![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 14 to 38 of 38. Go back in thread:
Posted by SLS on February 18, 2001, at 9:59:27
In reply to the corpus callosum of women is not bigger, posted by mars on February 18, 2001, at 1:53:38
Dear Mars,
Thanks for the information regarding the more recent measurements of the corpus callosum with respect to gender. It seems that, generally speaking, there is little association between gender and absolute callosum size. After reading through some of the more recent abstracts, I understand why the earlier studies concluded otherwise. Without stirring up any trouble, I will just comment that there is a trend towards females having a higher ratio of the size of the corpus callosum relative to total brain size.
There are many, many unequivical gender differences in brain structure and function.
All seriousness aside, I do think that women are intrinsically more intelligent than men. During childbirth, the reason why doctors hold the infant upside down and smack them on the butt is so the penis falls off the smart ones.
:-)
- Scott
Posted by Lorraine on February 18, 2001, at 10:53:33
In reply to Re: the corpus callosum of women is not bigger » mars, posted by SLS on February 18, 2001, at 9:59:27
I have to say, I have really enjoyed reading this thread. Scott, you have had me rolling in the aisles on more than one occasion. Thanx.
Posted by mars on February 18, 2001, at 11:16:17
In reply to Re: the corpus callosum of women is not bigger » mars, posted by SLS on February 18, 2001, at 9:59:27
Dearest Scott ~
Which articles have you been reading? I always value your feedback.
cheers,
mars-ola
Posted by danf on February 19, 2001, at 6:27:31
In reply to Re: the corpus callosum of women is not bigger » SLS, posted by mars on February 18, 2001, at 11:16:17
Detailed studies have shown that the size of the CC directly correlates with breast size. Apparently the CC is related to mechanical structural support in the brain tissue.
There is also a high affinity between credit card use & the size of the CC. women who grow up in countries without credit cards have CC same size as men.
another correlation... women who work at Home Depot & are on 'do it your self' home remodeling TV shows have men sized CC.
Posted by allisonm on February 19, 2001, at 8:01:09
In reply to Re: Why the corpus callosum of women is bigger, posted by danf on February 19, 2001, at 6:27:31
You've gone too far. If that is your attitude toward women, perhaps you should take your stereotypic views to another board.
Posted by shellie on February 19, 2001, at 9:18:54
In reply to danf, posted by allisonm on February 19, 2001, at 8:01:09
.
Posted by Noa on February 19, 2001, at 13:55:23
In reply to Re: gender differences » Noa, posted by SLS on February 17, 2001, at 16:33:11
Scott,
That may be the existential 64,000 dollar question!
But seriously, don't you also think we are all a balance of masculine and feminine, not an all-or-nothing thing? Afterall, we all have both estrogen and testosterone, just in different amounts.
So, the degree to which we have the "general manager" kind of traits or the "specialist" kinds of traits, might be individual, on a continuum.
Posted by Noa on February 19, 2001, at 13:56:38
In reply to Re: gender differences , posted by shar on February 17, 2001, at 23:36:11
> > - Scott, call on me! Call on me! I know!
> SharLOL
Posted by Dr. Bob on February 19, 2001, at 18:30:29
In reply to Re: Why the corpus callosum of women is bigger, posted by danf on February 19, 2001, at 6:27:31
> Detailed studies have shown that the size of the CC directly correlates with breast size. Apparently the CC is related to mechanical structural support in the brain tissue.
Please be careful not to offend anyone, even -- or especially! -- when just trying to be humorous. Thanks,
Bob
PS: Follow-ups regarding this, if any, should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration.
Posted by shar on February 20, 2001, at 1:55:17
In reply to UH-OH! Cam's Going to Respond to This, posted by Cam W. on February 18, 2001, at 9:53:38
Cam,
I agree with you about no gender difference in IQ, and believe that it is possible that men process information differently than women. Also, left-handed people process information differently from right-handed people. Also, serial killers process information differently than most "normals" (or maybe non-killers).I'm aware of findings on each of the items I mentioned, which is why I stated in a post above that a healthy dose of skepticism about sex difference findings couldn't hurt. When we look at physical (esp. brain) activity we don't know what's making what happen, and many researchers don't do much to control for possible covariants, so it could be completely spurious that a gender difference is found. Maybe gender is related to the real causal factor that has nothing to do with sex/gender.
