Slashdot Mirror
Oxytocin Regulates Sociosexual Behavior In Female Mice
Chipmunk100 writes In a research article in the journal Cell scientists report that there is a subset of neurons that are vital in social interest of female mice for males during estrus, the sexually receptive phase of their cycle. They say that these neurons are responsive to oxytocin. The level of oxytocin rise when we hug or kiss a loved one. The BBC has an article on the findings as well, and reports that
Without [oxytocin], female mice were no more attracted to a mate than to a block of Lego ... [The affected] neurons are situated in the prefrontal cortex, an area of the brain important for personality, learning and social behaviour.
Both when the hormone was withheld and when the cells were silenced, the females lost interest in mating during oestrous, which is when female mice are sexually active.
I am a guy and must say that is the most ignorant comment I've ever read
She who has the pussy makes the rules.
Hey, did somebody mention LEGO?!
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Saw this story, knew the comments would provide ammo for the SJWs. Way to go, morons.
OxyContin regulates sociosexual behavior in Rush Limbaugh. What?
I'm sorry but I've had more than enough evidence that women do not have as much free will as they think. They have to fight hard the instinct (hormones, "get only the alpha male", etc) to have true free will, but they constantly lose. Never stopped to wonder why so many women choose guys that they never would choose according to the rational thought of them? And I can not tell if is something good or bad... Because at the same time that prevents women from accept only wealthy movie stars, it also makes them choose dangerous criminals (on my country is called "amor bandido" (coarsely "thug love")).
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
"What is the difference between a man and a parasite? A man builds. A parasite asks "Where is my share?" A man creates. A parasite says, "What will the neighbors think?" A man invents. A parasite says, "Watch out, or you might tread on the toes of god..."
Quoting a character based upon the writings of a woman is the perfect way to end... whatever that was. Well done.
Marriage is the perfect way to cure that.
There are a lot of women out there who have very low or no sex drive and nothing seems to work, so I can't help but wonder if oxytocin would be useful in this area. Especially in a relationship the woman wouldn't be the only one reaping the rewards as the partner would likely also be quite happy with increased sexual activity around the house.
Disclaimer: I admit to being totally ignorant of what oxytocin really is or what it does and I have no idea if it would work the same in humans.
So there's more than one neuron? There's now two? Wow, well fuck me! I had no idea my chances were better than I expected.
New Axe body spray with oxytoxin.
Have gnu, will travel.
Personally, I'm kinda curious if this could lead to pest control solutions by reducing breeding.
He can't help it, Oxytocin is regulating his socio-sexual behavior. Or mice are. Either way, welcome to Slashdot, newguy, hang around for a bit and you'll see posts a lot more ignorant than that one.
Who is John Cabal?
Free will is a convenient illusion.
A body spray is not going to work unless they get some of your skin in their mouth. By then you don't need it :)
not just because Free Will, but for Great Social Justice.
Considering the gender makeup in Washington, that does not seem to be the case.
Browsing at -1 in this thread is fucking terrifying.
Check out my sci-fi book "Lacuna" at http://goo.gl/MVxX8
OK Brits, any other vowels you feel like tossing in there?!
Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
The system in the brain and nervous system in fact are not tied or regulated by individual neuro-chemicals at all. The behavior and CNS processes might make use of some form of the oxytocin pathways, but by no means does that mean psycho-sexual behavior is regulated or controlled by those neuro-pathways or neuro-chemicals.
The reason is you can actually damage any part of an animals brain. You can knock out feelings, behaviors, nerve impulses, pain, emotions, thoughts, because it causes damage. When you disrupt the oxytocin pathways, it does not mean anything but the fact that the part deadened there was impacted heavily by that particular route in the brain.
A trick about the brain is many other behaviors and cognitive functions were also probably impacted but the researchers made absolutely no attempt to try to trace or reverse engineer that there. And in fact, without studying the brain as an entire universe of complex magnetic, electromagnetic, electro-chemical building and signaling processes, our researchers are not truly observing what is going on or how brain function is altered.
We have the same problem in the mental health drug field; We claim depression or psychosis is tied to this chemical or that, but we have no evidence of it and the drugs were found to be more or less general nerve inhibitors and nerve pathway disruptors for their method of action. We found that you can knock out any pathway by blocking connections and receptor site activation, or by otherwise dysregulating the neuro-chemical pathway, and achieve all sorts of tranquilizing effects that damage behavior and function out of a someone, resulting in new personality, new behavior, and extreme brain damage, because the person is only operating with part of their brain in tact.
