SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Girls who share a womb with boys tend to make less money than those with twin sisters
Female twins who shared a womb with a brother tend to get less education, earn less money, and have fewer children than girls who shared a womb with another girl, according to an analysis of hundreds of thousands of births over more than a decade. Researchers suspect the cause is testosterone exposure during fetal development, though the exact mechanism remains a mystery.
"I think it's a really interesting look at how this really complicated system might impact females," says Talia Melber, a biological anthropologist at the University of Illinois in Urbana who wasn't involved in the study. Still, she cautions, a lot more work needs to be done to establish a causal link.
Fraternal twins, in which each of two eggs is fertilized by a different sperm cell, occur in about four of every 1000 births. About half of those result in male-female twin pairs. Typically, about 8 to 9 weeks into gestation, a male fetus begins to produce massive amounts of testosterone, which helps jump-start the development of male reproductive organs and brain architecture; female fetuses receive only modest amounts of the sex hormone. In male-female twins, though, small amounts of the male fetus's testosterone can seep into the female twin's separate amniotic sac. Scientists have known about this phenomenon for decades, and have been arguing for just as long over what effects, if any, it has on women later in life.
[...] Controlling for factors such as birth weight and maternal education, women who had a male twin were 15.2% less likely to graduate from high school, 3.9% less likely to finish college, and 11.7% less likely to be married—compared with women with a twin sister. They also had 5.8% fewer children and earned 8.6% less money, the team reports today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Evidence that prenatal testosterone transfer from male twins reduces the fertility and socioeconomic success of their female co-twins (open, DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1812786116) (DX)
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday March 20 2019, @05:21AM (9 children)
And yet like any woman, I am surrounded by men and the world men have made everywhere I go. I see men suffering terrible things...done to them almost entirely by other men. This is one reason I keep saying men need feminism and feminism needs men: because the excesses and cruelties of "the patriarchy" are inflicted on innocent men to begin with, and most of you are told "well at least you're not a woman" as a redirection.
Who starts wars? Men, leaving aside a few weird edge cases like Boudicca. Who is it that has a problem with gays? For the most part, men, and that means gay or just effeminate men suffer horribly at the hands of men for being who and what they are...because they are associated with women and being woman-like. Who is driving this continued, ever-worsening boom and bust cycle? Pretty much all men, though I hold every single female CEO just as complicit (Liz Holmes, I'm lookin' at you...). Who does most of the human trafficking? Again, almost all men, and yes, there are some male victims of it despite it being almost a textbook example of male sexual violence against women. Whose bodies are used to advertise fucking everything, and usually in the most exploitative, objectifying ways possible, and by whom? Womens', by men. Why can't men get help when they are victims of domestic abuse? Because *other men* tell them "that doesn't happen to men," in effect.
And you've fallen for it hook line and sinker. You suffer all this, and see others suffer it, and willingly allow it to continue because at least you can dump on women, at least you're not a woman, at least you have that Y chromosome going for you. Guess what? SO DO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE MAKING YOUR LIFE HELL. You have more in common with me than you do a rich man. Think about that.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 20 2019, @06:12AM (1 child)
Prostitution rings are frequently managed by "madams". Recall old Heidi Fleiss, Madam to the Stars.
What you are blinded to is that you see men as the agents of evil rather than what is really happening: people who have the means to do so indulging themselves.
Put women in positions of power and many of them will be insufferable cruel bitches (Leona Helmsley--an ancient example). The human trafficking stories I am most aware of are household servants who are slaves beaten and humilated by a Chinese, Arab, or Indian she-devil matron. Power corrupts and it pays no heed to sex.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday March 20 2019, @06:33AM
You think I don't know this? I don't think a woman is automatically angelic or innocent just by virtue of being female, and those "madams" are some of the lowest of the low. And forget Leona Helmsley, what about Irma Grese? If it comes to that, the person who's hurt me most in my entire life was another woman.
None of that negates my other points. God damn it, man, I'm *defending* the vast majority of men, proclaiming them to be largely innocent of the worst of male abuses, and you jump all over this like I proposed eliminating half the human race and blasting off into space a la Vandread to create a lesbian-separatist Dyson sphere or something.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 4, Insightful) by deimtee on Wednesday March 20 2019, @06:12AM (4 children)
And this is an example of the core dissonance between yours and TMB/Runny/KHall/etc, viewpoints.
You blame "Men" as a whole when the truth is that it is the 0.1% who start wars, and always was.
You claim that "Men" have had 45 USA presidents in a row. True, but it is more accurate (smaller grouping) to say that the 0.1% upper class have had 45 presidents in a row.
You blame "Men" as a group for discrimination, while simultaneously claiming that blaming any other group for the individual actions of its members is wrong.
No problem is insoluble, but at Ksp = 2.943×10−25 Mercury Sulphide comes close.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday March 20 2019, @06:27AM (3 children)
You misread me here: I am not saying "all men and every man are directly responsible for $EVIL_THING." I am saying that within the set of "humans responsible for $EVIL_THING," the vast majority of them are men, and many of their victims are male as well. Read for comprehension, *please.*
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Wednesday March 20 2019, @09:22AM (2 children)
Yet in almost every case you refer to them as men. Not 'the sexists', or 'the racists', or 'the patriarchy', or 'the upper class', or 'the 1%' or even 'evil sociopathic bastards'.
The group 'men' includes many people who are not responsible for the problems, but by using by the group name you include them.
Some Mexicans are drug dealers. Is it acceptable to say 'all Mexicans are drug dealers'?
Some African-americans are violent muggers. Is it acceptable to say 'all African-americans are violent criminals'?
Some men are sexist, racist pigs. Is it acceptable to say 'all men are sexist, racist pigs'?
I think the first part is overly simplistic, but I agree with the bit I italicized. But you are contributing to the very problem you are complaining about by then referring to them as 'men' every time you have a problem with someone's behaviour.
No problem is insoluble, but at Ksp = 2.943×10−25 Mercury Sulphide comes close.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday March 20 2019, @09:56AM (1 child)
This must be that "fragile masculinity" I keep hearing about so often recently...
Try it like this: "in the set of [people who do $BAD_STUFF], it is observed that most of the members of the set are men." Does that help any? I'm not backing off this, because I'm not wrong.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 20 2019, @06:40PM
My wife made me do it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 20 2019, @06:22AM (1 child)
One of your examples needs to be mentioned: "human trafficking."
For the most part, this is just a new marketing term for prostitution, something that is legal and regulated in many Western countries.
As far as prostitution, there are different strata of prostitute. The bottom ones are quite bad and may involve coercion or drug addiction. These are the street walkers. At the top you have the call girl who is pretty safe, doesn't work many hours, and makes a lot of money. She goes into it of her own volition and it is a rational job choice, although one should recognize like an actor or athlete it is based on physical appeal and therefore usually has a limited span as a "career."
I hope you weren't conflating *all* prostitution with a slavery ring.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday March 20 2019, @06:37AM
If I'd meant all prostitution I'd have *said* all prostitution. As it is, I do think someone should be able to go and do "camgirl" (or "cam-boy" for that matter) work if s/he wants to, but that's about it. There's too much danger to the person being prostituted otherwise, even in cases of supposedly independent free agents working for themselves: disease, kidnapping, robbery, injury, death, health issues, the list goes on.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...