5 ms·

Absolutely fascinating. I guess mostly it comes down to XY and XX chromosomes. XY leaves more room for random chance. XX would be more moderate because it would

by lotusleaf1987 16y ago

Absolutely fascinating. I guess mostly it comes down to XY and XX chromosomes. XY leaves more room for random chance. XX would be more moderate because it would presumably have more genetics to balance out its extremes.

ars 16y ago
No, it has nothing whatsoever to do with that.
- eru 16y ago
  It may (may!) have been the initial tiny nudge in this direction. Though I know that different animals (or even lifeforms) decide on gender differently.
  - lotusleaf1987 16y ago
    I'm not sure why I'm getting downvoted. Y chromosomes are smaller and have less genetic information. Having XY vs XX would lead to extremes as opposed to balanced out genes--exactly what he was talking about, heights/intelligence/violence. I may not be a geneticist but I'm pretty sure this generally what is happening."Because males have only one X-chromosome, they are more likely to have an X chromosome-related disease." From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_chromosome http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_chromosome
    - araneae 16y ago
      Yes, but there are plenty of organisms where the male is homogametic and the female is heterogametic and the behavioral trend is the same: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZW_sex-determination_system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZW_sex-determination_system
      - yungchin 16y ago
        Wow, that's pretty cool, I didn't know any of that. From the wikipedia link, it seems this should still be consistent with lotusleaf's suggestion: the avian sex chromosomes are thought to be related to the autosomal chromosome 9 in mammals - so any variability in intelligence which was determined by X-chromosomal genes would not necessarily be as apparent in those ZW-carrying animals.
    - nollidge 16y ago
      Why would XY lead to extremes just because men are more susceptible to X-linked recessive diseases? That's a total non-sequitur.
      - lotusleaf1987 16y ago
        It was an example because I'm at work and don't have time to find another...But anyways the X is larger than the Y chromosome and also has more genetic information. So XX would have more genetics information, thus moderating the extremes---height, weight, intelligence etc. Whereas the Y these would be more pronounced because there would be fewer chances to have the genetics balance out. I can't explain it any better than that or I would. I am just trying to have a discussion, not an argument.
    - yungchin 16y ago
      I don't get it either, looks like more than one person misread your comments[1]. Here's a nice and brief starting point with some citations for further reading: http://www.pnas.org/content/106/37/E101.full http://www.pnas.org/content/106/37/E101.full [1] and in any case, I think down-voting ought to be used only to punish bad form, not to express disagreement - there's not-voting for that.
      - lotusleaf1987 16y ago
        Thanks! I actually said something similar before: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1606824 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1606824 HN is turning into Reddit way too fast for my liking.
- lotusleaf1987 16y ago
  Why don't you elaborate then instead of just giving some smug answer? Hacker News would be a lot better without pointless contrarians like you.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  - nollidge 16y ago
    Why should they elaborate more than you did?
    - lotusleaf1987 16y ago
      Getting your superiority high for the day? I did elaborate. All he said was "No" in so many words.
      - nollidge 16y ago
        > All [s/]he said was "No" Which I think is all that is warranted when you declare your opinion that the difference is due to XX vs. XY without backing that up. If you had phrased it differently, like "Hm, I wonder if this has something to do with XX vs. XY?", that would actually sound like a conversation-starter.
        lotusleaf1987 16y ago
        I said "I guess" quit trolling and find something worthwhile to nitpick. I never ever presented my original comment as fact. So you're wrong.
        nollidge 16y ago
        I specifically used the word "opinion" rather than "fact" for that very reason. You got downvoted (at least) 5 times, the dismissive response from ars got 16 upvotes, and I'm trying to explain to you perhaps why that all happened. That's not nitpicking, it's not fucking trolling, and I didn't do it to put you down.

ars 16y ago

No, it has nothing whatsoever to do with that.

eru 16y ago
It may (may!) have been the initial tiny nudge in this direction. Though I know that different animals (or even lifeforms) decide on gender differently.
- lotusleaf1987 16y ago
  I'm not sure why I'm getting downvoted. Y chromosomes are smaller and have less genetic information. Having XY vs XX would lead to extremes as opposed to balanced out genes--exactly what he was talking about, heights/intelligence/violence. I may not be a geneticist but I'm pretty sure this generally what is happening."Because males have only one X-chromosome, they are more likely to have an X chromosome-related disease." From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_chromosome http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_chromosome
  - araneae 16y ago
    Yes, but there are plenty of organisms where the male is homogametic and the female is heterogametic and the behavioral trend is the same: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZW_sex-determination_system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZW_sex-determination_system
    - yungchin 16y ago
      Wow, that's pretty cool, I didn't know any of that. From the wikipedia link, it seems this should still be consistent with lotusleaf's suggestion: the avian sex chromosomes are thought to be related to the autosomal chromosome 9 in mammals - so any variability in intelligence which was determined by X-chromosomal genes would not necessarily be as apparent in those ZW-carrying animals.
  - nollidge 16y ago
    Why would XY lead to extremes just because men are more susceptible to X-linked recessive diseases? That's a total non-sequitur.
    - lotusleaf1987 16y ago
      It was an example because I'm at work and don't have time to find another...But anyways the X is larger than the Y chromosome and also has more genetic information. So XX would have more genetics information, thus moderating the extremes---height, weight, intelligence etc. Whereas the Y these would be more pronounced because there would be fewer chances to have the genetics balance out. I can't explain it any better than that or I would. I am just trying to have a discussion, not an argument.
  - yungchin 16y ago
    I don't get it either, looks like more than one person misread your comments[1]. Here's a nice and brief starting point with some citations for further reading: http://www.pnas.org/content/106/37/E101.full http://www.pnas.org/content/106/37/E101.full [1] and in any case, I think down-voting ought to be used only to punish bad form, not to express disagreement - there's not-voting for that.
    - lotusleaf1987 16y ago
      Thanks! I actually said something similar before: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1606824 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1606824 HN is turning into Reddit way too fast for my liking.
lotusleaf1987 16y ago
Why don't you elaborate then instead of just giving some smug answer? Hacker News would be a lot better without pointless contrarians like you.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- nollidge 16y ago
  Why should they elaborate more than you did?
  - lotusleaf1987 16y ago
    Getting your superiority high for the day? I did elaborate. All he said was "No" in so many words.
    - nollidge 16y ago
      > All [s/]he said was "No" Which I think is all that is warranted when you declare your opinion that the difference is due to XX vs. XY without backing that up. If you had phrased it differently, like "Hm, I wonder if this has something to do with XX vs. XY?", that would actually sound like a conversation-starter.
      - lotusleaf1987 16y ago
        I said "I guess" quit trolling and find something worthwhile to nitpick. I never ever presented my original comment as fact. So you're wrong.
        nollidge 16y ago
        I specifically used the word "opinion" rather than "fact" for that very reason. You got downvoted (at least) 5 times, the dismissive response from ars got 16 upvotes, and I'm trying to explain to you perhaps why that all happened. That's not nitpicking, it's not fucking trolling, and I didn't do it to put you down.