I have a belief that the brain is far more complex than running one system all on a certain pathway and that these researchers haven't uncovered shit.
http://www.obamasweapon.com/
Clearly, we need to consider giving oxytocin injections to the male nerds among us since they always find the Lego block more attractive than a potential female mate.
(Somebody call up Pfizer and see if it comes in 55 gal. drums.)
High concentrations of oxytocin found in larger than average sums of money.
Hard to believe they're not going for "The Dark Master"!
It is heresy to even suggest that there are biology driven gender specific behaviors. Everything bad in the world is because boys are socialized incorrectly. Don't worry though, social science ( nee studies ) professors are retooling our schools as we speak!
I'll just leave this here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
Samsung took back my unlocked bootloader because Google wants me to rent movies. They're both evil.
How do I tip an arrow to shoot at a woman with this stuff?
captcha: antics
Ehhhhhh (sound of buzzer). Minus two points. Saying one thing badly does not constitute saying something else "unconsciously".
In debate logic, that's known as the "mind reading fallacy".
Biologists have now discovered the most powerful oxytocin suppressant on Earth.
It is known as "Wedding Cake".
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
From what I've heard, the mere availability of Oxycontin (not oxytocin) is enough to influence the sociosexual behavior of some human females.
But I have no person experience of this, so I don't know.
Trolling isn't ignorant - in fact, trolling requires you to be knowledgeable as to what kind of public statement would elicit the most heated reaction for your amusement.
Ezekiel 23:20
s/person/personal
We have a proverb here: men rule the world, and their wives rule those men. Or something along those lines.
Ezekiel 23:20
I don't see how it can be taken any other way.
But by all means, let TDM clarify this for himself, rather than offer to... read his mind for us.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Whereas men are always perfectly rational when choosing a partner?
I don't think he was claiming this.
I don't really believe that anyone who is a man or even knows a man would claim that.
When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
Punish him!
First, I agree completely with you and I suspect that this is a real troll. I'm going to go a bit offtopic now.
I've noticed a trend of people using the word troll as a synonym for disagreeing (where the person accused of trolling legitimately believes their position/statements). They then complain that they get accused of trolling and it's ruining the Internet and everything needs to be censored/harmonized. I've got good friends of mine who suffer from this very same desire to censor speech they disagree with (while calling it a troll), and yet still complain that they get called trolls when they voice unpopular opinions. Perhaps if people recalled the definition of trolling, which is making a provocative statement with the primary (and only) goal of eliciting a response, instead of calling disagreeable viewpoints trolling, we wouldn't have this issue.
The word 'troll' has been hijacked. The real trolls are outnumbered by idiots who don't even know what a troll is and are too stupid to recognize one. For the record, this post is not a troll. I'm being entirely serious. The sad part is that it's driving censorship, where a well-executed troll is closer to satire: it should enrage and enlighten simultaneously for maximum effect.
Okay, I'm done. Mods, you can go ahead with the -1, Offtopic now. But if you want to keep your ability to voice dissenting views, lay off the Troll mod except for real trolls. Overrated is a better mod if you disagree. </karma_burn>
Jane was right. If you read the post, you'll see that nowhere in there does he say men don't do the same thing. You inferred it because that's what you wanted to see.
What's not rational about choosing tits and ass?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Without [oxytocin], female mice were no more attracted to a mate than to a block of Lego.
And... How attracted are female mice to blocks of Lego?
Men aren't "perfectly" rational, but they are "more" rational than women. It's not "misogyny" that leads to this opinion, just social dynamics.
Men have a lot more social pressures that come into play when choosing a partner than women do. Classically, men want youth and beauty. But, his ability to earn a living, provide for his wife and children, social standing, etc. all come into play when his prospective mate says yes or no. Not only that, but men have to worry about whether or not they'll be divorced in a few years, which tends to limit them wanting to marry the hot, but possibly unhinged, woman they might want, in favour of the less attractive, but mentally stable woman they would be better off with.
This may sound antiquated, but even among modern, "liberated" women, you will find very few instances where a woman married below her own standing. You don't see female doctors or lawyers married to plumbers or clerks. Not to say it's impossible, just extremely unlikely. Reversed, men don't care as much.
It's not that men are perfectly rational, just that there is more social pressure on them to not follow their physical desires as much. Even then, they still might. But on the whole, men are more likely to choose the "right" decision instead of the short-term "I want it" decision. They'll choose "right" because they have more to lose if (when) things go badly.
Forget the mice. I'm pretty sure Oxytocin Regulates Sociosexual Behavior In Female Humans.
