Originally posted by scottishinnz Not exactly, more of a developmental thing. Human embryos are all created equal, and female. It's only during development that male embryos are masculinised by a rush of testosterone, that changes a whole host of things, it turns the organ that will become the cliteros into a penis and it changes the brain architecture.
In females Oestrogen is the ...[text shortened]... e are!
So, to sum up, male nipples are a reminder of our uterine trans-genderal experience.
Human embryos are all created equal, and female.
Wrong. You are propagating an urban myth. In human embryos, both the müllerian duct system (female) and the wolffian duct system (male) develop at first.
The subsequent differences are the result of hormone levels that control the expression of gender-specific genetic information.
Originally posted by Halitose [b]Human embryos are all created equal, and female.
Wrong. You are propagating an urban myth. In human embryos, both the müllerian duct system (female) and the wolffian duct system (male) develop at first.
The subsequent differences are the result of hormone levels that control the expression of gender-specific genetic information.[/b]
Okay, perhaps I may be absolutely-technically, incorrect; however, it is true that without the Y-chromosome induced testosterone rush the embryo will develop into a female.
Originally posted by scottishinnz Okay, perhaps I may be absolutely-technically, incorrect; however, it is true that without the Y-chromosome induced testosterone rush the embryo will develop into a female.
Fair enough. Although that is the same as saying that the embryo would be female if it had no Y-chromosome -- rather circular.
Except you're not playing around with chicken-and-egg stories but dealing with an observed fact: without said hormone influx, the foetus is female. It simply doesn't work the other way around.
Originally posted by Halitose Fair enough. Although that is the same as saying that the embryo would be female if it had no Y-chromosome -- rather circular.
Not exactly. If it only had one chromosome it wouldn't develop. Really, I think we both mean a Y rather than an X.
Anyhoo, the really interesting bit is when you get XXYs (extremely effeminate men) or XYYs (super-ferocious males).
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage Except you're not playing around with chicken-and-egg stories but dealing with an observed fact: without said hormone influx, the foetus is female. It simply doesn't work the other way around.
Originally posted by scottishinnz Not exactly. If it only had one chromosome it wouldn't develop. Really, I think we both mean a Y rather than an X.
Anyhoo, the really interesting bit is when you get XXYs (extremely effeminate men) or XYYs (super-ferocious males).
Not true, actually. Individuals with Turner's Syndrome have an XO chromosomal cofiguration. They tend to be short of stature, webbed of foot, and feminine to a fault (e.g., have no sense of direction).
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage Except you're not playing around with chicken-and-egg stories but dealing with an observed fact: without said hormone influx, the foetus is female. It simply doesn't work the other way around.
The said hormone influx is determined by the Y chromosome, ergo male or female -- it is still determined genetically. I could just as well argue that it becomes female due to the absence of testosterone.
Originally posted by Pawnokeyhole Not true, actually. Individuals with Turner's Syndrome have an XO chromosomal cofiguration. They tend to be short of stature, webbed of foot, and feminine to a fault (e.g., have no sense of direction).
Nipple Challenge: Evolution v. Creationism
10 Feb '06 07:28
Back to Top