Posted by:
ificouldhietokolob
(
)
Date: December 19, 2016 10:29AM
stokars Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Perhaps this reference is too far above the
> average person's scientific acumen:
>
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK26842/No, not at all.
That reference doesn't, however, back up any of your assertions (or denials). And the "Men's Health" article correctly describes the embryonic development process. If you'll search on the scientist they cite in the "Men's Health" article, you'll find his research papers that back up what the article says.
> ...not popular sites that are especially known for
> left-wing agenda.
In general you have a point about "popular sites" -- but you don't have a point about any "left-wing agenda." "Popular" sites all tend to make mistakes when reporting on science, and that's true on the right and the left. However, if you'll do your homework, and look up the papers of the people they quote, as well as contrary papers, you can find out facts. Which, in this case, "Men's Health" hit pretty well. Or is that too much work for you?
> My suggestion on this topic is for those
> interested in getting to the core of the issue,
> begin reading the trade journals (like the Journal
> of American Medicine being typical), doing their
> own research and not relying on popular press
> releases.
There is no "Journal of American Medicine."
Did you perhaps mean the "Journal of the American Medical Association?" (http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama )
Or the "American Journal of Medicine?" (http://www.amjmed.com/current)
At any rate, while it's not absolutely proven that brain structure/chemistry is the main source of gender association, there's a lot of evidence pointing that way. And while the research continues, I personally don't see any reason to treat people who feel themselves to be a different gender than their biological parts suggest as anything other than human beings who merit the same respect, care, and concern as any other human being.