Total gender change within a decade, scientists say

[Anonymous No.5795801]

What do you think the chances of this happening are, /sci/?

http://hplusmagazine.com/2010/11/28/total-gender-change-within-decade/

[Anonymous No.5795815]

Oh come on, the article writer talked to ONE guy, and he was a member of an organization that specializes in making outrageous claims about trans-humanism will grant us immortality in the next few decades.

[Anonymous No.5795814]

>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.5795817]

and we still don't have cure for baldness

[Anonymous No.5795832]

>>5795814
butthurt conservitard?

this is science.

[Anonymous No.5795835]

>>5795817
baldness is less important. There are people out there who should be men or women instead of what they are.

[Anonymous No.5795836]

Down to the genetic make-up?

[Anonymous No.5795844]

>>5795836
I think they just mean they will be able to grow and implant functioning synthetic genitalia withing a decade, which is still an outrageous claim to make, but I suppose if you're desperate you will believe anything.

[Anonymous No.5795845]

>>5795832
>polfags on recognizing science
Back to your shithole.

[Anonymous No.5795889]

I don't want a gender change but I do want clitorises on the palms of my hands so I can go around high-fiving strangers.

Can science make this happen?

[Anonymous No.5795897]

This is great.
Now we can all follow suit with Iran and enforce legislation that makes gays have mandatory sex change operations, the way G*d intended.

[Anonymous No.5795902]

>>5795835
Less important individually but more common. Better to cure the flu than ebola, because while one is more serious for those who have it, the other is more common and kills more people.

[Anonymous No.5795903]

That's great.
I'd love to have my own pair of titties.
Fuck females and their monopoly on breasts.

Then whenever some girl is flaunting her shit and teasing I can whip out my own and tell her to fuck off.

[Anonymous No.5795928]

women have structurally different brains from men. their very minds on a physical level are different. they are not the same. and no man can ever fully become a woman.

[Anonymous No.5795934]

>>5795928
Interesting proposition, but being a woman-shaped man is more along the lines of what people are asking for, and that is far more possible.

[Anonymous No.5795936]

>larger penises

[Anonymous No.5795943]

does this guy not realize that a decade is 10 years? i think much of what he mentions will be possible in some capacity within a century. but a decade? come on.

i think his predictions are correct. but his timescale is media sensation to attract readers. and it has succeeded

[Anonymous No.5795950]

It'd suck if all the trannies decide to go full woman.

>tfw no Sarina Valentina

[Anonymous No.5795964]

>>5795928
They're not that different, though.

[Anonymous No.5795969]

>>5795964
Different enough that trannies won't shut up about "OMG I HAVE A WOMYN'S BRAIN PLZ GIB HORMONES"

[Anonymous No.5795983]

Disgusting.

[Anonymous No.5796010]

>>5795801
OP wants to be the little girl

[Anonymous No.5796044]

>>5796010
Redirect him to /a/

[Anonymous No.5796137]

>>5796010
I don't want to be a little girl.

I want to be a proper 1950s housewife for a man who knows how to treat me like a woman.

[Anonymous No.5796140]

I would love to be a stay at home dad

not having to work and just relaxing all day sounds amazing. If i get tired of it i can just get back into forex trading and make serious cash while doing so.

[Anonymous No.5796169]

>>5796140
wut

[Anonymous No.5796171]

>>5796010
We're all girls here. Science is a girl thing.

[Mutemattics !!58hTUK7XbfZ No.5796179]

>when it will be my time for genetics
25cm fat dick, here i come.
>mfw as i look grils trying to fit my dick into their mouth
This is the purpose of all science.

[Anonymous No.5796188]

>>5795817

Why would you want to "cure" baldness?

[Anonymous No.5796191]

>>5796140
strange how everyone on the intrenet can crush forex

[Anonymous No.5796232]

>>5796188
Some people look like neo-nazis when they go bald.

>>5796179
You can actually increase your length and girth by keeping your dick in tension for 3-6 months, but that's too much effort for most people.

[Anonymous No.5796243]

>>5796232
>you can actually increase your length and girth by keeping your dick in tension for 3-6 months
[citation needed][clarification needed][original research?]

[Anonymous No.5796264]

>>5796243
There's plenty of original research on it. I had about 3 publications archived on my last laptop. I'll spend about 10 minutes looking for them again. Not sure if I can find them but this is the only technique that legitimately works.

[Anonymous No.5796295]

>>5796243
I had better papers before, but here are some:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20102448
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18990153

Other studies showed increase in girth too, I believe.

Here's one of the devices:
http://www.x4labs.com/clinical-study-for-penis-enlargement.php

[Anonymous No.5796309]

One more:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090305080516.htm

[Anonymous No.5796344]

>>5796295
>>5796309

...and with one fell swoop, a random anonymous cleansed /sci/ of it's pent-up aggression due to their collective micro-penises. The dawn was so much brighter for /sci/ members that were so bitter and resentful of the world.