Correlation/causation? I don't really give a shit. Getting my dick wet is just a proxy for acknowledgement that I'm a desirable person to have in their lives. It took me a long time to realize I cared more about someone wanting to give me a BJ than I actually cared about getting a BJ. Maybe that's because the majority of physical contact I was exposed to during child hood was physical abuse? Don't worry about it: when Ebola is done feasting on our internal organs, we can resume the human exponential growth party. If it kills 1 out of 2 people it'll only take us ~20 years to get back to complaining about oil prices. In the meantime: I'm gonna go paint watercolor pictures of sunsets and write love sonnets to Florence Nightingale*. My therapist tells me that artistic expression stimulates Oxytocin release(which I've heard brings all the sluts to the yard).
*If you thought she was a good nurse, you should see her actuarial work on viral pandemics. That girl knows how to get NASTY!
+1, Uncomfortably True. So much so, that I won't put my username on it. In fact I'm posting this over Tor. (Okay, to be fair, I'm posting it over Tor because I can't shut my mouth and Slashdot won't let me run my mouth more than 10 times a day despite being here for over a decade and having Excellent karma the whole time. I also never get more than 5 mod points. What's up with that?)
My male friends claim to be feminists. I do not. I'm not an anything-ist. I believe that people should do whatever the hell they feel inclined to do and the Universe will sort it out. It always has. To discriminate, either way, on the basis of anything but cold, hard facts, is bull. That includes affirmative action. I don't care if you're the minority--you can still be a discriminatory fuck.
Alright, mods, roll out the flamethrowers.
reply to undo accidental mod
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
Err ... okay. I'm sure you can do a lot of research into the finer points of oxytocin action, but that it is an immensely important hormone affecting all kinds of social behavior has been known for quite a while ...
In terms of mammals, is a fascinating neurotransmitter, because it's effect is different for males and females, get a room full of females and spray oxytocin in the air and all the females start being nicer to each other. Get a room full of males and do the same thing and the effect is different, all the males start being more competetive, here is the astonishing thing, it make the males more monogamous. When a female breast feeds the nerves in her nipples send signals to her limbic system, which starts producing oxytocin which alters her behaviour.
It's called an elephant's trunk whereas it is in fact, an elephant's nose, a nose by any other name would smell as sweet
Maybe I'm just cynical, but when somebody starts out with, "I'm sorry but I've had more than enough evidence that women..." it's a pretty clear indicator IMO.
I'm not bothering any more with this thread unless/until TDM responds.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it: there are many that consider us humans to be pests, and would like nothing more than for us to stop breeding to reduce the population down to a tenth or less what it is now.
Then again, if oxytocin in humans (and other primates, I assume) results in bonding rather than sex and (more distant assuming) peace, then what do you suppose is happening right now where people will kill you over any slight and trolls rule the online world? Perhaps, the conspiracy theorist would say, there's an anti-oxytocin running around in the world right now, either uncontrollably (like the estrogen-analogs) or deliberately. Something to think about...
But what if discriminating is what we feel inclined to do? Should we just do it and let the Universe sort it out?
One of the things I've read about is that individuals with Aspergers may have different than normal levels of oxytocin
http://www.autism.org.uk/livin...
Don't say "my wife ignores me as if I were a block of Lego"
but say "her oxytocin levels are getting low again"
where a well-executed troll is closer to satire: it should enrage and enlighten simultaneously for maximum effect.
Makes me wonder... why does "Troll" have a -1 score on slashdot?
And what about the concept of "patent troll"? I can understand the rage, but I don't see the satire in their actions...
About hot vs mentally stable.
Its very hard as it is to dont fuck other wimmen as US President (which one didnt cheat his wife). Its also hard as a hot {wo,}man to only have one partner, and harder for the partner to keep her with them, as there is more competition than for the unattractive one.
You are either ignorant or want to be a victim. Obviously both sexes are affected by hormones, it's just that it's not okay to attribute every decision you don't like or every behaviour you don't understand to PMT or whatever.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
I don't see how it can be taken any other way.
But by all means, let TDM clarify this for himself, rather than offer to... read his mind for us.
You don't need to read his mind, you can read his post. He's says nothing about the rationality of men. You need to do an awful amount of squirming to read any view on men in that post.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
You are either ignorant or want to be a victim. Obviously both sexes are affected by hormones, it's just that it's not okay to attribute every decision you don't like or every behaviour you don't understand to PMT or whatever.
