What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Play the flash game. view!
DragonAgeJourneys.com - Play the free companion flash game to Dragon Age: Origins.
38 Comments
- inactive, on 01/09/2009, -1/+23"Mother rats typically spend more time grooming males. Previous studies have suggested this is necessary for their genitalia to develop properly.
The researchers, from the University of Wisconsin, stroked baby female rats in a similar way."
Does anyone else find that a little strange? - sh0rtbus, on 01/10/2009, -0/+7i'm proud of my university for spending time stroking rats' nether regions
- justrasputin, on 01/10/2009, -1/+7More fun facts, there is an area of the brain that differs between genders, the sexually dimorphic nucleus of the preoptic area in the hypothalamus; it's involved in "sexual behavior," though I can't say I'm familiar with what *exactly* it does. It's about twice as big in males.
There's also an area that's larger in homosexuals, the INAH (interstitial nucleus of the anterior hypothalamus), but this has only been observed in post-mortem studies and it isn't clear whether this difference is genetic or not. - lovemorgul, on 01/09/2009, -0/+6Sex differences in cognitive pattern may be interpreted within the general.
- klij, on 01/10/2009, -0/+5aw its a beautiful baby girl!!
but she has a penis, don't worry ill take care of it. - madfrogurt, on 01/10/2009, -0/+4The study itself is an interesting door opener more than anything applicable to human behavior. Basically it says that some epigenetic changes (where DNA stays the same but protein factors attached to the sequence inhibit the activity of the gene) can be induced outside of the womb. Basically it's a mechanism for social behavior to effect genetic level physiology.
That's an interesting start point for more research. As for what this reveals about human behavior? Nothing close to even a reasonable guess can be made. - DC2040, on 01/10/2009, -0/+4No ***** sherlock.
- WhiteRaven, on 01/10/2009, -0/+4Determined is the wrong word. Develop makes more sense.
- jeffkee, on 01/10/2009, -5/+8Does this explain why some people turn out to be gay? I'm not against gay people, I'm just curious (no pun intended).
- purplesun2, on 01/10/2009, -0/+3How do you phrase that on a resume?
Chief Scientist in Charge of Rat Stroking?
Then again, a professor mine in college, an ichthyologist specializing in breeding habits, had a sign on his door that declared him a "Fish Pornographer". So, perhaps 'Rat Stroker' wouldn't raise that many eyebrows. - slapthemonkey, on 01/10/2009, -0/+3Science always fascinates me
- alricsca, on 01/10/2009, -1/+3Well actually the proof people are born gay is in separated twin studies. Whenever one twin was gay, they other was vastly more likely to be gay. While post natal treatment may effect sexual expression and possibly how a person manifest their sexual identity in someways. It alone cannot explain homosexuality. My question is why must it be one single reason and second why no one can come to grips with the fact that many people want to know this is so they can try to stop it or blame someone, even though in every single unbiased analysis gay people on average live good healthy lives that have greatly benenfited the world.
http://www.tim-taylor.com/papers/twin_studies/conc ... - vectorjohn, on 01/10/2009, -0/+2It doesn't say *all* differences are determined after birth.
- jumkua, on 01/10/2009, -0/+2what we should do?
- ChloeMS, on 01/10/2009, -0/+2Not to me. To "some" people, "any" kind of sexual research is "strange."
- troye, on 01/10/2009, -2/+4Wow, since when did simple-minded ***** like you get on Digg?
It's ***** like this that make me want to leave Digg. - ozydingo, on 01/10/2009, -0/+2Although I'm one to hold that position, I have to ask in this case: what do you base that on? It seems difficult in this case to distinguish between being born gay (which may be genetic or resulting from exposure to obligatory environmental factors prenatally in the womb) and becoming gay by almost obligatory environmental factors in very early development.
As always, though, I wish the article had provided a citation to the study. Why do reporters never do that? - ployd, on 01/11/2009, -0/+1"ya"?
- thomasryan, on 01/10/2009, -2/+3i would say this definitely has something to do with it if its true...
i can sense the "are people born gay?" argument being sparked up once again.... - alricsca, on 01/10/2009, -1/+2When they say that, they mean in the womb. Most brain structure are complete at birth.
- valis, on 01/10/2009, -0/+1Carlin would hate you for that androgynous comment.
- ozydingo, on 01/10/2009, -0/+1Ar you basing that on the article or on the scientists' paper?
- ozydingo, on 01/10/2009, -0/+1It's still misleading though. "The difference between x and y" is often used to mean "a determining factor between x and y"
- chthonical, on 01/10/2009, -0/+1Depends on the "type" of gay person. Whether it's someone who inherently prefers the same sex, or someone who just doesn't care.
- Anifanatic, on 01/10/2009, -0/+1So why not give it a try? I mean, we already know lots of people with a mother and father can be twisted as hell and do some terrible things right? And I like how you subtly implied that same sex marriages are irresponsible as as standard, or they have to be -extremely- responsible not to twist their children with their '*****' rays or something.
- slurba, on 01/11/2009, -1/+1Uhhh this has nothing to do with changing your gender in your developed life
. - JigoroKano, on 01/10/2009, -2/+2This fits right in with the most recent theories that becoming gay is something that happens in very early brain development.
- inactive, on 01/10/2009, -2/+2Oh look I have a penis...
Nuff said! - pitdog, on 01/10/2009, -3/+3that's why we don't know what influence on a child's mind has being raised by same sex parents, unless those parents happen to be extremely responsible...
- gogog0, on 01/10/2009, -3/+3I love it when politically driven scientists take experimental evidence and completely overgeneralize the conclusions to make political statements. But then again, the entire field of sociology works like this. Try and be a sociologist and come out with a conclusion that is even a little bit politically incorrect, watch what happens.
- inactive, on 01/10/2009, -2/+2So.. mama's boys have bigger dicks? Hello Oedipus. Or am I totally reading this wrong?
- inactive, on 01/10/2009, -2/+2Title's a bit misleading; gender can't normally be successfully changed after birth, see the studies by Dr Money.
- troye, on 01/10/2009, -2/+1BULL ***** *****!!!
Some people are born gay, PERIOD. Some people are born gay. - inactive, on 01/10/2009, -4/+3***** leave! take your decapitated cockhead with you!
- inactive, on 01/10/2009, -3/+2http://digg.com/comedy/The_Difference_Between_Men_ ...
- theskillwithin, on 01/10/2009, -5/+4what differences are we talking about here exactly?
should little Johnny be afraid of waking up without a dick? - inactive, on 01/10/2009, -11/+5***** this transexuals will always be considered freaks. you cant sew up your pussy grow out a ***** and demand me to call you a man, you freak.
- EmoSLWarrior, on 01/10/2009, -9/+3I would have to concur. It is not possible to have sex before being born. I'm saving myself for marriage, but I'm told by many of my male friends that having sex after you're born is just as nearly impossible.
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is