As far as sex differences, there are two questions I wonder about. First, does it make sense that the observed difference really boils down to having that X or Y chromosome. Second, if we went to place where strict role behavior was absent, could we replicate the finding of a sex (gender) difference? Even at 1 year old, children have learned many social constraints and permissions, including ones related to gender. I believe a lot of the "gender differences" are developed due to roles people occupy, and what's needed to fulfill the prescribed behaviors.
It is too bad that replicating studies has gone out of style!
Shar
> Actual, while I believe that there is no differnece in general intellectual ability between the sexes, there are definitely differences in the way we process certain information. Even these differences are probably on a genetically-based continuum. Intellectualism can be subdivided into a number of areas (at least 7) and I do not understand all of the implications of this, but I am sure women (on the whole) excel at some and men at others. Still in a within groups model (eg all male or all female) there is a wide varience in intellectual ability. I do know that there are actual brain structure differences between the sexes, but I can't remember what they are, right now.
>
> Women flabbergast me with the number of lists they can juggle in their head, but ("I don't care if I am driving, just give me the damn map!") men are better at spatial orientation. There are a number of other examples of this.
>
> To keep this a med issue, I know that a number of neuropsychocologists have (and are) developing elegant tests to determine the extent of these differences and their relation to the effects of medication.
>
> My 2¢ - Cam
Posted by mars on February 21, 2001, at 17:59:17
In reply to Re: the corpus callosum of women is not bigger » SLS, posted by mars on February 18, 2001, at 11:16:17
You never answer my followup questions, Scott. (I can document this.) When you have a moment, dear Scott, would you post a bit of info about what you were reading about corpus collosi (?)?
yrs very truly,
a very sick mars
> Dearest Scott ~
>
> Which articles have you been reading? I always value your feedback.
>
> cheers,
>
> mars-ola
Posted by SLS on February 22, 2001, at 0:03:33
In reply to Scoooooootttttt » mars, posted by mars on February 21, 2001, at 17:59:17
> You never answer my followup questions, Scott. (I can document this.) When you have a moment, dear Scott, would you post a bit of info about what you were reading about corpus collosi (?)?
>
> yrs very truly,
>
> a very sick mars
Dear Mars,I am dismayed to here that you are suffering so. No matter how many times I read of people here who are hurting and agonizing, it never becomes any less difficult to see.
I apologize for not following-up on your post. Please don't take it personally. I have a limited amount of mental energy, and I can't always follow the continuation of a thread. Actually, I am becoming more reluctant to post things because I would then have the responsibility to follow up and answer people's questions.
There still seems to be a preponderance of evidence that indicates a true gender difference in the size and orientation of the corpus callosum along with many other structures and pathways. I thought it a good idea to include at the end of this post an abstract that is a rather lengthy, but broad treatment of gender differences in both brain morphology and psychometrics.
I could not find one abstract that I alluded to in my prior post. However, it made the following points:
1. There was very little gender difference in the absolute size of the corpus callosum.
2. As the size of the whole brain decreases, the size of the corpus callosum tends to remain the same.
3. Thus the size ratio of the corpus callosum to whole brain size is higher in smaller brains.
4. Woman generally have smaller brains than average-sized men, presumably because they have smaller heads and reduced cranial capacity.
5. Thus, most woman and smaller men have a larger corpus callosum relative to brain size.
This study would indicate that the size of the corpus callosum is not gender specific, but dependent only upon whole brain size.
* Cranial capacity does not equate to mental capacity. Any male who would disagree with this fact is, in fact, providing corroborative evidence of its validity.
