4 ms·

Intriguing why someone would try to analyze a biological compound through a cultural / political / sociological lens without at least giving some reference to a

Intriguing why someone would try to analyze a biological compound through a cultural / political / sociological lens without at least giving some reference to actual scientific research. I have no clue whether anything in this article is true or false. Only that people might have used Testosterone to justify male dominance. Not saying it is false, but like what is the evidence? I just see vague anecdotes and personal opinions from people with no scientific training. I admit, it did get me to think and I am very curious what the answer is.

ttctciyf 8y ago
Whenever testosterone comes up, I always think of the study showing testosterone levels change in sports fans according to whether their preferred team wins or loses[1]. The interest for me is not so much in the question of testosterone and dominance, but more to do with how mere perception of events whose meaning is entirely culturally determined can mediate hormone levels in this way. Winning at football is very different from winning at a fight, that is - you need to understand football's rules to understand who's won, whereas the winner of a fight is immediately clear. Thinking about it, though, I guess ritualised proxies for fighting to establish dominance (like antler fights, etc.) might be thought to occupy an intermediate position. 1: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9811365 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9811365
- solarkraft 8y ago
  Winning at football is exactly like winning a fight. The member of the winning tribe will feel more confident that they will be able to win the next fight/feel more dominant, which correlates well with testosterone levels in my mind.
  - chillacy 8y ago
    Sometimes the winner also riots and wrecks their city. Actually a lot of the time.
    - solarkraft 8y ago
      This is possibly related to testosterone levels/heightened confidence as well. I don't see many riots, though. At least in my kind of football (soccer).
      - chillacy 8y ago
        I was reminded of that by the recent news in France after they won the world cup https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/989289/world-cup-final-france-vs-croatia-riots-Paris-French-celebrations https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/989289/world-cup-final-...
  - ttctciyf 8y ago
    Understanding you've won at football is quite different to understanding you've won a fight. Compare two cats fighting and knowing who's won to two cats playing football and knowing who's won :)
0xcde4c3db 8y ago
> Intriguing why someone would try to analyze a biological compound through a cultural / political / sociological lens without at least giving some reference to actual scientific research. I don't think it's all that strange, given the situation. Testosterone appears to be a cultural and even economic phenomenon irrespective of its actual effects. There's a whole franchise chain of doctor's offices branded as "Low T Centers", which I don't think I've seen for any other biological compound. It's not a big stretch to say that people interested in that kind of thing are predominantly more interested in an experience than they are in a molecule. It's not entirely unlike "pot culture" or "drinking culture", etc..
- balfirevic 8y ago
  My understanding was that they are mainly interested in body-building.
- mdomans 8y ago
  That to some degree is driven by how taboo TRT (fuelled by steroid craze of the `80s) was. In effect there were seriously hundreds of men forced to live for example on Clomid because testosterone was a no-no (compared to TRT Clomid is like using propofol because you can't sleep)
  - atomical 8y ago
    Clomid works for some but not all. http://www.ergo-log.com/clomid-testosterone.html http://www.ergo-log.com/clomid-testosterone.html http://www.ergo-log.com/clomidendur.html http://www.ergo-log.com/clomidendur.html
    - mdomans 8y ago
      The main point of Clomid are quite usual psychological side-effects, including such fun stuff as suicidal thoughts.
      - atomical 8y ago

ttctciyf 8y ago

Whenever testosterone comes up, I always think of the study showing testosterone levels change in sports fans according to whether their preferred team wins or loses[1]. The interest for me is not so much in the question of testosterone and dominance, but more to do with how mere perception of events whose meaning is entirely culturally determined can mediate hormone levels in this way. Winning at football is very different from winning at a fight, that is - you need to understand football's rules to understand who's won, whereas the winner of a fight is immediately clear. Thinking about it, though, I guess ritualised proxies for fighting to establish dominance (like antler fights, etc.) might be thought to occupy an intermediate position. 1: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9811365 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9811365

solarkraft 8y ago
Winning at football is exactly like winning a fight. The member of the winning tribe will feel more confident that they will be able to win the next fight/feel more dominant, which correlates well with testosterone levels in my mind.
- chillacy 8y ago
  Sometimes the winner also riots and wrecks their city. Actually a lot of the time.
  - solarkraft 8y ago
    This is possibly related to testosterone levels/heightened confidence as well. I don't see many riots, though. At least in my kind of football (soccer).
    - chillacy 8y ago
      I was reminded of that by the recent news in France after they won the world cup https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/989289/world-cup-final-france-vs-croatia-riots-Paris-French-celebrations https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/989289/world-cup-final-...
- ttctciyf 8y ago
  Understanding you've won at football is quite different to understanding you've won a fight. Compare two cats fighting and knowing who's won to two cats playing football and knowing who's won :)

0xcde4c3db 8y ago

> Intriguing why someone would try to analyze a biological compound through a cultural / political / sociological lens without at least giving some reference to actual scientific research. I don't think it's all that strange, given the situation. Testosterone appears to be a cultural and even economic phenomenon irrespective of its actual effects. There's a whole franchise chain of doctor's offices branded as "Low T Centers", which I don't think I've seen for any other biological compound. It's not a big stretch to say that people interested in that kind of thing are predominantly more interested in an experience than they are in a molecule. It's not entirely unlike "pot culture" or "drinking culture", etc..

balfirevic 8y ago
My understanding was that they are mainly interested in body-building.
mdomans 8y ago
That to some degree is driven by how taboo TRT (fuelled by steroid craze of the `80s) was. In effect there were seriously hundreds of men forced to live for example on Clomid because testosterone was a no-no (compared to TRT Clomid is like using propofol because you can't sleep)
- atomical 8y ago
  Clomid works for some but not all. http://www.ergo-log.com/clomid-testosterone.html http://www.ergo-log.com/clomid-testosterone.html http://www.ergo-log.com/clomidendur.html http://www.ergo-log.com/clomidendur.html
  - mdomans 8y ago
    The main point of Clomid are quite usual psychological side-effects, including such fun stuff as suicidal thoughts.
    - atomical 8y ago