Some clarity in how the trans movement became so embedded, so preeminent

Conveniently miss this bit did you? 😂

"Nature and Psychological Mechanisms of Prenatal Androgen Effects on Gendered Behavior

Confidence has increased that early androgens affect gender development, in light of recent studies that confirm, extend, and clarify previous findings. Most promising, research has moved from asking whether hormones influence human behavior to asking how they do so.

Activity interests and participation – from childhood toy preferences to adult hobbies and occupations – continue to be strongly linked to prenatal androgen exposure [e.g., 7,8], with two notable recent findings. First, androgen effects on interest and engagement in male-typed occupations was seen to have economic consequences: women with exposure to high levels of prenatal androgens due to congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) were more likely than controls to have income in the top 20th percentile, reflecting employment in male-typical, higher-paying jobs (despite having lower education, and more psychosocial problems) [9]. Second, the sensitive period for androgen effects on activity interests was extended to the early postnatal months, as seen in links between parent-reported child play and urinary testosterone during the first six postnatal months [10], and penile length at a similar time (marking the postnatal testosterone surge also known as mini-puberty) [11].

Speculations about the affective and cognitive processes that underlie children’s sextyped toy preferences have been stimulated by evidence that those preferences are paralleled in rhesus monkeys (male monkeys, like boys, strongly preferred wheeled toys, whereas female monkeys, like girls, had variable preferences, leading to sex differences in preference for wheeled versus plush toys) [12, 13]. Recent work has documented early sex differences in propulsive movement (hitting versus cradling an object), with sex-typed activities suggested to develop “from socialization mechanisms that build on a male predisposition to imitate propulsive motion” [14, p. 262]. Furthermore, sex differences in occupational choices (e.g., male-predominance in science and engineering, female-predominance in social service) appear to be driven in part by androgen effects on interest in things versus people [15].

Spatial abilities are facilitated by exposure to high levels of prenatal androgens. Performance on several spatial tests was higher in two samples of females with CAH compared to typical females [16,17]. Inconsistencies in early studies were clarified: androgen facilitation of spatial abilities may be countered by adverse effects of the disease during early life [17]. Converging evidence comes from typical samples. Spatial abilities were positively related to amniotic testosterone in girls for one measure, but not two others, perhaps due to small sample [18]. Spatial performance was also higher in females with a male co-twin than a female co-twin, thought to reflect transfer of testosterone during gestation [19,20]; importantly, one study controlled for postnatal socialization effects by showing that females with a (non-twin) brother did not have better spatial ability than those with a sister [19]."

Conveniently miss this bit did you? 😂

"Nature and Psychological Mechanisms of Prenatal Androgen Effects on Gendered Behavior

Confidence has increased that early androgens affect gender development, in light of recent studies that confirm, extend, and clarify previous findings. Most promising, research has moved from asking whether hormones influence human behavior to asking how they do so.

Activity interests and participation – from childhood toy preferences to adult hobbies and occupations – continue to be strongly linked to prenatal androgen exposure [e.g., 7,8], with two notable recent findings. First, androgen effects on interest and engagement in male-typed occupations was seen to have economic consequences: women with exposure to high levels of prenatal androgens due to congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) were more likely than controls to have income in the top 20th percentile, reflecting employment in male-typical, higher-paying jobs (despite having lower education, and more psychosocial problems) [9]. Second, the sensitive period for androgen effects on activity interests was extended to the early postnatal months, as seen in links between parent-reported child play and urinary testosterone during the first six postnatal months [10], and penile length at a similar time (marking the postnatal testosterone surge also known as mini-puberty) [11].

Speculations about the affective and cognitive processes that underlie children’s sextyped toy preferences have been stimulated by evidence that those preferences are paralleled in rhesus monkeys (male monkeys, like boys, strongly preferred wheeled toys, whereas female monkeys, like girls, had variable preferences, leading to sex differences in preference for wheeled versus plush toys) [12, 13]. Recent work has documented early sex differences in propulsive movement (hitting versus cradling an object), with sex-typed activities suggested to develop “from socialization mechanisms that build on a male predisposition to imitate propulsive motion” [14, p. 262]. Furthermore, sex differences in occupational choices (e.g., male-predominance in science and engineering, female-predominance in social service) appear to be driven in part by androgen effects on interest in things versus people [15].

Spatial abilities are facilitated by exposure to high levels of prenatal androgens. Performance on several spatial tests was higher in two samples of females with CAH compared to typical females [16,17]. Inconsistencies in early studies were clarified: androgen facilitation of spatial abilities may be countered by adverse effects of the disease during early life [17]. Converging evidence comes from typical samples. Spatial abilities were positively related to amniotic testosterone in girls for one measure, but not two others, perhaps due to small sample [18]. Spatial performance was also higher in females with a male co-twin than a female co-twin, thought to reflect transfer of testosterone during gestation [19,20]; importantly, one study controlled for postnatal socialization effects by showing that females with a (non-twin) brother did not have better spatial ability than those with a sister [19]."

Spatial abilities were positively related to amniotic testosterone in girls for one measure, but not two others, perhaps due to small sample 18]. Spatial performance was also higher in females with a male co-twin than a female co-twin, thought to reflect transfer of testosterone during gestation

So first study inconclusive and second study just a hypothesis.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39844442/

"but this result was not significant after multiple testing corrections (p > 0.050). The findings indicate that the TTT hypothesis may not apply, or its effects on digit ratios and testosterone levels in females of OS twin pairs are weak and not statistically significant. Further studies involving larger samples are however, recommended."

Again, it's not clear what you are trying to argue. Do you want to classify people according to brain scans? Why?

All comes down to words and power, I suppose.

As exploitation and abuse have become more restricted by moral frameworks, international & humanitarian law, norms, regulations and agreements, humans, being some of them venal, abusive, and base, have sought ways to subvert.

We used words to create laws to control human behaviour, and then we used yet more words to undermine and moderate and 'queer' social contracts and norms and legislation.

So we can construct linguistic cases for absurd assertions, like humans changing sex, and turn fundamentally cruel concepts, like surrogacy/baby trafficking, into linguistically asserted positive moral acts, and turn abusive acts of prostitution into 'sex positive' narratives.

It all ends up looking like a giant exercise in narc wheedling, in the end.

Have we got a list yet of what behavioural and psychological traits are considered ‘male’ and what are considered ‘female’?

Or is it just more amorphous blob stuff ?

Still waiting…

I'm still waiting for Northern to confirm that Prof Phoenix, Nurse Sandie Peggie, Maya Forstater, Allison Bailey et al are, and I quote from Northern, 'useful idiots'.

So on one side, we have idiots like Prof Phoenix, Nurse Sandie Peggie, Maya Forstater, Allison Bailey, and on the other...... Northern....

Hmmmm. I think 'balance of probability' is the most sensible route to go down here...