[Anonymous No.5796348]

I think I'll buy an extender some day. I'd like an extra 1 inch in length, and an extra 0.5 inches in girth. I'm currently 5.75 inches in length.

[Anonymous No.5796416]

>>5796348
>5.75
>inches
>combining decimal notation with traditional english units

[Anonymous No.5796417]

>>5796416
What else do we have? Is there a traditional unit for less than an inch?

[Anonymous No.5796762]

>>5796417
From the Wikipedia:
>finger: 7/8 of an inch
>digit: 3/4 of an inch
>barleycorn: 1/3 of an inch
>line: 1/12 of an inch

In any case, it's just traditional to give "traditional" units in fractions, not decimals- labeling things in 16ths, 32s, and 64th of an inch, not in decimals.

[Anonymous No.5796871]

>>5795801
Ask your mom

[Anonymous No.5796881]

>>5796762
> americlaps in charge of measuring

[Anonymous No.5796885]

>>5796881
>americlaps in charge of measuring
>americlaps
>ameri-
>america
>implying bolivia

[Anonymous No.5796888]

>>5796885
what the fuck is a bolivia

[Anonymous No.5796909]

>>5795801

Gender can already be changed with a legal document.

Most people mistakenly conflate gender with sex. They are two very different concepts.

Gender is an identity, it is for the most part meaningless in science.

Sex is determined by your sex chromosomes.

Sex is what is very much impossible to change, at least for now till the distant future. Why? Because in order to do so you need to replace each and every one of your cells' DNA's X chromosome with a Y chromosome or vice versa.

[Anonymous No.5796925]

>>5796888

[Anonymous No.5796946]

>>5796925
BOLIVIA

[Anonymous No.5796969]

>>5796909
So what youre saying is that its possible for gendered males to give birth and gendered females can get prostate cancer?

Is it possible to weaponise this logic against feminists who claim that men can never understan women?

[Anonymous No.5796985]

Not total unless every cell of your body suddenly has that sex chromosome changed

[Anonymous No.5796983]

>>5796969
Why on earth do you think he's saying that?

[Anonymous No.5797256]

>>5796969
men cant ever fully understand women. we act like they're just like us but they are not. and those little differences make all the difference. they are not the same. they are a little closer to animals in many ways but also more advanced in others. they are pretty much the aliens living amongst us. they are also very difficult and frustrating because they're really not on the same page.

[Anonymous No.5797325]

>>5796946
BOTSWANA

[Anonymous No.5797331]

>>5795835
>There are people out there with delusions that they are not the sex they were born.

ftfy

[Anonymous No.5797339]

>>5795928
The brain of self identified transgenders is more similar to the one of the opposite biological sex.

[Anonymous No.5797362]

>>5797331
>not realising that your brain and reproductive organs are separate things

[Anonymous No.5797359]

>>5797325
ZIMBABWE

[Anonymous No.5797363]

>>5797339
not according to the studies ive read.

maybe in the journal of checked privledges but not in reality

[Anonymous No.5797364]

>>5797362
the brain of a woman and a natural vagina are a package deal. and you can only have both or none.

[Anonymous No.5797379]

>>5797362
>Not realizing that your reproductive organs are involved in the feedback system that determines how you feel
>Thinking a brain in a jar would think anything like a brain in a body

[Anonymous No.5797381]

>>5797363
>not according to the studies ive read.
Don't hesitate to share them. It's kind of stupid to say something vague like that and not back it up. Here are some papers that back up what I say.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7477289
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10843193
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10843193
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20562024

TL;DR, There are clear anatomical differences between people of a sex and people of the same (biological) sex who transgenders, with the transgenders showing greater similarity to the opposite biological sex. Differences exist in the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis, right putamen, and medial and posterior parts of the right superior longitudinal fasciculus (white matter).

[Anonymous No.5797383]

>>5797379
>Thinking a brain in a jar would think anything like a brain in a body
interesting observation
i will now reflect on the psychology of a brainjar

[Anonymous No.5797389]

>>5797339
I'd heard this somewhere as well
care to share a source?
>>5797363
you have a source?

[Anonymous No.5797390]

>>5797364
>there is no way for mutations to have organ-specific effecs

>>5797379
>implying that gonadal feedback loops are the sole source of "feeling female"
>implying that system is infalliable

It's like you guys want me to hate you

[Anonymous No.5797393]

>>5797381
fair enough
i can admit you got me there

however i would suggest that these differences are learned rather then innate (which doesnt prove you wrong)

i will back up that assertion in my next post

[Anonymous No.5797400]

>>5797393
these brain differences can be explained by preoccupied thinking and imagination alone. Thinking, particularly repeated thinking, changes brain microstructure.

Recently a paper by Savic and Arver ( 2011) has appeared. Their innovation is to take a study group composed only of male-to-female gynephiles (i.e. those attracted sexually to women). Previous male-to-female studies mixed gynephiles and androphiles. The authors found that the brains in their study group were not feminised. There was no evidence for female brains in a male body; the brains were male-typical. This is contrary to many of the previous research studies on mixed groups, but the study is thorough.

