RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 149,537
Posts: 5,944,399
Members: 26,480
Currently online: 425
Newest member: kchage

TrekToday headlines

Abrams On Star Trek Into Darkness Flaws
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Star Trek Beyond In IMAX
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Red Shirt Diaries: The Return of The Archons
By: T'Bonz on Nov 23

Abrams Loves His Lens Flares
By: T'Bonz on Nov 23

Elba Star Trek Beyond Character Speculation
By: T'Bonz on Nov 23

Retro Review: Meld
By: Michelle Erica Green on Nov 20

Borg Cube Paper Lantern
By: T'Bonz on Nov 20

Takei Responds To Internment Comments
By: T'Bonz on Nov 19

Four New Starship Models
By: T'Bonz on Nov 18

February IDW Publishing Comics
By: T'Bonz on Nov 18

Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.

Go Back   The Trek BBS > Lounges & General Chat > Miscellaneous

Miscellaneous Discussion of non-Trek topics.

Thread Tools
Old June 23 2013, 01:30 AM   #16
Rear Admiral
stj's Avatar
Location: the real world
Re: Study Says Men Are Cause Of Menopause

The human life span is essentially unchanged. It's the average life span that has increased as infant mortality has decreased. People don't really live longer, it's just that more of them live out a normal life span. The fifty and sixty year olds were not old per se, they were older, since so many of their coevals died before five. There is a partial exception, in that exposure to sunlight and loss of teeth had aging effects. Even then, upper class men and women kept their looks much longer, in addition to the benefits of good childhood nutrition on appearance.

As to the cause of menopause, the popular evolutionary psychology "explanation" for menopause is that grandmothers' care for their grand children to perpetuate their genes. The role of menopause is generally supposed to be extending the lifespan of grandmother's by limiting the number of pregnancies, which tend to shorten female lives. Every childbed is a battle. Many battles, more chances to die.

However there is not a scrap of evidence to show that menopause is any more effective than wrinkles in saving older women from the vicissitudes of childbirth. Nor is there any evidence showing that grandmothers are more effective at child care than the ugly aunt (or for that matter, the lesbian aunt or the gay uncle.) There isn't even any evidence that crabby old women are any better at child care than same generation female friends who just cooperate. It has not even been ruled out that menopause is not a side effect of the switch from open ovulation (females in heat) to concealed ovulation. And any hypotheses about menopause's primary effect being the limitation of reproduction are ruled out tout court.

The story is just more EP agitprop. It's being test marketed for popularity, i.e., superficial plausibility as an "explanation." EP theories are handicapped by lack of evidence, so there's inevitably a lot of desperate handwaving like this.

Evolutionary psychology is the new scientific racism. Its perpetrators keep making up stories about how genes mean women really are fundamentally different from men in ways that just so happen to coincide with the backward notions about women they inherited from their childhoods. Instead of wondering whether women as a group aren't subjected to fantastic indoctrination and social pressures that prevent sexual fulfillment, they conclude that women really are naturally less interested in sex because their genes say so. (And you can usually substitute "God" for "genes" without changing the flavor!) Etc. ad nauseam.

I have no doubt that some day, when the time is ripe, EP will sadly conclude that homosexuality really is a developmental disorder instead of a normal variation. They already have the occasional enthusiast rediscovering the validity of racial differences. I also have no doubt this will be a fertile field of research as more suitable circumlocutions are found. I don't think it's much of a science in which progress is based on plausible deniability.
The people of this country need regime change here, not abroad.
stj is offline   Reply With Quote


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:41 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.