[ShadowWolf_IH]

Quoted from the article I read on this.

Also, biological anthropologist and Rutgers University professor Helen Fisher, Ph.D., notes: "The two brain hemispheres are less well connected in men than in women. This gives men the ability to focus on one thing at a time and be very goal oriented, whereas the female brain is built to assimilate many feelings at once, and to connect sex and love much more rapidly."

[General Battuta]

She's wrong, and discredits herself for saying so. This isn't even an academically controversial topic. I'll happily supply you with citations to an actual peer-reviewed source in a moment.

That 'sex=love' thing is particular bull****; women have sex for sexual pleasure at precisely the same rate men do, and rate emotional connection at the same priority as men.

[IceFire]

I honestly think its like some of the various websites out there say.  Women, like men, are looking for a challenge in their relationships.  So if you're already taken then you are that much more of a challenge...instantly you're already more desirable because someone else thinks so too.  Women are just as competitive as men and they have their own social pecking order like men do.  The key thing is to try to have the same appearance of being comfortable and engaging without appearing desperate or needy while single.

Thats why you have to get out there and do something and focus on you.  It sound selfish and it is a bit but it'll help you and whoever you're trying to attract later on.  Then you have to learn how to temper that selfishness.

[ShadowWolf_IH]

Well spoken Ice, during my divorce one of the best pieces of advice that I got was from a marriage counsellor.  He told me to surround myself with women, but not to get romantically involved with any. This would make me feel somehow better about myself, and allow me to ward off my own selfish tendencies.  It would also allow for a comfort level with members of the oposite sex that you can't have when worried about a potential romantic relationship.

[General Battuta]

From 'The Structure of the Human Brain', Allen, Damasio, and Bruss, American Scientist, May/June 2004, pp. 242.

When the sexually dimorphic corpus callosum was first suggested in the early 1980s, many scientists speculated that the "larger" band in women meant they had a greater degree of communication between the two hemispheres. This idea seemed to support the cliche that in women the "emotional, analytical" left side was more in touch with the other. Of course, we now know that women do not have larger corpus callosa than men. This fact doesn't preclude greater functional connectivity between the two hemispheres (as the cliche would have it), but there is no anatomical evidence for the claim.

They go on to describe how sexually dimorphic areas in the brain evolved well before the human 'cognitive revolution'.

Ironically the corpus callosum is actually larger in men, and once you control for height as a covariate, the difference between the two sexes shrinks by about two thirds. The main difference between the male and female brain lies in the ratio of gray matter to white matter. Men have a higher proportion of white matter; however, it consists primarily of additional blood vessels and non-neuronal components, which leads to little functional difference.

Current scientific consensus points to possible sexual dimorphism in language and spatial/visual tasks, but they are subtle and highly distributed throughout the brain.

[ShadowWolf_IH]

Then I stand corrected as the misinformed masses.  Thank you forsetting me straight on that issue.

[General Battuta]

Sorry if I went off on you. Didn't mean to be quite so snippy about it.

I really do think it's important for our society to realize that men and women handle sex in very similar ways, though.

[Thaeris]

As a general rule, remember that intelligence is not an X-linked trait...

[Rian]

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

[ShadowWolf_IH]

I didn't realize you were going off on me, I thought we were just having a debate about something and backing it up with sources.  Your sources simply proved to be better and more reliable.  I'd rather admit to being mistaken than  to propogate a disservice in the form of misinforming.

[General Battuta]

Then you're a good egg, and a mature one at that. Props.

[ShadowWolf_IH]

Apreciate the vote.  Actually I think that this thread is worthwhile, and rather than see it turned into yet another flame war, I probably would have backed away, even if you hadn't proven yourself more knowledgeable.  I like to debate, soetimes I win, sometimes I lose (case in point), sometimes we both just walk away a little more enlightened on the other person's views.  The difference is that this debate was not one of philosophy, or truth, but one of fact. 