I'm sorry but that sword cuts both ways - it's equally not okay to dismiss the influence of biology merely because the influence is something that you don't like. You can't always dismiss physiological effects as ignorance.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
It might be closer to satire but it's not satire, it's primarily intended to elicit negative reactions. I would disagree with a definition of trolling that says that enlightenment is part of the intent.
As for patent troll, I think that's a separate derivation; it's not really the same word. Internet trolling is like fishing-trolling: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T..., and we get a troll as "someone who trolls". Perhaps instead it should be angler.
Patent troll is like mythological trolls that live under bridges and collect tolls: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...
I misread this as "Oxytocoin". Man, ANOTHER new cryptocurrency to fit some particular specialised application that only a handful of people actually have a use for? How many of them do we need?!
Unluckily I fail in the requirement "needs to be human"
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
As the others realized I did not say anything about the men because the focus of the topic in this case are women. But if you prefer so, I do not think somehow that men always make purely rational decisions. But having said that, I noticed based on the evidence and simple observation that it is much easier for it to happen in females.
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
As others have said, you take hasty conclusions based on nothing. I said nothing about men simply because they are not the focus of this topic (after all, the study described in the article does not say if the same thing happens in the case of males, if he said so I would have included men in the subject).
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
I knew you were going to say that.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Why moderated this guy as +1 funny? What he says is true. And I would add that to be possible freedom of will you (reader of tihs post) need to know that part of your behavior is biologically determined, to be able to differentiate it from your rational thoughts and so be able to choose when to obey or not your instincts.
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
Correct.
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
She who has the pussy makes the food.
FIFY
lactation and nipple stimulation. though rubbing her nipples will land you in jail if she's not into you yet...and if she's breast feeding. well, EWWWW!
Free will has nothing to do with biological urges. Eat -> defecate -> no free will? pls.
Given the inability of humans to do much otherwise (on average), I'm pretty sure that how it's going to happen until we extinct ourselves. It doesn't mean I like it. But I'm not inclined to shove my view down someone else's throat, so there's little else I can ask for.
Damn. And here I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt--that you just stuffed your foot in your mouth accidentally. Now you've gone and done it on purpose. Oh well...
Many what? Other humans? Aliens? This doesn't make any sense.
Of course we're 100% rational. We just start from some really dumb axioms, like "the best partner is the one with the biggest boobs and smallest waist".
I've observed that a similar dynamic applies to men. Most will ignore a smart, resourceful and mentally stable woman if she only has average looks in favor of a woman that's feckless and irrational if the latter happens to be pretty. (Even if the former is obviously interested in him and the latter manifestly isn't.)
Both are equally capable of having babies (the biological reason you're interested). The former is going to be a lot more enjoyable to be with over the long haul.
I'd be interested in seeing whether the oxytocin thing works the same in male mice and male and female humans.
Lemme propose a hypothetical. What if you and other males are just as 'irrational' as you think females are... but you don't notice it because you take your own irrationalities as given? It's hard to judge a culture from within; how much harder might it be to judge one's own biology?
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
Good point. And so now I wait to see what will be the results of the researchers when they do the same with male rats.
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
I can not be used as a basis for suspecting that I'm too much rational (and not quite human). But I also observed what men do in a similar situation and have not found the same level of divergence between what they say and their actions
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
Whoosh. You totally ignored Dr. Manhattan's question and simply restated your original premise. He asked, essentially, how do you eliminate your own cognitive bias? The answer is, you can't. At best, you can *try* to take note of it.
A psychologist for the CIA, Richards J. Heuer, Jr., wrote a book entitled, The Psychology of Intelligence Analysis, addressing this very issue. It's a fascinating read; download it over Tor if you must.
Evaluation of evidence is a crucial step in analysis, but what evidence people rely on and how they interpret it are influenced by a variety of extraneous factors. Information presented in vivid and concrete detail often has unwarranted impact, and people tend to disregard abstract or statistical information that may have greater evidential value. We seldom take the absence of evidence into account. The human mind is also oversensitive to the consistency of the evidence, and insufficiently sensitive to the reliability of the evidence. Finally, impressions often remain even after the evidence on which they are based has been totally discredited.
As an aside, he takes care to note that cognitive bias (which I would argue that you are exhibiting) is not the same as cultural bias (although the line is quite fuzzy this instance, and I'm not a psychologist).
Information that people perceive directly, that they hear with their own ears or see with their own eyes, is likely to have greater impact than information received secondhand that may have greater evidential value.
Case histories and anecdotes will have greater impact than more informative but abstract aggregate or statistical data.
