RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress



Message

ShaktiSama -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/10/2009 2:53:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: samboct
Shaktisama-Sorry- I have to disagree with you.
1)  These days fMRI can distinguish between male and female.


I can distinguish between male and female skulls completely sans flesh as well.  I can distinguish between a male and female pelvis and a male and female humeral and femoral head on many occasions.  This does not mean that by some crude physiological instrument I can tell what the owners of these body parts think, feel, or would think and feel if they had been brought up differently.

There is absolutely no reason to believe that there is a direct relationship between the physiological and psychological differences between men and women, when they vary considerably by CULTURE and GENERATION.  Anyone who tells you differently is trying to sell you something--and nine times out of ten, what they're trying to sell you is male supremacy.

If you don't understand what "acculturation" is, please stop talking.  I get very sick of correcting people about this nonsense, and the fact that people keep trying to propagate desperately shitty sexist science to "prove" that their culturally mandated and nturalized sexism is "correct" is really, really irritating.



LadyPact -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/10/2009 3:33:30 PM)

Never thought I'd be saying this one.  At least not in quite this way.

You guys are concentrating too much on the wrong head.

(Yes, it was terrible.  Had to do it anyway.  [:D])



Lockit -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/10/2009 3:36:22 PM)

ROFL...  I'm glad you did LadyPact!  I enjoyed it...



samboct -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/10/2009 4:53:21 PM)

Shaktisama

I suggest you do a little research on functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI).   The device can measure changes in blood flow and microenvironments to detect neurotransmitters firing.  Essentially this enables researchers to see what sections of the brain light up when certain stimuli are applied.  Along with PET scans, researchers are getting a look at what's going on in your head when you're thinking something- it's not a black box anymore.  If Freud had toys like this- he'd never have invented his theory of the unconscious.

Here's a nice paper that covers fMRI of sexual imagery in man and women- shows that the processing is indeed different-

http://news.bio-medicine.org/medicine-news-2/Study-finds-male-and-female-brains-respond-differently-to-visual-stimuli-3785-1/

Data has a way of overturning pet theories (and thanks 2NYCDommes-mine may bite the dust next.  Oh well...)


Sam



PeonForHer -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/10/2009 5:14:09 PM)

If Freud had toys like this- he'd never have invented his theory of the unconscious.

I think that's going too far, samboct.  Neurology is about brains; psychology is about minds.  Two different subjects.  Certainly, we might one day get the study of neurology down to a fine art - but we'd never be able to tell what images and thoughts are actually going through someone's mind.



samboct -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/10/2009 5:47:54 PM)

Actually, Freud's medical degree and research was in neurology.  He was very interested in how the brain works- just didn't have the tools to study it.  That's when he came up with the idea of probing through psychology.

Sam



ShaktiSama -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/10/2009 5:55:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: samboct

I suggest you do a little research on functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI). 


I'd be willing to bet a considerable amount of money that I have spent more time "researching" this and many other subjects related to biological anthropology than you have. Stop stamping your little foot and crying about "wiring" when you don't know how plastic the human brain is and how it is trained to perform over time. The results of an MRI show us how the brain performs as a result of training, not biology. This is why the brain of a violinist has such a disproportionate amount of activity related to control of the left hand, with MORE activity manifesting the longer he/she has been practicing the art. And its why cab drivers have such a disproportionate amount of brain activity in the centers that govern spatial relationships, with MORE activity the longer they have been driving.

TRAINING CREATES UNIQUE PATTERNS OF BRAIN ACTIVITY.

NOT biological sex.

Men are TRAINED IN THIS SOCIETY to respond to visual stimuli.

Women are TRAINED IN THIS SOCIETY AND IN MANY OTHERS to avoid visual stimuli.

This is because eye contact is a biological signal of DOMINANCE. A direct gaze is the classic sign of the born predator.

Why do you think "Eye Contact Restrictions" are listed on the site's laundry list of BDSM activities? Because restricting or compelling the gaze of another human being is about POWER. This power is exerted over girls in our society from birth, to a disproportionate degree. A similar power is exerted over the male gaze.

