Gender-Bender Chemicals are Turning Boys Into Girls , page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 23 times
Topic started on 15-3-2010 @ 07:46 PM by highlyoriginal

Gender-Bender Chemicals are Turning Boys Into Girls


www.naturalnews.com
The government of Denmark has released a 326-page report affirming that endocrine disrupting chemicals are probably continuing to the birth of fewer males and the "feminization" of existing ones.

The report centers on chemicals like PVC, flame retardants, phthalates, dioxins, PCBs and bisphenol-A, all of which mimic the action of estrogen in the body. The researchers concluded that due to the prevalence of these chemicals, children could easily be exposed to high enough levels to place them at "critical risk" of harm.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.blacklistednews.com


reply posted on 15-3-2010 @ 08:03 PM by The_Pride_Lion










reply posted on 15-3-2010 @ 08:20 PM by Benevolent Heretic
Loam did an excellent thread on this a little while ago.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

It has been known for many years, but not getting the attention it deserves, IMO.

Oops, I see scubagravy beat me to it.

[edit on 3/15/2010 by Benevolent Heretic]


reply posted on 15-3-2010 @ 08:41 PM by mryanbrown
@OP To help add more evidence to this.

www.chemtrust.org.uk...
www.chemtrust.org.uk...


A scientific review highlights the dangers of exposing pregnant women to hormone disrupting chemicals in consumer products, and focuses on the risks these pose to baby boys and the reproductive health of men. The conclusion of this analysis is that exposure to the cocktail of chemicals in our environment is likely to account for a proportion of the birth defects of the genitalia in baby boys, which are linked to under-masculinisation.
- www.chemsec.org...

Short story, over 100,000 new chemicals in the last 100 years. Causing men to under-develop and retain feminine traits. Such as testicles not decending.

[edit on 15-3-2010 by mryanbrown]


reply posted on 15-3-2010 @ 09:22 PM by MaxBlack
While this posting affirms what I had suspected for some time, knowing that chemicals are causing boys to sound effeminate is something that can be observed all around us.

Take the radio and TV talk show hosts. Most of the older types like Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh, and others are manly sounding. The sound as if you can easily tell that they have some male testosterone in their maleness. The deep, gravelly voices are indicative of men that sound like men. Even their breathing is more like a man than the hyper Chihuahua dog panting and talking style that we get from the younger crowd of talking heads and talk show hosts.

On the other hand, we have the new crop of talking heads and they sound like girls or better yet they sound like ditsy blonds that cant spell GED. When they get excited it's very amusing to hear just how high their voices can get while trying to sound like angry men. Well, it's not working.

Shawn Hannity, Glen Beck, Mad-cow, Rusty Humphrey, and others all sound like ugly whiny girls. They sound effeminate and you can hear it in their voices. Then sound like girls and have a high pitched sounding voices that seems devoid of any testosterone. They do not sound manly, but they do sound like women that haven't decided what they are.

This posting only confirms what I had already suspected. It is good to know the scientific process by which such a phenomena is causing males to sound like girls, but no where in the posting did I detect a cure for such a malady.

Some of the talking heads probably wouldn't agree, but then you be the judge. Listen to them and see if I'm not telling you the truth. The older men sound like men and the new upstarts in the mid 20's to early 30's sound like women. I hate to say it, but I feel better knowing that my suspicions were not totally insane. While I don't particularly like being right, this time I will have to just say that if chemicals are doing this to the male population, what could be happening to the women?

Oh well, that's another subject. Thanks for the posting. I feel better knowing my suspicions were validated.

Thanks for the posting.


reply posted on 15-3-2010 @ 09:25 PM by highlyoriginal
reply to post by Maxmars



Exactly. Big pharma would rather us be sick than healthy - more money for them. I have tried to raise awareness, not just by posting threads like this (I've made others exposing big pharma before) but I also share this information with everyone who is willing to listen <<


reply posted on 16-3-2010 @ 10:23 PM by highlyoriginal
reply to post by Edrick



I agree, and thank you for sharing the info and adding to the thread flag for you.