- Scott
------------------------------------------------------------------9: J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 1999 Mar;58(3):217-26
The human cerebral cortex: gender differences in structure and function.
de Courten-Myers GM
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Cincinnati, Ohio
45267-0529, USA.Most people are aware of subtle differences in cognitive functions between men and women. Psychometric tests confirm specific gender differences in a number of areas, the most robust being in spatial orientation and mathematical tasks which are better performed by males. Nonetheless, normal males and females perform comparably on intelligence tests and human brains lack sexual dimorphism on routine neuropathological exams--other than mean differences in weight and size. Even so, human brains demonstrate: 1) a sexually dimorphic nucleus in the hypothalamus with twofold neuronal numbers in males than in females; 2) the planum temporale/anterior Sylvian fissure on the left side are larger in males; 3) some studies reveal the posterior corpus callosum to be more bulbous in females while others fail to show this difference; and 4) a cytoarchitectural study demonstrates definite sexual dimorphism of cerebral cortex with significantly higher neuronal densities and neuronal number estimates in males and a reciprocal increase in neuropil/neuronal processes in female cortex as implied by the 2 sexes' similar mean cortical thicknesses. Such morphologic differences may provide the structural underpinning for the gender differences exhibited by the normal and diseased brain. Males manifest a higher prevalence of mental retardation and of learning disabilities than females which may reflect the male fetus' smaller overproduction of nerve cells. Such an inference is supported by the demonstration of 1) better functional recovery following early brain injury than after later insults, 2) substantially overproduced and secondarily reduced nerve cells in human cerebral cortex during gestation, 3) the demonstration of a similar neuronal production and a testosterone-dependent neuronal involution of the sexually dimorphic hypothalamic nucleus in rats, and 4) more cortical neurons present in the adult human male than female. If an overproduced nerve cell population is capable of compensating for pathologic nerve cell losses taking place during the process of neuronal involution, the magnitude of overproduced nerve cells may define the extent of the protection conveyed. Because male fetuses appear to involute fewer overproduced cortical neurons than females, this gender difference could explain in part the boys' greater functional impairments from early brain damage. Women, on the other hand, exhibit a higher incidence and prevalence of dementia than do men. Given the females' overall larger extent of cortical neuropil (neuronal processes) and lower neuronal numbers compared with men, any disease that causes neuronal loss could be expected to lead to more severe functional deficits in women due to their loss of more dendritic connections per neuron lost. In conclusion, superimposed on a strong background of functional and structural equality, human male and female cerebral cortex display distinct, sexually dimorphic features, which can begin to be linked to a complex array of gender-specific advantages and limitations in cognitive functions.
PMID: 10197813
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by Gene' Bujold on October 9, 2003, at 21:16:01
In reply to the corpus callosum of women is not bigger, posted by mars on February 18, 2001, at 1:53:38
There's been a recent spate of modern disrepudiation concerning the correlations between CC size and gender. This is nothing more than a pathetic attempt by feminists to prove their "the same as" men in nearly every respect. Unfortunately, a lot of well-meaning but otherwise ill-informed men and women have echoed this misinformation to such an extent that even doctored practitioners are beginning to believe it and regurgitate it as well.
Fortunately, there are MODERN MRI-based studies that correlate CC size and gender. The results of one such study, done in 1997, can be found here: http://cogprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/archive/00000085/
Thank you for your enlightened understanding.
Gene'
> hey folks ~
>
> just wanted to add this. very old studies seemed to indicate that the corpus callosum of women was bigger, but all of the more recent ones indicate it's not. my corpus callosum is damaged, so i tend to pay attention to info about it =;)
>
> mars
Posted by Gene' Bujold on October 9, 2003, at 21:28:08
In reply to All seriousness aside.......Caution Advised, posted by shar on February 17, 2001, at 23:48:57
I believe that while there is a lot of overlap between the sexes, when you measure certain ways of thinking and plot the results, it invariably shows bimodality with most women on one side and most men on the other.
Take the following online test (be honest!) and you'll see exactly what I mean: http://test.thespark.com/gendertest/
Although the development of the test was primarily intended as a joke, the correlation between the answers of millions of respondants and their gender has shown a clear difference in response patterns between genders.
So take the test - you might surprise yourselves!
