Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Men more evolved? Y chromosome study stirs debate

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 03:17 AM
link   
reply to post by sos37
 



if there were no men in this world and women had found a way to clone themselves I would guess there would be far, far fewer wars; everyone regardless of nationality would be treated equal and the earth would be much better taken care of - to name just a few.

You've apparently never set foot in your average high school have you?

Man, I remember when I was in high school almost everyday there would be girls at each others throats. The girls were also way better than any of us guys at shunning someone because they were different.

ETA: Ha. As luck would have it, I found this thread.

[edit on 1/14/2010 by octotom]




posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 03:23 AM
link   
Not so sure in this phenom is best described as "evolving" and it sounds like the article is misrepresenting a VERY troublesome event. I have researched this before and the best I can tell these mutations that are occuring is degrading the chromosome with potentially catastrophic implications. I would post citings for what I am saying but seeing as to how I am on a cellphone I strongly recommend at least googling it.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 03:25 AM
link   
In addition to my previous post (The first one), I feel that I must counter the LIE that women have a more complete set of genetic code than men.

Women posses *2* X chromosomes.

Men posses One X, and One Y.


In females, both X chromosomes code the same information, and traits.... thus, one is redundant, and is "Switched Off" during embryonic development.

www.scripps.edu...

This essentially means that for all intents and purposes, the Female has LESS ACTIVE GENETIC MATERIAL THAN MALES.


So.... Yeah.... Sexist Emotional Argument Debunked.

-Edrick



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 04:59 AM
link   
Reply to post by Edrick
 


Wrong. For one redunancy does not cause the effects you are ascribing it. Do your research. Not just to support your OBVIOUSLY ignorant and biased claim.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 05:04 AM
link   
Reply to post by Edrick
 


And by the way countering fem-nazism with it's opposite is just SILLY at best. This problem has bad implications for us AS A SPECIES. As does the petty bickering of the genders over dominance.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 05:15 AM
link   
reply to post by BigfootNZ
 

I worded it pretty badly. The genome is set at conception. However, a protein chain reaction creates the physical form that is a male from those genomes. Hormones, being the end result of protein reactions , are part of it.



reply to post by Edrick
 


Your statement is incorrect, and ignorant of evolution at best. First and foremost, the quantity of your genes does not direct your quality of product. For instance, the lung fish has more genes then you OR I, but I sure don't see that species building super computers and landing on the moon. Thus, the argument that men are better than women due to an extra chromosome is debunked.

But it's debunked even if it was true, because the second x chromosome is not turned off. The X chromosome acts as a shield, or sex-linked dominance, over the second one, or sex-linked receive. The genes that would show up are replaced with the other ones. If there are no dominant-receive relationship, then both show up. For males, the Y acts as a window to the second chromosome. There is no shield to turn off first X-linked diseases and problems.


Thus, if anything, males are weaker as a result of the Y chromosome. This is why males usually get diseases like Hemophilia.


Thank you, and Good night good sir.




And for the record, as a man, I like my women according to a simply mathematical formula bellow.

(Sarah Palin personality + brain) - (bony features)= perfect woman.



[edit on 14-1-2010 by Gorman91]



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 06:28 AM
link   
after further reading and based on personal experience;

is it safe to say that life form changes such as metamorphosis and morphogenic changes are only possible due to the "y" chromosome?



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 06:45 AM
link   
Men and women are different. Physically, physiologically and (many would agree) psychologically and emotionally. These days, the negative attributes of men are emphasised while the positive attributes of women are highlighted by the media and society in general. As a consequence men tend to receive harsher punishment for crime, receive less compassion and leniency when they make mistakes, have higher expectations placed on them in terms of physical labour and appear more suspicious and untrustworthy. In addition men are much less likely to win custody of their children and are expected to pay higher amounts of child support compared to women in similar situations.

While women were discriminated against in the past, the push for "equality" and "fairness" has far passed the line that separated them from men. These days it is the duty of men to ensure they do not offend women, be understanding and sensitive to their needs and walk on egg-shells when the subject of sex is mentioned.

The truth is that men and women are different but their negatives and positives complement each other and both sexes could be very happy if they recognised and appreciated these differences.

P.S.: in terms of physical attributes and physical adaptation to environment, I would say men are probably more "evolved" than women. Having alternative chromosome types (X AND Y) would play a factor in this theory. Still, the word "evolved" as it is used in this context is ambiguous at best.

[edit on 14/1/2010 by Dark Ghost]



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 07:12 AM
link   
Nature will always find a way to rectify humanity's selfish and thoughtless poisoning of Earth.

'Y' has to evolve/change, for the survival of the species depends on it. Through common (modern, techno advanced) agricultural practices, there is evidence of the 'feminisation' of species through waste products from herds and crops that are modified or fed on modified, for the purpose of increased production through introduction of female growth hormones (as present during gestation) into food and water supplies.

Sperm counts are reducing and Nature fights back to rectify this.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 07:13 AM
link   
As a female I know that we women are usually are more choosy about their mates, than males are towards females. Whatever trait is the most attractive (the fastest, strongest, smartest, richest...etc. whatever trait is the most attractive for survivability) I think its makes sense that men are more evolved. Evolving towards better or worse? Well...no comment.



[edit on 14-1-2010 by mishmallow8]

[edit on 14-1-2010 by mishmallow8]



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 07:28 AM
link   
so, sociology is not biology; and the mystery is about the y chrome that women lack. whether or not this(y chrome) is a factor, or a similar factor found in nature, that precludes changes that are spontaneous like caterpillar to butterfly; two x chromes do not show the observation of y unless the observation of y in man is what is not observed by two x chromes.

off topic;

in an insect colony what other function do females play other than queen?



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 07:33 AM
link   


in an insect colony what other function do females play other than queen?