Savic and Arver also found that there were differences in the brains of their study groups that were not found in either heterosexual male or female brains. These regions have been identified as those possibly associated with bodily self-perception (they are also enlarged in those who do a lot of meditation, focusing partly on body state).

The authors say this is a “highly speculative” interpretation, but it’s possible they are actually underestimating how much support it has. It is very clear that repeated patterns of mental exercise alone, as seen for example in navigation (London taxi drivers) and internet addiction (Maguire et al. 2006; Zhou et al. 2009), changes significantly the microstructure of the brain.

The possibility then, is that an intense preoccupation with body shape and a desire to be other than the birth sex has caused these structures, rather than innateness.

>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/21467211/

[Anonymous No.5797401]

>>5797400
basically these people imagined themselves as women so hard that they became... not woman and not fully man. but something structurally unique to transexuals

[Anonymous No.5797409]

>>5797401
>basically these people imagined themselves as women so hard that they became... not woman and not fully man. but something structurally unique to transexuals
That's quite the unwarranted conclusion based on the results of this study. Basically, it's reverse inference. Also, transgenderism can occur at very early stages of life, and the possibility of multiple causes is of course very likely.

Anyway, what's the point you're trying to make by saying all of this? Even if transgenderism were predominantly environmental, what implications come with that?

[Anonymous No.5797411]

Change my gender... Vagina? Pregnancy? Periods? Infection? No thanks, but I would like to alter the rest of my body...

>pic very related

[Anonymous No.5797413]

>>5795817

SHAVE YOUR HEAD YOU PIECE OF SHIT!

Bald fits everybody (with the exception of women, obviously), men who are in the process of getting bald would look much better without those ugly remnant hairs. Patrick Steward is an exception to this, and only because he played Jean Luc Picard, who'd still be awesome regardless of hairstyle.

[Anonymous No.5797544]

>>5797409
>Anyway, what's the point you're trying to make by saying all of this?
it was its own point and not implying anything

im not trying to have an argument with you. just a conversation.

[Anonymous No.5797550]

I don't care about gender change, but if we can change the mind to create a race of sociopathic Übermensch then i'm all for it.

[Anonymous No.5797552]

>>5797400
>Recently a paper by Savic and Arver ( 2011) has appeared. Their innovation is to take a study group composed only of male-to-female gynephiles (i.e. those attracted sexually to women).
So, what, lesbians don't exist?

[Anonymous No.5797578]

>>5797552
wut? that was not implied anywhere. they did a study on male to female transexuals that are attracted to women. and then compared them to straight males.

at no point does that imply lesbians dont exist

[Anonymous No.5797605]

>>5797578
>at no point does that imply lesbians dont exist
yes it kinda does

the only plausible reason for separating transsexuals based on sexual attraction is because you think sexual attraction in the transsexual is indicative of some underlying difference in the transsexual - that being attracted to females is indicative of not really being transsexual the same way individuals attracted to males are.

the only way that reasoning makes sense is if you ignore the existence of females sexually attracted to other females.

[Anonymouѕ No.5797636]

>>5797605
You make an a priori fallacy. You take it for granted that the transsexuals are women (or close to them) in brain chemistry, and that their sexual preferences for men or women is just a feature on top of that. But this study tries to show that it could be the opposite, that the sexual attraction is the foremost factor in the development of their transsexual tendencies, and that in turn fed back into a loop that turned them intro true transsexuals.
This doesn't make a statement either about lesbian "cis"women or "straight" MtF androphiles, those groups can have very different underlying mechanisms for their sexual attraction/their desire to switch gender.

[Anonymous No.5797650]

>>5797636
The researchers are committing the exact same fallacy, then.

if they truly wanted to test this idea that sexual preference and transsexualism are not independent, then the proper comparison would have been gynephilic transsexuals to androphilic transsexuals, not gynephilic transsexuals to gynephilic non-transsexuals.

The latter comparison also takes their conclusion for granted in the construction of their test groups.

[Anonymous No.5797661]

>>5797650
>>5797636
they took male to female trannies that sexually prefer women

and compared them to regular straight men.

and found differences in brain structure.

thats all

then they compared these results to previous studies that lumped both straight and "gay" male-to-female trannies.

gay men are different then straight men physically in the brain. other studies entirelt have proven that. so they just took the gay out of the occasion so they could compare straight males that think they are women to regular straight males.

[Anonymous No.5797676]

>>5797661
fuck let me try to write that again

they compared straight men to m2f trannies that fuck women

previous studies just compared straight men to m2f trannies without regards to sexual preference

there are physical differences in the brain between gay and straight men. and that was interfering with the results of previous studies. so for this study they only compared men vs trannies that all prefer to fuck women. no xy fucking xy

only tranny xy fucking xx
vs regular xy fucking xx