Gene'
Posted by Emme on October 9, 2003, at 22:51:17
In reply to Re: All seriousness aside.......Caution Advised, posted by Gene' Bujold on October 9, 2003, at 21:28:08
It got me WRONG! I did in fact surprise myself. Apparently I'm a man and didn't even know it. :)
Emme
> I believe that while there is a lot of overlap between the sexes, when you measure certain ways of thinking and plot the results, it invariably shows bimodality with most women on one side and most men on the other.
>
> Take the following online test (be honest!) and you'll see exactly what I mean: http://test.thespark.com/gendertest/
>
> Although the development of the test was primarily intended as a joke, the correlation between the answers of millions of respondants and their gender has shown a clear difference in response patterns between genders.
>
> So take the test - you might surprise yourselves!
>
> Gene'
Posted by KimberlyDi on October 10, 2003, at 12:59:17
In reply to Re: All seriousness aside.......Caution Advised, posted by Gene' Bujold on October 9, 2003, at 21:28:08
The test incorrectly guessed I was a man. Lacking a father figure all my life, and having to live independently most of my adult life, I believe I am more practical than emotional.
I am a good mother though plus I am passionate about shoes. :)
KDi in Texas
> I believe that while there is a lot of overlap between the sexes, when you measure certain ways of thinking and plot the results, it invariably shows bimodality with most women on one side and most men on the other.
>
> Take the following online test (be honest!) and you'll see exactly what I mean: http://test.thespark.com/gendertest/
>
> Although the development of the test was primarily intended as a joke, the correlation between the answers of millions of respondants and their gender has shown a clear difference in response patterns between genders.
>
> So take the test - you might surprise yourselves!
>
> Gene'
Posted by yabba on October 11, 2003, at 0:09:45
In reply to Re: Scoooooootttttt » mars, posted by SLS on February 22, 2001, at 0:03:33
'* Cranial capacity does not equate to mental capacity. Any male who would disagree with this fact is, in fact, providing corroborative evidence of its validity.'
How do you know that it doesn't? And if a female disagrees with that 'fact' would she be providing corroborative evidence also?
Posted by yabba on October 11, 2003, at 0:21:51
In reply to Re: gender differences » Noa, posted by SLS on February 17, 2001, at 16:33:11
"I think the evolutionary question is, not why do females have these capacities, but why males do not. Males are the "specialized" sex. We are good for only one thing. I just don't happen to know what exactly that one thing is."
Some people seem to forget that men are responsible for designing almost all of the comforts of our modern world. I'm not a women hater and I think that women have played a significant role in the past (despite what the modern feminists say; where would the men have been without good women to support them?), but honestly, I'm getting tired of the male bashing out there.
Posted by yabba on October 11, 2003, at 0:31:55
In reply to Re: All seriousness aside.......Caution Advised, posted by shellie on February 18, 2001, at 0:30:21
"Even with the liberal parents banning guns from their house, most boys create guns out of sticks or whatever. Girls rarely do. That's why I think the possibity of a peaceful world will never happen. Because those little boys that pick up sticks and pretend they're guns grow up and create wars."
I think if today's society focused more on turning boys into gentlemen like it used to instead of trying to turn them into sensitive girls we would be better off. There must be a reason that crime has risen exponentially in the past years.
Posted by tealady on October 11, 2003, at 3:05:03
In reply to Re: All seriousness aside.......Caution Advised » Gene' Bujold, posted by Emme on October 9, 2003, at 22:51:17
Hey Emme..it reckons I'm definitelu a man! too
Don't you like the "People like you, who walk the scary line between man and woman" bit..lolST***PID test
Jan
Posted by yabba on October 11, 2003, at 13:47:33
In reply to Re: All seriousness aside.......Caution Advised, posted by tealady on October 11, 2003, at 3:05:03
It marked me as a man (which I am) but just barely above the middle line. An interesting thing that I noticed was that when you look at the colored graph you can see that although there is a bunch of red women's dots on the right side in the women's area but there is also red dots over the entire graph even though the blue men's dots are mostly on the left except for a couple of small clusters. Not that the test is exactly all that scientific though.
Posted by genebujold on October 11, 2003, at 21:51:07
In reply to Re: All seriousness aside.......Caution Advised, posted by yabba on October 11, 2003, at 0:31:55
You're right, there is a reason for an increase in crime. It's a distinct lack of fathers.
