In the category of things we already knew but it's interesting to have scientific proof for: (Young) men respond hormonally to (young) women almost immediately -- even ones they aren't particularly interested in:
Research involving a group of male students found that their levels of the hormone testosterone increased to the same extent whether they were talking to a young woman they found attractive – or to one they didn't fancy much at all.
After 300 seconds alone in the same room as a woman they had never met before, and in some cases did not find particularly attractive, the men's testosterone levels of the hormone had shot up by an average of around eight per cent.
The study's authors believe the rise in testosterone may be an automatic and unconscious reaction that has evolved in man when faced with a woman, to prepare him for possible mating opportunities.
Essentially, this is why you so very infrequently hear young men say "not if she were the last woman on Earth." Their minds are made up on that score even before the men know their minds are made up.
Mind you, this is one of those studies determined to create more questions than it answers. My questions: Do young women have the same sort of immediate hormonal response (and if so, is it triggered by the men attempting to act more "manly" as hormones steep through their systems)? Do gay men have the same hormonal response to women as straight men and/or do they have the same hormonal response to men and straight men do to women? And also, how long before some opportunistic lawyer tries to argue in front of a jury that a flush of hormones made his client attempt something stupid and criminal against a woman? Because you know one will. Grumble.
Being a guy, the finding of this study makes sense to me; I do notice that my internal reaction to meeting a new woman is ever-so-slightly different than to meeting a new guy. Of course, the hallmark of being civilized is keeping your involuntary hormonal reactions to yourself. Yes, yes. It's a skill to have, my friends.
VIEW ALL BY · Monday July 21, 2008 12:27pm EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Monday July 21, 2008 12:50pm EDT
Testosterone's also associated with social rank, so an increase in confidence-associated postural cues might be intended to intimidate other nearby males, not (just) impress the woman.
Monday July 21, 2008 01:01pm EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Monday July 21, 2008 01:02pm EDT
Monday July 21, 2008 01:02pm EDT
VIEW ALL BY · Monday July 21, 2008 01:08pm EDT
Monday July 21, 2008 01:51pm EDT
And what's natural anyway? It's totally natural for humans to build airplanes to fly and to wear clothes and to be compassionate. It's totally natural for us to think before we act. We're moral beings who decide how we're going to conduct ourselves.
VIEW ALL BY · Monday July 21, 2008 02:22pm EDT
If you got the same result with women of races and body types far from the attractive norm for the subjects, that would at least validate this tiny slice.
VIEW ALL BY · Monday July 21, 2008 02:45pm EDT
The article that you linked, by the way, is discussing the differences between the neurological wiring of gay and straight men, not the similarities. From the article:
"MRI and PET scan studies are showing remarkable similarities between the brains of gay men and straight women, and between those of lesbians and straight men."
VIEW ALL BY · Monday July 21, 2008 03:33pm EDT
But thanks for clarifying my weekly written response. It apparently needed it.
VIEW ALL BY · Monday July 21, 2008 03:39pm EDT
No offense meant.
VIEW ALL BY · Monday July 21, 2008 10:32pm EDT
(Hey, wouldn't it be nice to have comment numbers we could refer to?)
VIEW ALL BY · Tuesday July 22, 2008 05:21am EDT
Interesting discussion, though it's like walking on eggshells with the oppertunity to give offence to both sides.
The article neautronjockey links to doesn't go into enough detail but it seems like it's still scientists trying to explain away an anomaly. Gay men are like women and lesbians are like men, look their brains have the same minute hemispherical differences.
I get annoyed by people always wanting to fit things into their preconceptions, they put effeminate gay men in the same box as women and assume that they must have a more "manly" partner. Or they assume that there must always be a masculine lesbian in a couple because someone has to be "the man".
Just because it does happen a lot, most of (but by no means all) the lesbian couples I know do have a masculine partner, doesn't mean that they are "men traped in women's bodies", that last bit is rationalising, and it's harmful because it encourages the thought that there's something "wrong" about it. And that scares me.
Whenever science starts talking about how homosexuals are similar to heteroseuals, I worry that it's only a matter of time until they start talking about "fixing" the difference.
VIEW ALL BY · Tuesday July 22, 2008 08:22am EDT
While certainly there are gay men and women who have had life events which influenced their sexuality; I'm not denying that.
The article, and what that study is showing us is that yes gay men and straight women share similar neurological make-up; science is not saying gay men are just women trapped in men's bodies. I believe that statement would fall under gender identity and not sexual identity.
Absolutely. While I look at that study as proof of what I've believed all along, there are some people who have (and there will always be) people that view homosexuality as a disease and attempt to find a 'cure' for the condition.
You concern is valid --- history lends itself to your case.
Tuesday July 22, 2008 10:48am EDT
Sally: "So a man could be friends with a woman he finds un-attractive."
Harry: "No, you pretty much want to nail them too."