BoysToys

[SlowFJH]

We have two boys and a girl (all now teenagers). My daughter was never into dolls and never really liked pink. She was into arts and crafts and loves knitting and sowing. The boys were completely stereotypical (plastic and wooden swords, guns, cars, diggers and tractors, soldiers etc).

We have good feminist friends (with three boys) who banned violent toys for boys. They always gave us the cat's bum face when they visited ours because their boys used to absolutely love playing with my sons' swords and shields. When we went out it for a walk, every stick they found was a gun - despite their parents vocal disapproval.

My friend's boys (now all strapping teenage lads) joke about how their parents banned them from having the toys they always wanted.

We definitely saw differences in toy preferences very early on. My daughter had zero interest in wheeled toys (despite my efforts) but both boys were fascinated by them virtually from day one.

I know my experience is not scientific. But there were some studies several years ago using baby apes (who obviously had not been conditioned by human systems or been exposed to advertising etc). Baby male apes showed a clear preference for mechanical toys over plush toys.

www.newscientist.com/article/dn13596-male-monkeys-prefer-boys-toys/

I'd love to hear others views on this topic... social conditioning versus biological predispositions.

It's because it's an easy cop out, scallops.

Oh actually they do have their testicles removed. Who knew? Learn a new thing every day. And here's me who grew up on a farm and all (didn't castrate any animals though).

Or boys...

Yes, because castrated male animals tend to fatten up faster than their intact brethren, which means that they don't have to be kept alive as long for the meat market.

Have I, or has anyone else, done that in this discussion?

PalmerViolet and Scallops
OK I am going to go along with this for now.. Even though I know (hope) you're just "bustin my balls" for fun.

Let me turn the question around. What biological effect (if any) do you think testosterone has?

PalmerViolet
Do you think that's why colts are commonly castrated? Because they produce more horsemeat than stallions?

Would any horse loving readers care to give a view?

I don't much care. I'd just like men to stop raping and murdering women (and other men/boys too. Let's share the love). I'm sure that can be achieved with or without testosterone. NAMALT, for example.

Scallops
"I don't much care"

I am asking you what you think and I'm genuinely curious how your physiology curriculum might have been different to mine..

I too would like men to stop murdering and raping women (men, boys and girls).

Ahh, so what you are doing is checking out my credentials, in relation to yours which are obviously impeccable.

I did the degree over 20 years ago and only used small areas since e.g. Energy metabolism. I've forgotten more than I remember. As I said I work with computers. Not much call for physiology.

I do remember quite a bit about swim bladders in fish though (for some reason). Can we talk about those?

I wonder if a study of violence in human castrate has ever been done?

Don't think I ever claimed my credentials were impeccable. Sorry if I gave that impression. The topic of castration has only come up because you and a couple of others have discounted the effects of testosterone on male behaviour and development.

Thankfully we do not castrate boys and men anymore. But we do have ample evidence from the animal world. It's been suggested by PalmerViolet that this is for the benefit of meat yield. But, last time I checked, we don't eat a lot of dog meat in this country and yet most doh owners get their male dogs castrated.

Why do you think that is?

PalmerViolet
How much cat meat do we get through in this country ? Is that why so many catlovers have their tom cats castrated? So that they produce more meat?

Or do you think there could be other reasons?

Scallops
You voluntarily shared that you had a degree in Physiology. I had asked Geeka about her degree. But you very kindly shared your credentials. Now you're saying you don't remember much and want to talk about swim bladders on fish.

Please feel free to start a thread on that topic. I am not sure of the relevance to toys for human children.

I think it is relevant to discuss our closer evolutionary relatives (ie mammals) because we have lots of evidence as to what castration does to behaviour.

Caroldecker
I was wondering when the ad hominem attacks would really get going.

In answer to your comment "What that means to 3 year children I will leave your obvious imbecility to contemplate"

Here's what my imbecility lesfs me to contemplate. I believe that, as in most situations, both nature and nurture probably play a role in toy preferences.