But we're nerds, remember, so we get the plain and practical woman. In the long run, this gives us more success in life than those whose success was in following their hormones.
Oh boy, another one who thinks he is the almighty smartass... I answered the question from Dr. Manhattan, dude. You just failed miserably to understand. And honestly I'm not going to spend my time trying to explain given that the tone of your reply suggests to me that you're not the least bit interested in hearing.
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
Wasn't this the basic plot of Serenity? They tried to make some type of "peace" drug and ended turning the population that didn't outright die in to "Reavers"?
I wish there was also Super Troll Mod rating
The Dunning-Kruger is strong in this "not human" one. As well as the other mental disorders...
Seriously, "dude", you missed the question. How do you account for your own biases? You're inferring an actual phenomenon from anecdotal evidence instead of data. The plural of anecdote is not data.
CAPTCHA: reoccur
Women's intuition is socially acceptable. An irrational man isn't considered manly at all.
No doubt GSK will throw several Million $ and 10k workers into getting their next date-rape drug to market before the Christmas rush.
Ha ha
I assure you that the wasps and hornets I kill when working on a job site consider humans to be a pest, despite them making their nest in the nice convenient wooden structure that was clearly built for them.
captcha: gassings
My hypothesis is, the human foreskin contains around 20,000 nerve endings and they connect to the brain, in rougly the same area, as the nerves from the female nipples and like the nipples, make the male limbic system excrete oxytocin, this changes the male collective psyche, when done as a cultural practice.
The amazing thing about oxytocin is, it makes males behave more monogamously.
I've read somewhere or other, that before the diaspora, it was concidered, if you were Jewish to have more than one wife was ok. We all ready know that in islam, polygamy is considered ok.
So if the circumcised male has less oxytocin in his cerebral fluid, we have a major cause for behaviour in societies, where the majority of males are circumcised.
I have studied this subject for a good few years now, and have collected a lot of materials which you can study here http://dollyknot.com/circ.html
It's called an elephant's trunk whereas it is in fact, an elephant's nose, a nose by any other name would smell as sweet
Men are slaves to their biology, too. It just takes a different form. We are all the slaves of hormones, particularly when it comes to reproduction, (or love, if you prefer).
-- sudon't
Air-ride Equipped
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Nice Dune reference :)
If the plural of anecdote is not data, then why do you people always have to beat the shit out of that drum? Shouldn't it be obvious to everyone else? We can throw "correlation isn't causation" into this same boat. Again, like clockwork, this phrase will be shouted when it's convenient to your cause. If it wasn't "real" though, then why do you constantly have to go about correcting everyone? Face it people, your "proof" is all lies and goddamned statistics...
I'm getting fat from all of this hypocritical irony I've been reading for the past couple weeks on Slashdot. So you've made a stereotypical judgment about people who judge based on stereotypes? Simply brilliant! I can't get enough!
I'm glad you've got some Dragons, Wizards, Knights and humor with you. You've just engaged one of Slashdot's biggest social justice warriors- the great Paladin Amimojo, White Knight of all Vaginas. You've got quite a long battle ahead of you...
Yeah, they fucking misspelled "Legos"....
The don't think anything because they don't "think"
No it's SJW Paladin White Knighter Amimojo. He wasn't even talking to you, yet you have to swoop in to defend radical vagina in all of its forms. pathetic.....
Close, but a troll must be also be an expressed opinion which the writer does not actually believe. It is this dishonesty that earns the moniker "troll". Otherwise, an intentionally provocative statement is merely flamebait.
I figured that part was obvious from where I complained about "people using the word troll as a synonym for disagreeing (where the person accused of trolling legitimately believes their position/statements)".
Guess I'm putting too much faith in humanity these days.
My bad, then. Please accept my apologies.
See? Cynic I may be, but--unlike some people--I can and do admit when I've made a mistake.
Are we good now?
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
I should also mention that I could have just modded your original post Troll or Flamebait, but I instead decided to voice my concerns and give you a chance to respond.
Dialogue, what a concept.
Oh, and I do like the tagline. Cheers.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
TDM responded, and I've responded in turn.
I think you can put down the buckets of tar and feathers now. :)
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Thanks. I also think that is very good when people is civilized.
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
I didn't propose that males would necessarily be irrational in the same way as you think females are. It could easily manifest in different ways or even diferent domains. But even in the same domain... what of the many men who damage their family relationships and careers because they manifest a lack of Johnson control?
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
Since it's less enjoyable, maybe that goads the male into leaving and finding another female, thus spreading his genes further than if he'd found a compatible female on the first attempt.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?