[Thaeris]

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

It's been a very long time, but I believe I recall that the neurological development in humans is primarily driven by the 22 other chromosomes, not X- and Y- really. This is besides the fact that hormones produced due to the X- and Y-chromosomes most certainly do impact thought patterns and the like. In short, the intelligence of a given individual bears no real relation to gender. Since we were on a tangent for a bit on the subject of neurology...

[MR_T3D]

From 'The Structure of the Human Brain', Allen, Damasio, and Bruss, American Scientist, May/June 2004, pp. 242.

When the sexually dimorphic corpus callosum was first suggested in the early 1980s, many scientists speculated that the "larger" band in women meant they had a greater degree of communication between the two hemispheres. This idea seemed to support the cliche that in women the "emotional, analytical" left side was more in touch with the other. Of course, we now know that women do not have larger corpus callosa than men. This fact doesn't preclude greater functional connectivity between the two hemispheres (as the cliche would have it), but there is no anatomical evidence for the claim.

They go on to describe how sexually dimorphic areas in the brain evolved well before the human 'cognitive revolution'.

Ironically the corpus callosum is actually larger in men, and once you control for height as a covariate, the difference between the two sexes shrinks by about two thirds. The main difference between the male and female brain lies in the ratio of gray matter to white matter. Men have a higher proportion of white matter; however, it consists primarily of additional blood vessels and non-neuronal components, which leads to little functional difference.

Current scientific consensus points to possible sexual dimorphism in language and spatial/visual tasks, but they are subtle and highly distributed throughout the brain.

is height directly or inversly porportional here?
asking as a tall-ish guy \(only 6'3") whom can't seem to find it after a couple of searches, and that 'height as covarible' peaked my interest.
I must say this is one of the best threads I've seen in a long time, a long time.

Well spoken Ice, during my divorce one of the best pieces of advice that I got was from a marriage counsellor.  He told me to surround myself with women, but not to get romantically involved with any. This would make me feel somehow better about myself, and allow me to ward off my own selfish tendencies.  It would also allow for a comfort level with members of the oposite sex that you can't have when worried about a potential romantic relationship.

I have done what you have described, but it kind of sucks when you eventually, even innocently, become attracted to one or more of the persons you've befriended, because you really don't want to ruin the estabilished friendshipss. and that starts to gnaw away at the confort level you have with them.
sometimes, like, I've actually stayed friends with someone whom shot me down with 'As a friend' thing, in june, which sort of is cool, as i do feel comfortable hanging out with her, which is odd, as apart from sex, (duh-ish for a 18-year old male) that's all I'd want in a relationship; comfort. Think something's up with that?

[Mongoose]

To be quite honest, I don't think that is something you need help for.  Now I don't know your exact circumstances, but I was just like that. Never had a girlfriend, had a handful of people I called friends but knew they were nothing more than acquaintances, liked being mostly by myself, and like you, I wanted somebody to spend time with., but then again didn't care very much if I didn't.

Now things are so much different, I hate being away from the girl I love dearly, and I'm getting married in December. Whats my secret? I don't have one. I started working where I work now when I completed High School. On the application it asked, "What would I like to become better at?" and I put "Talking and getting to know people better." While it took a long while I am better at speaking to groups, ect. But the thing is, I had practice doing it at my job. The say you have to face your fears to get good at something, and they are right.

My advice is to take Ice's first point by far, above the rest. Since the economy is down, it's hard to find a job, but I'd think that it isn't hard at all to find a place that needs a volunteer here and there and you never know what you will learn that may give you a boost self esteem wise. When I started work at my job I didn't know a whole lot, but now I'm a jack of trades workman who still has tons to learn BTW, but who loves it.

So I'd say that is by far the first thing you should do. Go down to the local animal shelter and volunteer there, or maybe a local farm or the like. Then stick with it, even it it seams to be leading nowhere. Let me tell you, I never expected to find the girl of my dreams where I worked at, but you never know what life's little surprises my bring and they are not all for the worst.

