3G-sex and typical misconceptions of gay, straight, and the reasons why

Genetic-gonadal-genitals sex (3G-sex) and the misconception of brain and gender, or, why 3G-males and 3G-females have intersex brain and intersex gender. Joel, D.  Biology of Sex Difference, 3:27 (17 December 2012) OPEN ACCESS

Abstract excerpt from:  https://www.bsd-journal.com/content/3/1/27/abstract

“…although only ~1% percent of humans are 3G-“intersex”, when it comes to brain and gender, we all have an intersex gender (i.e., an array of masculine and feminine traits) and an intersex brain (a mosaic of “male” and “female” brain characteristics).”

See also: Evolutionary mode routinely varies among morphological traits within fossil species lineages SUBSCRIPTION REQUIRED

“Our results are so striking that they compel us to think differently about the whole question of single traits as proxies for species-level change: the apparent ubiquity of mosaic patterns of morphological evolution.”

My comment: The concept of mosaic evolution of the human brain and behavior is addressed in these articles from similar perspectives, but without the addition of molecular epigenetics that we incorporated into our 1996 published work, and which McCarthy et al (2009) came closest to incorporating in theirs (e.g., given their partial details of chromatin remodeling).  At a time when Hopkins and Lidgard are [quote]…currently looking in more detail at data collection methods and expanding our inquiry to include additional and more complicated models of evolution [end quote], the complexity of existing systems biology continues to be comparatively ignored.

Scientific progress has continued to redefine the meaning of “ethology” (e.g., the scientific and objective study of animal behavior) and extend what is known to humans since at least two decades ago. With each report that attests to the complexity of adaptively evolved behavior, is there a reason to posit theoretically simplistic explanations of brain development and tightly defined operantly conditioned behaviors that have long been outdated by neuroscientific progress.  Is there a model for that, er… complacency, outside of academic pursuits?

If not, shall we simply quote from Kuhn’s translation of Max Planck? “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.

In a similar vein: Every scientific truth goes through three states: first, people say it conflicts with the Bible; next, they say it has been discovered before lastly, they say they always believed it.

What do you believe about the adaptive evolution of the human brain and behavior? Is there a model for that, or a Good Book you can read about it? Do you understand the concept of theist evolution outside the misconception of random mutations?

About James V. Kohl 1308 Articles
James Vaughn Kohl was the first to accurately conceptualize human pheromones, and began presenting his findings to the scientific community in 1992. He continues to present to, and publish for, diverse scientific and lay audiences, while constantly monitoring the scientific presses for new information that is relevant to the development of his initial and ongoing conceptualization of human pheromones. Recently, Kohl integrated scientific evidence that pinpoints the evolved neurophysiological mechanism that links olfactory/pheromonal input to genes in hormone-secreting cells of tissue in a specific area of the brain that is primarily involved in the sensory integration of olfactory and visual input, and in the development of human sexual preferences. His award-winning 2007 article/book chapter on multisensory integration: The Mind’s Eyes: Human pheromones, neuroscience, and male sexual preferences followed an award winning 2001 publication: Human pheromones: integrating neuroendocrinology and ethology, which was coauthored by disinguished researchers from Vienna. Rarely do researchers win awards in multiple disciplines, but Kohl’s 2001 award was for neuroscience, and his 2007 “Reiss Theory” award was for social science. Kohl has worked as a medical laboratory scientist since 1974, and he has devoted more than twenty-five years to researching the relationship between the sense of smell and the development of human sexual preferences. Unlike many researchers who work with non-human subjects, medical laboratory scientists use the latest technology from many scientific disciplines to perform a variety of specialized diagnostic medical testing on people. James V. Kohl is certified with: * American Society for Clinical Pathology * American Medical Technologists James V. Kohl is a member of: * Society for Neuroscience * Society for Behavioral Neuroendocrinology * Association for Chemoreception Sciences * Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality * International Society for Human Ethology * American Society for Clinical Laboratory Science * Mensa, the international high IQ society