drive me crazy that some people believe they have the right to tell everyone who to have sex with -- and not only that, they believe that they know what God feels about the situation!! mad.gifdisgusted.gifblink.gifIdiots.

What ticks me off even more though, is how it's "cool" and "sexy" for a girl to be bi-sexual or a lesbian, but if it's the same for a guy, that's "disgusting".

You're absolutely right. Personally, I tend to believe that everyone has at least a tiny little bit of bisexual inclination, though most people do seem to be very much more to the straight or gay end of the spectrum. I think that society -- American society, at least -- is not quite as bigoted against bisexual and/or gay women as against bisexual and/or gay men, because (1) women are, as a rule, more emotionally expressive than men anyway, tend to kiss/hug their friends hello, etc. it's just more accepted than if men do it, unfortunately; (2) men love to see two women together, lol. whistling2.gif

Thanks for posting that link, by the way. I read the article it led to, although I don't have the time at the moment to read all the other articles that that article led to, but what I read was thought-provoking.

That's crap. If I have a son one day he will never be circumcised. Besides, most of the nerve endings that are in a male's penis are located in the foreskin. You chop that off and the little dude's not getting all of the feeling he should. Off the topic, but does anyone know why that ritual was started in the first place?

I don't think that most of the male's nerve endings are in the foreskin; it's my understanding that some people believe that when the glans or head is exposed, which is what happens when the foreskin is removed, over time the head becomes somewhat desensitized. Myself, I'm undecided on the issue of whether or not to circumcise my boys, if I ever have any. It does seem barbaric, but on the other hand it's easier to keep the penis clean if it's been circumsized, especially when the boy hits age 10 or so and is none too fond of baths and general hygiene. I think I will probably let my husband make the decision, only because he owns one himself and has a better understanding of the impact and implications.

As for why it was started in the first place, I think it had something to do with the Jewish people wanting to maintain their religious and cultural identity, while in the midst of various other Middle Eastern peoples/tribes (the old "if your pants were any tighter I could tell your religion" bit, lol. wink2.gif ) But I may be wrong about that; maybe someone else here knows more about it. Probably so, in fact. wink2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There isn't as much need for that nowadays, but on the whole circumcision is more sanitary than not..

I read somewhere that circumcision takes away 1/3 of sensation. So sensation or sanitation ? What will it be ? Ask yourself this question when you have a newborn son.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

In this day and age, with there not being a whole lot of sanitation problems, I would have to choose sensation. Plus, my husband is already set on that decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Besides, most of the nerve endings that are in a male's penis are located in the foreskin. You chop that off and the little dude's not getting all of the feeling he should.

All of the nerve endings that count, are located in the exact head of the penis, same as a clitoris.

Now, the foreskin rubs against the head, which would logically create more sensation, more friction more sensation. This is where the fallacy comes from that the foreskin has more nerve endings or is crucial to full sensation.

Quite the opistite when you consider that the whole head of the penis is exposed to friction without the foreskin.

It's comparable to feeling the exact temperature of the water with your sock on? or off?

Edited by Chauncy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ask yourself this question when you have a newborn son

Well, I do. And we went with the circumcision. We had some long conversations with various doctors about it, and what came out of it for the most part was that the sensation thing was an often repeated myth. Just like that well-known fallacy about only using 10% of your brain.

The only drawback is the slight chance they'll botch the operation, but it's a 1 in a milion chance of that happening if not more..

Another factor for me was that my Son has a Jewish Grandmother and a half Jewish Dad(I mean me smart-asses). I'm not pushing him into any particular religion, but if he decides to practice Judaism when he gets older, I'd rather him be circumcised now than when it will be really painful for him..

..Anyway, his circumcision went fine and he's healthy and happy..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You loose 35% of feeling according to my husbands doctor.

Edited by MoonBaby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.