I appreciate the input, but I honestly feel like my own circumstances go somewhat beyond that.  Based on the way I respond to certain situations, I've become at least somewhat convinced that I'm exhibiting at least some degree of social anxiety.  I recently read a wonderful article, possibly linked somewhere on HLP, titled "Caring for your Introvert," which kind of described the author's struggles to convey his mindset to an extrovert-centered world.  And while I found myself readily identifying with just about everything he said in the article, I also recognized that my own behavior goes well beyond it.  I don't just feel mentally exhausted after engaging in social situations for a period of time...I feel flat-out anxious during them, and I try to avoid them if I can.  You mentioned having a handful of acquaintances, but I don't even have that much at this point: outside of my immediate family and anyone else who happens to wander into our house, I don't interact with anyone socially on a daily basis.  On the job-related side of things, on one occasion when I attended a job fair down at school, I experienced somewhat of a panic attack and booked it before even speaking to anyone.  When I read through advice books about how to network with other people professionally or be a good interviewee or things of that nature, I literally cannot see myself participating in that sort of world in the least...it's the exact and utter opposite of the way I'm wired.  This is the sort of thing I'm facing, which is why I think that talking to someone is the only way I can get anywhere.

So no, volunteering is definitely out of the question right now, as it's as removed from my comfort zone as anything is possible of being.  Plus, at this point, if I have to start working, I'd sure as hell better be getting paid for doing so.

(Oh, and this is the sort of thread we need far more of in GD.)

[Thaeris]

Mongoose, what sort of environments (in a social sense) do you usually subject yourself to on a weekly basis?

[Mongoose]

Primarily, sitting on my ass at the computer in my room. But from a social standpoint, I don't do much beyond going to church every week, and even there I'm not looking to talk to anyone before or afterwards.  I've gotten to the point where I'm able to go up to a cashier at a store/eatery and interact with them, which made me feel extremely anxious when I was younger, but I still break out in a cold sweat when I have to talk on the phone to someone I don't know (and even sometimes to those I do).  When I was at college, I did participate in things like mentor meetings and a few clubs where I felt rather comfortable, but even then, there was always some part of me feeling like I had to wall myself off and worrying about how I was coming across to everyone else.  By my senior year, my club activity dropped off a bit, so I spent a lot of time alone in my room; if there was a period of time where the suspect traces of depression were at their maximum, that was definitely it, due to a number of factors.

[MP-Ryan]

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

It's been a very long time, but I believe I recall that the neurological development in humans is primarily driven by the 22 other chromosomes, not X- and Y- really. This is besides the fact that hormones produced due to the X- and Y-chromosomes most certainly do impact thought patterns and the like. In short, the intelligence of a given individual bears no real relation to gender. Since we were on a tangent for a bit on the subject of neurology...

You are mostly correct.  Cognitive development isn't sex-linked.  Hormonal impact on brain development occurs during fetal development primarily, with low doses directly impacting sex-linked behaviours in adulthood.  Androgens and estrogens regulate a number of body functions, but the most readily evident are in sexual characteristics.  It's interesting to note, anecdotally anyway, that people undergoing sex reassignment from female to male note the biggest change they experience is in their sex drive.

That said, sex hormones don't really have any measurable impact on cognitive processes in the brain.  While men and women may think differently, it appears to have much more to do with minor structural differences (possibly as a result of hormone dosages during development) than any direct impact by the hormones themselves.

[Colonol Dekker]

Wow. . . . . I'm amazed at the tangent this went down. Interesting read.
 
Social interaction and cognitive developement, I remember dealing with this for my psychology A-level.
 
But I can't remember anything worthwhile. Suffice to say that much like anything else real or virtual, your stats won't improve unless you get out there and grind. Never too late, even if you start by using public transport to go and sign up at the local library (i'd imagine this would give you some fair exposure to the public and limited interaction in a reasonably safe environment too)
 
 

[Mongoose]

I despise games that involve grinding.