There's nothing "natural" about the way men look at women, especially if you compare it to the eye contact and gaze restrictions that come into play when they are looking at other men.



samboct -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/10/2009 7:44:47 PM)

"TRAINING CREATES UNIQUE PATTERNS OF BRAIN ACTIVITY.

NOT biological sex."

There is a wealth of research that disagrees with your theory ranging from studies in rats where pieces of male brains are transplanted into female pups  (an experiment that's a little hard to do with humans.)  which affects adult behavior.  If male and female brains were functionally equivalent- there'd be no difference.  Feel free to hit www.sciencemag.org- I probably have some of the issues kicking around, but they're not organized, so it's a pain to dig them out.

Human studies have also been done- ranging from ultrasound studies which at 26 weeks can identify male/female brains in utero to fMRI studies in infants.

Note that nobody's denying that environment also plays a role in the development of brains- but genes do a lot.  I suspect most people will recognize intuitively that your theory is in error using the violinist as an example.  I tried to play the violin when I was younger and eventually gave up.  What dawned on me was that other folks who practiced less rapidly got better than me.  It's clear that some people are born with various talents and abilities- and I suspect that sexual behavior is wired in.  

A bit closer to home- according to your theory- gay men are trained not born.   I have a good friend who commented that sexual preference was an oxymoron as far as he was concerned- he'd prefer to be straight- but he was gay.   I suspect most gay men would say the same thing.

I'm going to pass on a response to your claims that I've got some hidden agenda involving male superiority.  I will acknowledge that I didn't spend much of my academic career looking at various cultures, but I did spend a fair amount of time doing NMR on biological molecules.

For some other folks- I've listed a rather junky article that gives some useful references.

http://www.cerebromente.org.br/n11/mente/eisntein/cerebro-homens.html


Sam



gauguin -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/10/2009 7:44:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

If Freud had toys like this- he'd never have invented his theory of the unconscious.

I think that's going too far, samboct.  Neurology is about brains; psychology is about minds.  Two different subjects.  Certainly, we might one day get the study of neurology down to a fine art - but we'd never be able to tell what images and thoughts are actually going through someone's mind.


unfortunately you are very wrong... the mind is nothing else but outcome of brain activity, and even though current neurology has only glimpses of how brain works etc, but it is already possible to determine with >90% accuracy i.e. if someone
is lying or if is familiar with displayed picture and so on... bare in mind (LOL) it was total sci-fi 5 years ago...

as well there is something called neuropsychology, for more then 30 years now...



PeonForHer -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/10/2009 8:04:10 PM)

You think he'd have stuck with neurology if he'd had today's neurological tools - and ignored the mind?  Difficult to see that . . .



PeonForHer -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/10/2009 8:10:53 PM)

There's no comparison, gauguin.  The mind certainly is the result of brain activity, but we can barely tell a tiny fraction of what goes on in it with mechanical devices.  Telling if someone is lying or not is quite a simple and crude thing in relation to all that goes on in anyone's mind.  There's no way, for instance, that any such machine could see the picture I have in my head at any one time.  That's the stuff of science fiction!



RealSub58 -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/10/2009 8:15:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

Never thought I'd be saying this one.  At least not in quite this way.

You guys are concentrating too much on the wrong head.

(Yes, it was terrible.  Had to do it anyway.  [:D])



But LP, it is men's first play toy, even in the womb besides their thumb (a bit of resemblance with some men) and it will be just about all their lives!!



MzMia -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/10/2009 8:17:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RealSub58

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

Never thought I'd be saying this one.  At least not in quite this way.

You guys are concentrating too much on the wrong head.

(Yes, it was terrible.  Had to do it anyway.  [:D])



But LP, it is men's first play toy, even in the womb besides their thumb (a bit of resemblance with some men) and it will be just about all their lives!!