As I understand it, in insect colonies, the queen is the only female, there are some males to fertilise her and the rest are genderless drones.

If Nature fails to rectify the feminisation of all specii, then the majority of males will become drones.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 07:44 AM
link   
they have differing functions that does not include fornicating with the ant queen; so even as a drone, individually from a human perspective: they function, as all members within a colony has a function.

but are other functioning members in an insect colonization female other than the queen?

or are different members within their colony viewed as differing sexes like a builder sex a worker sex a flying sex and so on?



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 08:23 AM
link   
I just think that we are taking the evolution thing and making it sound like it's an intelligence/getting better than... etc... I just think we are adapting to our ever changing environment more than women are. I.E. the fact that we don't hunt, we don't need to navigate, there are different dangers to watch out for etc... I think we are evolving because of our environment and that it has nothing to do with women...


Originally posted by Malzypants
Men may be physically destructive, but women can destroy one emotionally. A little bit of both keeps a nice balance




There an episode of Seinfeld where Jerry and Elaine discuss this... Jerry says something like : Men fight and that's it, they go out for drinks after. Elaine says : We just tease until they develop an eating disorder...

2 different ways of fighting... lol...

Peace,


Magnum



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 08:39 AM
link   
This is a major problem for our species - we have a serious and debilitating fear of being wrong, and are willing to cut the noses off our faces and knowingly believe a lie rather than admit to being wrong, time and time again.

(Except for the "autistic" members of society, the true pinnacle of human evolution
)

If there is an advantage to being either male or female, that advantage is there regardless of how politically incorrect it is. Simple as.

And as for who's better, a bunch of girls will lie and pretend to get along and avoid war, but the entire time they'll be catting it out and ripping chunkcs out of each other's backs. As I heard said once, if 2 girls turn up to a party wearing identical clothes they'll spend the entire night avoiding each other or trying to get the other to leave. 2 men finding themselves in the same situation of randomly turning up at a party in identical clothes will likely end up being life long friends and have a fantastic night.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 09:00 AM
link   
reply to post by sos37
 


get over yourself you female fascist, some of the biggest bigots I know are female and although men are involved in more violent incidents than women, would you make the same judgement about races based purely on who is more likely to commit a violent act.


Now, be a pet and make us all a nice cup of tea, and we will hear no more of your emotional nonsense



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Also, I love women (or at least some women, such as my mum, wife, daughter sister etc), however, if man did not have such a predisposition for physical and violent acts, OFTEN IN DEFENCE OF THEIR WOMEN AND FAMILY LET US NOT FORGET, FURTHERMORE THE AGGRESSION AIDED HUNTING BEASTS TO FEED THEIR WOMEN, then we may not have even been having this conversation at all as we would all have died out along time ago



Men and women both have their place, "GENERALLY" we are different (though individually people can fly in the face of the generalisation)



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by blueorder
reply to post by sos37
 


get over yourself you female fascist, some of the biggest bigots I know are female and although men are involved in more violent incidents than women, would you make the same judgement about races based purely on who is more likely to commit a violent act.


Now, be a pet and make us all a nice cup of tea, and we will hear no more of your emotional nonsense


Actually I'm not a woman and I don't judge people by their race. But being a man, I sure as hell know arrogance, selfishness and evil when I see it. Men aren't involved in just "more" violent crimes than women, there's a whopping huge difference. Here's a study back from 2006 from the Pew Center on the States:


Men are still roughly 13 times more likely to be incarcerated

www.pewcenteronthestates.org...

As of 2007:


In the population as a whole, men were five times more likely than women to be under correctional control, although the rate for women continues to rise.

www.wsws.org...

The numbers of women committing violent crimes are on the rise, no doubt due to corrupt men such as yourself.

Oh and see this?

It's just ONE of the top ten lists of the world's worst dictators - all men.
www.parade.com...

You, sir, are exactly the type I'm talking about. You are completely and utterly selfish. All you think about is how to get drunk or laid - everything else gets pushed aside. Yeah, you are some role model. You are exactly the kind of man that this world would be better off without so your corrupt and evil influence no longer affects more innocent women.

I would classify you as a parasite. People like you truly make me sick. I mean REALLY sick!


[edit on 14-1-2010 by sos37]



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Here's a documentary that may be of some interest in this thread:

The Disappearing Male

I heard about this 'phenomenon' a little while ago. Anyway, I'm not sure what to think quite yet but there are so many variables not helping the situation.

I may go as far to say that I see this happening just by watching popular culture and the kind of kids I see walking around my city these days...poor boys. I'm worried for them! I did want to have children one day but there is so much lying and untruth in this world, I don't know what to do any more.

Anyway, enjoy (?) the documentary!

[edit on 1/14/2010 by MetalCoffeeL]



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by teapot


in an insect colony what other function do females play other than queen?


As I understand it, in insect colonies, the queen is the only female, there are some males to fertilise her and the rest are genderless drones.

If Nature fails to rectify the feminisation of all specii, then the majority of males will become drones.

In bee colonies the workers are female and when a new queen hasn't been layed and the old queen is dead the workers feed the (female) lavae royal jelly and it turns into a replacement queen. The drones spend their lives being fed by the workers.. thats about it till it comes time to fertilise the queen midflight and he dies before he hits the ground.
Drone bees have no sting either and a kinda slow.

Felt like sharing.


btw. I agree with the idea that women choose the mates so men would have to be more genetically competitive and varied. The idea that men are "more evolved" is missleading.. the way it's being presented is that men are "better" but thats not really what more "evolved" means. Just because something has more genetic mutations doesn't mean it's superior. There are viruses that have evolved as much as humans (always a step ahead of us they are).

[edit on 14-1-2010 by riley]





new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join