Prison polls reveal time and again that only about 3% of all prisoners had what they considered a "good relationship" with their fathers, compared to about 35% of the general population at large.
There's another very direct correlation between the divorce rate (with the overwhelming majority of kids going with their mothers) and crime later on.
"Problem kids" usually have one or more of the following factors in their lives:
1. Absent fathers (either divorce or workaholics)
2. Family strife (lots of arguing or worse)
etc.
Now - is this to say that mothers don't provide what kids need?
By no means! Kids need moms and the special relations moms can give them so they can relate healthily and emotionally with others in society. Poor emotional relations also tend to produce problem kids, although these kids are usually limited to those who withdraw from society.
Bottom line - kids need BOTH parents. Period. If you're a father and your kids don't have a substantial mother presence, learn to relate, and make sure you spend both quality and quantity time with your kids. Get into their world. If you're a mother and your kids don't have a substantial father presence, learn to instill both discipline and loving guidance, and don't let your kids say otherwise!
Even if you're happily married, fathers can learn to become more maternal, and mothers can learn to become more paternal. As Doc said, "It's your kids, Marty! We've got to do something about your kids!"
The best way you can do that is NOT to work better to provide for them materially, but to work harder, with them, to provide for them relationally and spirtually, empowering them to be all they can be.
Posted by genebujold on October 11, 2003, at 22:03:51
In reply to Re: All seriousness aside.......Caution Advised, posted by yabba on October 11, 2003, at 13:47:33
> An interesting thing that I noticed was that when you look at the colored graph you can see that although there is a bunch of red women's dots on the right side in the women's area but there is also red dots over the entire graph even though the blue men's dots are mostly on the left except for a couple of small clusters. Not that the test is exactly all that scientific though.
I think it's terrific that you noticed the spread. While the majority of respondants clear fall into one category or another (bimodal response), you can see that there is indeed variation in the responses.
Although I am a man, and feel like a man, I also feel I have a strong nurturing side, a fact which others have told me as well (along with other comments such as "you know, you scare me - you think just like my wife").
It's not surprising then that if the results were plotted on a 1 (man) to 10 (woman) scale, I scored at the 7 level (more feminine in my thinking than a man).
Still, I AM a man, hence the following analytical comments:
Actually, it's quite scientific. If they'd asked 100 questions chosen at random from a variety of different tests, and 20 of them produced significant results with the ability to identify the sex of the individual, then the test was revised to include just those 20 questions and the results plotted over some 15 Million respondants, you'd have a very good test!
Which is precisely what they did.
In fact, this is pretty much how all predictive analysis tests are created (Strong-Campbell Interest Survey, etc.), through the generation of numerous questions, and the weeding out of questions that produce little correlation in the responses (and subsequent ability to measure whatever they're trying to measure).
Obviously, if you're looking to measure just two modalities (man vs woman), you don't need a very long test. One question that would certainly be a strong predictor would be "What's your bra size: A) Flat as a board, B) A-cup, C) B-Cup, D) C-cup or larger). Correllating that with the individual's age would make it a strong predictor for everyone over the age of 18.
The fact that the questions they chose are somewhat off the wall merely reflects the fact that they're not a government-funded research organization, and can have a little fun with the test!
Which was the whole point of why I suggested it in the first place, so...
Posted by Dr. Bob on October 11, 2003, at 23:44:11
In reply to Re: All seriousness aside.......Caution Advised, posted by Gene' Bujold on October 9, 2003, at 21:28:08
> I believe that while there is a lot of overlap between the sexes, when you measure certain ways of thinking and plot the results, it invariably shows bimodality with most women on one side and most men on the other.
I'd like follow-ups regarding how the sexes think to be redirected to Psycho-Social-Babble, thanks.
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on October 15, 2003, at 0:10:19
In reply to Redirect: ways of thinking, posted by Dr. Bob on October 11, 2003, at 23:44:11
> I'd like follow-ups regarding how the sexes think to be redirected to Psycho-Social-Babble, thanks.
And those about other issues not related to medication, too... Here's a link:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20031011/msgs/269538.html
Thanks,
Bob
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.