"Dani" <danielle at nospam.arcticmail.com> wrote in message
news:B7601ADC.19A3%danielle at nospam.arcticmail.com...
> "Are men really brain damaged at birth?"
>http://brain.com/about/article.cfm?ID=21105&cat_ID=12>> It's a nice article for a little malebashing (my favorite
> new hobby), it's -very- suspicious to me. First, the author didn't bother
> with informing us about any studies that support the callosal brain sex
> dimorphism which he posits. No cites, no refs, I guess we'll just take his
> word for it.
>> And consider this passage...
>> "Testosterone is mildly damaging to the nerve fibers in the corpus
> in baby boys. The connecting link between both halves of the brain in baby
> girls is left totally intact."
>> Now how does one go about determining this putative callosal dimorphism in
> babies? Open their heads and put a ruler on the brain? No. MRI? No, that's
> not powerful enough to discern whether or not there's a sex dimorphism of
> any part of the brain. I'd -really- like to know the technique used here
> what age the babies were when tested and how they know for certain that it
> was testosterone that did the bad business. And some other stuff as well.
>> Moreover, the majority of studies that have been performed in the last 10
> 15 years have failed to find a difference between male and female corpus
>> So, what do you guys think?
>> ps. how do you spell "callosal"? did I get it right? :-)
Consider the source -- what type of web site is posting the article?
It is actually females whose brains are damaged by the need to
sequester that pesky extra X chromosome. OK, I made that up
just now, but it has as much validity as a lot of the stuff on the web.
So you are right to notice that the information you found is a
colossal error (did I get that one spelled right?)!
(And maybe it should be callosi for the plural?)