Originally posted by dzonatas
What happen to random natural selection and somehow that being able to keep the ratio of male to female equal. Someone has there hand in the pick

[edit on 16-3-2010 by dzonatas]


That was a point I was trying to make. Natural selection is becoming more scarce, at least compared to how it used to be before science intervened. When I do decide to have children, I want to have them naturally, and I want to let the sex of the baby be a surprise... I'm not even old fashion, I'm young, but I like the idea of a surprise.


reply posted on 17-3-2010 @ 06:15 AM by Edrick
reply to post by sos37



No, you are absolutely NOT going here, Not in this thread, Not on THIS BOARD...

Your position is so ABSOLUTELY SEXIST and blind that I have NO CHOICE but to respond.

I don't see a problem here. Men make up the vast majority of violent crimes and acts in this world.


In prrcvious studies [Aggrtssirc Behavior 142403414, l9t8; Aggressive Behavior lE: I 17-127, 1992] it was found that adolescent girls used indirect means of aggression more than adolescent boys, whereas physical aggression was used more by boys, and direct verbal aggression was used equally by both sexes. The present study investigated whether
males, as adults, start to employ indirect aggression to the same extent as females. Three hundred thirty-three university employees (162 males, 176 females) filled in the Work Harassment Scale by Bj0rkqvist et al. [994]. Specid attention nas drawn to two sub scales: rational-appearing aggrmsion and social manipulatlon. lt was found that males used the former type of aggression significantly more often than females, while females used
the latter more than males. Both are variants of covert aggression, in which the perpetrator tries to disguise his/her aggressive intentions, in order to avoid retaliation and/or social condemnation


Source: Sex Differences in Covert Aggression Among Adults
www.vasa.abo.fi...

I know what you are *TRYING* to say.... that women are BETTER than men.

But you are wrong.



Men always think with their penises first and their minds last


Such a sad little generalization... your motives and irrational bias is showing.

That must be why men wear skin tight, cleavage revealing clothing, but women wear more casual wear in public....

/sarcasm

Men always think with their penis, huh?


Well, that explains, Agriculture, Medicine, Mathematics, Engineering, Computer Science, Chemistry, Algebra, Philosophy, The Rule of Law, Harnessing Electricity, Geothermal power, Metalsmithing, Metallurgy, Aero Engineering, Space Flight, Satellites, Naval Vessels, The Automobile, the Highway system, Mining, Advances in Medical Technology, The INTERNET...

In fact... EVERY convenience YOU TAKE FOR GRANTED... was given to you by *MEN*

You should probably thank their penises... since that is what they were thinking with AS THEY BUILT THE WORLD.

...unless they have somehow untied their emotions from their bodies.


Oh... a qualifying statement, eh?

So... you are suggesting that women are better at subjugating their emotions than men?

Do I really need to refute that? or does EVERYONE see through the BLATANT LIE of your statement?

Men are the reason for all the world's man-made (no pun intended) destruction thus far.


Men have also BUILT everything "Man-Made" (no pun intended) thus far.


Homes, Skyscrapers, Bridges, Dams, Canals, High Capacity Agriculture...



Men are more prone to corruption and far more likely to walk out on their committments.


REALLY???

That is a fairly BRASH statement.

Especially considering the FACTS that...

1. Women are FAR more likely to file for divorce than men
osc.sciences-po.fr...

2.

*90% of Non-Custodial fathers Pay Child Support.
(Source: Census Bureau report. Series P-23, No. 173)

* 90% of Fathers With Joint Custody Pay Child Support.
(Source: Census Bureau report. Series P-23, No. 173)

* Fathers With Visitation Rights Pay 79.1%
(Source: Census Bureau report. Series P-23, No. 173)

* 44.5% of Non-Custodial Fathers Still Financially Support Their Children.
(Source: Census Bureau report. Series P-23, No. 173)

* 66% of Fathers Not Paying Child Support Are Unable Due To Lack of Financial Resources. (Source: GAO report: GAO/HRD-92-39 FS)

* 52% of Fathers Who Owe Child Support Earn Less Than $6,155 Per Year According To The Poverty Studies Institute.