We cannot discount the power and impact of social norms, family influences, peer group chastisement, marketing, TV advertising and other factors which influence what type of toys are child may or not prefer.

I also contend that there may be innate factors at play - such as genetic and hormonal differences.

We know that male foetuses start to produce testosterone soon after conception. Testosterone levels in boys are generally higher than in girls (of course there are exceptions). At puberty testosterone levels increase significantly. The primary effect of this is physical (growth spurt, increased muscle mass, voice breaking, facial hair etc).

As well as physical effects, testosterone is known also to affect behaviour. In most mammals it is associated with increased aggression, competitiveness and dominating behaviour.

We do not (and should not) castrate human beings. However we know from castrating animals that e.g. a bullock will be less aggressive and less likely to charge than a bull. A castrated dog will be less likely to fight another male dog than a intact dog. A geldling is easier to ride and control than a stallion.

Testosterone affects behaviour.

Behaviour might include toy preferences.

www.scientificamerican.com/article/strange-but-true-testosterone-alone-doesnt-cause-violence/

Some interesting points, but the article is quite old (nearly 8 years)

ShowMeTheWonder

plenty of girls want to play cars too and you aren't going to stop them, nor should you

When / where have I suggested that?

Read the OP. We went with whatever preferences our children had without trying to impose anything on them. Personally, I would have been delighted if my daughter had been into cars as we might have had a few more years of fun with the bloody expensive Scalextric set.

By contrast, it was my very good friends that decided to "ban" their children from playing with certain toys. Not us.

The debate about hormones has come up because some posters including Vashta and others who have stated there are no innate differences between boys and girls

Innate means "existing at the time of birth". By the very fact you can say "this is a boy and this is a girl" would suggest that there are some pretty basic differences which exist at birth. Genetic boys have an X chromosome (from mum) and a Y chromosome (from dad). Genetic girls have two X chromosomes (from mum and dad). That's a pretty fundamental innate difference that is present at the moment of conception. The XY chromosome means that testosterone is produced just weeks into gestation eventually resulting in the development of the male foetus.

As well as physical effects, testosterone is known to affect behaviour. That's why (and the only reason why) castration in animals was brought up in this conversation. Some people seem to be "Testosterone Deniers" - but the evidence of castration in animals before maturity suggests that this hormone plays a pretty significant role in behaviour as well as physiology.

Otherwise why do it (other than as a contraceptive procedure)?

PalmerViolet thinks it's to improve meat yield. If so, why castrate male kittens, puppies and ponies?

Aside from controlling reproduction, the procedure also means the animal develops differently in terms of behaviour. A capon behaves differently to a cockerel. The biggest differences are typically associated with aggression, competitiveness and territorial defence.

In addition to marketing, TV, family pressure, traditions, peer group chastisement and the patriarchy (none of which I am denying), I believe basic biology, physiology and endocrinology could also be playing a part.

So I'm saying its probably a bit of both (nature and nurture). Not sure why that is so contentious.

Partialderivative
That's an interesting article. Here are a couple of direct quotes from it..

Castration experiments demonstrate that testosterone is necessary for violence

Regardless of their gender the most violent prisoners have higher levels of testosterone than their less violent peers

From what we can tell now, testosterone is generated to prepare the body to respond to competition and/or challenges to one's status

That's the article I linked to earlier on. Don't you people read the thread?

And that Geeka commented on...

And you conveniently missed all that part about testosterone possibly being a consequence rather a cause of violence.

I did read it. I'm sorry I didn't quote from it immediately. The article is saying "it's complicated" I agree. Its not denying that testosterone has a role in behaviour

They mention a correlation but make it clear they don't know if it's cause at all.

Op, can I ask what prompted you to post this discussion? Your children are grown up now so you probably don't buy toys for them?

My degree is in Politics and Philosophy so I have no clue about geldings, unfortunately.

I do have a two year old though and I think it's astonishing how differently he's treated to my friend's daughter of the same age. She is 'bossy', constantly told to be quiet, sit still etc. So I would assume her choice of toys will be limited if she has to be quiet and still when playing with them.

I think nuture is the biggest factor.