I am convinced that many men are obsessed with all things penis.[sm=wiggleass.gif]
[:D]



LadyPact -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/10/2009 8:19:44 PM)

I think this thread is proof enough that I have My own obsession, in My own charming, charismatic way.  [;)]



MzMia -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/10/2009 8:21:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

I think this thread is proof enough that I have My own obsession, in My own charming, charismatic way.  [;)]


I believe you!
[;)]



PeonForHer -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/10/2009 8:23:07 PM)

LP just said it.



gauguin -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/11/2009 4:23:54 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

There's no comparison, gauguin.  The mind certainly is the result of brain activity, but we can barely tell a tiny fraction of what goes on in it with mechanical devices.  Telling if someone is lying or not is quite a simple and crude thing in relation to all that goes on in anyone's mind.  There's no way, for instance, that any such machine could see the picture I have in my head at any one time.  That's the stuff of science fiction!


IMHO detecting lying by analysing brain activity, as well as detecting existing associations/memories of pictures
is not so simple. As well cannot be compared to "lie detectors" based on physiological responses, as it operates
on actual brain activity involved in lie, not just outcomes such us increased heart rate etc

Concept of watching peoples thoughts might sound as sci-fi now, but as I said, fMRI lie detection was exactly same
just couple years ago. Obviously it will take a while (fortunately, as I am not very keen on idea someone could see my thoughts), but theory and quite lot of technology is already there... 



ShaktiSama -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/11/2009 6:19:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: samboct

There is a wealth of research that disagrees with your theory ranging from studies in rats where pieces of male brains are transplanted into female pups  (an experiment that's a little hard to do with humans.)  


If by "wealth of research" you mean a "wealth of research whose faulty conclusions have been overturned and demolished everywhere but the realm of pop science magazines written for lay people"--then yes, you're right. The same stream of false and misleading data has produced the popular belief in a "gene for homosexuality" and has popularized the "results" of many other poorly designed experiments with outlandish conclusions attached to them. For Christ's sake, you're actually quoting scientists that cite LeVay, of all people--his paper on the difference between "heterosexual" and "homosexual" brains is the ultimate in garbage science. I could topple that nonsense in my sleep--a relatively intelligent high school student who got an A in biology could do it.

Since the sources you quote seem to be inevitably pop science written to entertain (but never enlighten) white Western males, I'm going to give up on this conversation now. You don't seem to be interested in real science that engages the behaviors and bodies of real humans in a meaningful way--instead you're on a desperate search to have your pre-existing cultural biases affirmed. This is true of most people, so I'm not going to waste any more time.



samboct -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/11/2009 6:54:19 AM)

"If by "wealth of research" you mean a "wealth of research whose faulty conclusions have been overturned and demolished everywhere but the realm of pop science magazines written for lay people"--then yes, you're right."

It's nice to know that you consider Science to be "pop science"- and the papers it contains can be demolished easily.  Since it's damn hard to get a paper in that journal, anybody who could easily rip apart a publication there must be a genius.  Of course, most of us scientists tend to think of it as one of the best publications going- but hey.....(and yes, there have been retractions and errors- scientists are human).  From my perspective- you've failed to post any data that back up your contentions that differences between male and female brains are all based on society.


Sam



ShaktiSama -> RE: heterosexual males sucking cock (3/11/2009 9:24:17 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: samboct
Since it's damn hard to get a paper in that journal, anybody who could easily rip apart a publication there must be a genius. 


Not really. If you are, as you claim, a real scientist--try examining the details of LaVey's research sometime. In particular the "gay vs. straight brains" experiment. If you can't tell me what's wrong with his data set within thirty seconds, you need to return your degree to the institution that granted it and demand a refund, because they bilked you horribly.

I've actually discussed this issue and presented extensive citations in another thread. If you actually want to deal with the evidence yourself, feel free to go read that old post. I'm not going to derail this thread further.

http://www.collarchat.com/m_2489951/mpage_4/key_/tm.htm#2493614




Page: <<   < prev  31 32 [33] 34 35   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.078125