* 47% of Non-Custodial Mothers Default on Child Support.
(Source: Garansky and Meyer, DHHS Technical Analysis Paper No. 42, 1991)

* 27% of Non-Custodial Fathers Default Child Support.
(Source: Garansky and Meyer, DHHS Technical Analysis Paper No. 42, 1991)

* Total Custodial Mothers: 11,268,000.
(Source: Current Population Reports, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Series P-20, No. 458, 1991)

* Total Custodial Fathers: 2,907,000.
(Source: Current Population Reports, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Series P-20, No. 458, 1991)

* 66% of Non-Custodial Fathers Do Not Pay Child Support Due To An Inability To Pay. (Source: U.S. General Accounting Office Report, GAO/HRD-92-39FS January 1992)

* Custodial Mothers Who Receive a Support Award: 79.6%
(Source: Technical Analysis Paper No. 42, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Income Security Policy, Oct. 1991, Authors: Meyer and Garansky)


Men are FAR more likley (per capita) to actually PAY child support than women, and the VAST MAJORITY of men who do not have custody of their children, DO pay child support.... even to their own poverty

So, what responsibilities, EXACTLY are you talking about men walking away from?

As far as corruption...

Have you ever heard of the Marian Persecutions?

Yeah... that one is a fun read: en.wikipedia.org...

From "Political Cleaners: How Women are the New Anti-Corruption Force.
Does the Evidence Wash?"

www.u4.no...

To expect that women’s gender alone can act as a magic bullet to resolve a corruption problem that is much bigger than they are, that is systemic, is unrealistic to say the least. It reflects not just wishful but almost desperate thinking. If women do exhibit preferences for less corrupt behavior, that may simply be because they have been excluded from
opportunities for such behavior, and that effect is bound to change over time as greater numbers of women enter public office.


Fundamentally, your assertions that women are "Less Corrupt" than men, is political hogwash that does not stand the scrutiny of the light of day.

So, in other words.... Source your claim.

This world would be far safer, more empathetic and more technologically advancedwith sayl 10% men and 90% women, though I can't say what a world of 90% women would do for entertainment. Women are creative, though. They would adapt.


I see... so you are a SEXIST, and you are advocating the wholesale Genocide of an entire Gender.

That is very telling of your inherent bias and misandry (hatred of men)

You are not only WHOLLY WRONG, but you are also fueled by a hatred of men...

99.99% of EVERYTHING EVER MADE was made by men.

You can't honestly CLAIM anything that you HAVE claimed, and still expect to be taken seriously...

You need to examine your Hatred, because it is tainting your worldview.

-Edrick


reply posted on 17-3-2010 @ 06:37 AM by Mercuryae
And you are a Misogynist , Edrick ...so I am sure you two will have a lively discussion....not the first time you do this ^^

You are putting Men on some sort of God-pedestal, the superior sex

www.youtube.com...

George Carlin puts it in perspective


And by the way, gender isnt the same as sex, you get it wrong again


As for the OP's topic: Yes, it is a bad thing, if it leads to sickness and a unhealthy Human life. I am not sure whether very strict MALE and FEMALE dichtomies are a good thing however, maybe a little more balance would be more harmonious, just a suggestion...I wouldnt enforce my ideas about gender and sexuality on people, even if I disagree
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



Russian scientists reach buried Antarctic Lake Vostok
  Posted 3 days ago with 83 member flags
Monsanto quits as GM results announced (EUROPE)
  Posted 5 days ago with 72 member flags
Strange noises reported around North Battleford
  Posted 16 days ago with 67 member flags
Ayatollah: Kill all Jews, annihilate Israel
  Posted 4 days ago with 49 member flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Santorum wants more fracking!!!
  US Political Madness, Posted 12 hours ago, 53 replies
Pass Me My Rifle
  World War Three, Posted 8 hours ago, 51 replies