Thank you for this very thought-provoking article. You are correct in that there is a complex relationship between societal/environmental factors and biology (from molecules to systems) that, together, shape the person that we become. It is also true that the interactions are complex and often poorly understood even by the so-called experts. Https://everythingisbiology.substack.com/p/there-is-biological-evidence-for
Thank you again for this very interesting read. Sincerely, Frederick
What a great and well researched piece, thanks for your efforts to write this.
Besides providing some really interesting data and scientific discussion, I was struck by your comment that it's time to expand the discourse (especially struck by being able to get this posted on this particular Substack!). Unfortunate that the current discourse is being so ideologically driven right now, rather than focusing on the biological complexities you consider in the context of humanity.
For my whole health care career, I discouraged the use of hormones for birth control, and for various other modifications. In fact, I discouraged the unnecessary use of pharmaceuticals in general. People seem far too willing to alter themselves using exogenous substances, even those from manufacturers who are all too willing to kill humans, and commodify their parts. These manufacturers should not be the ones telling us what is natural or optimal for a human. If more of us can find purpose and satisfaction in what we do, perhaps this drive to alter ourselves will abate.
This article provides data that helps humans understand themselves. My daughter’s good friend, a chemical engineer/ physio therapist discussed the potential connection between his own scenario and environmental chemical influences many years ago. He is a well adjusted, generous, smart person.
"Clothes with frills or flowers or flounces or lace or anything girlie made me miserable." There is no flower/flounce/lace DNA code on the XX chromosome. Clothing standards are completely arbitrary. This would be like saying men who don't like to wear a suit and tie must have been exposed to something in utero. Then there's the man that supposedly was unhappy for not having more "masculine behaviors." While there's no doubt behavior differences between males and females that we can generally observe, it' not a recipe. We're not bees or ants in a hive with assigned roles. Accepting oneself seems to be the problem, no matter whether the cause of variations amongst us is environmentally induced or something else.
Throughout history plenty of men wore "flouncy" clothes, I think of the French nobility and really any other European nobility back in the day. Also, really, flowers? Has the author never seen men in Miami? She should also google the flower men of Saudi Arabia. This is an incredibly sexist article and the author seems to be 1) looking for a way to uphold sex stereotypes and 2) ignoring studies that show there really isn't a clear cut male-female brian. Now, there are behavioral patterns, which mainly involve level and violence and altruism, which can be witnessed at the sex class level. But it seems as a girl she related certain clothing characteristics to social coding and thus refused to wear anything associated with Western, modern femininity as that equated to weakness. I was like this too as I was an athlete. Then I decided it was stupid. Now I wear whatever I want.
Excellent points. I wear mostly t-shirts and loose, comfortable slacks, but I will dress in more "feminine" attire for my husband when we go out. I have zero interest in clothing fashion, but like comfort, and I don't mind sometimes wearing something that pleases my husband.
I am switching to skirts and dresses for work because although I can find comfortable jeans, I have always found dress slacks troublesome. Dresses and skirts and now easier and it has nothing to do with my brain or chromosomes!
Women throughout history and across cultures dress differently than men, and the patterns of dress show commonalities (accentuation of hips, breasts, etc). This is not a coincidence or a social construction but likely reflects the evolutionary imperative to compete with other females for the attention of high-status men. Just because you think you're an exception isn't really relevant.
As for the accentuation of the hips and breast's, also not universal clover cultures or time. Plenty of traditional female outfits were flowing due to heat (Berbers, etc) or the breasts were just not as accentuated. A lot of African clothing was very similar in terms of male and female wraps. I don't even get me started on ancient Japan throwing that out the window. The Tail of Genji was very revealing. Many traditional Native American outfits also were practical and not meant to sexualize.
For much of history, men were also as adorned as women unless they were in the labor class. It was a class thing. And long hair among men was very common. You also have cultures where women traditionally have short hair. African cultures, Amazon cultures, etc. I wasn't talking about myself I am talking about the anthropological record.
But wait! We (females) have it beaten into our heads like a religious mantra that men are overwhelmed with their sex drive and easy, so no need to compete. They're just simple creatures who don't even pay attention to clothing and grooming. There's the old joke that all he wants from a woman is to show up naked with a pack of beer. Which is it? I've never "competed" for a male, and I didn't spend my day revolving around what clothing/hair/makeup would attract a male. I dressed for MY comfort. From my experience I find all this crap makes young women low on self-esteem and that's where the "compete" garbage comes from.
Although dress is indeed culture-specific, that doesn't mean all sex-based stereotypes are wrong. Stereotypes are stereotypes for a reason.
The decades-long feminist attempt to call these stereotypes "sexist social constructs" is based on a denial of biology and genetics (not to mention ignorance of cross-cultural norms, history, the behavior male and female toddlers, and even primatology).
"We're not bees or ants in a hive with assigned roles."
Sure, but failing to recognize our shared evolutionary history with other animals is also incorrect. As they say, evolution does not stop at the neck.
I think a lot of people try to figure out the "why" to many complex subjects by distilling them down into more "simple" parts. Trying to separate out issues that are intrinctly woven together proves to be a rather difficult process. When we break down human beings into separate "parts" I feel we do a disservice to our species. Delving into the "why" of a persons personality is one such complex issue- what are the effects a maternal medication, paternal medication ( for example does excessive marijuana use adversely affect sperm and how does that affect the fetus?), the age old nature versus nurture, etc. I am not saying discard investigations into what the medications can do- just be careful of the conclusions we draw.
Wow. Such an amazing discovery to find that out! I used to spend a lot of time in junior high school trying to figure out why I felt so different (GID), what might have caused it, going over to the nearby university library where I stumbled upon Canary Conn's "Canary", as well as intersex medical journals, which I would anonymously read on the lam in the stacks. That was in the early mid 1980's, when GID related things were far off the radar of normies, and not yet sucked into the identity politics circus and related "critical gender theory" lunacy. That was always such the question... why? how? Eventually I came to realize, what does it matter. It IS. I AM. As I AM. The sad and maddening thing, is how this has all been politicized, because to me it's personal, just an aspect of who I am. Jubal, proverbial Stranger in a Strange Land. Couldn't imagine being any other way. Grok!
I asked my mom if she had ever been on DES during the pregnancy (I was born in 1970), though she denied it. I was however born significantly premature. My mom also recently disclosed that she had had several stillbirths between my birth and that of my sister and brother, following ~2.5 yr between each, after me. Other potential factors to consider in this line of research, are longer term multi-generational epigenetic influence of chemicals/endocrine disrupting agents, such as the increased cancer rates 2+ generations downstream from maternal grandparent exposure to pesticides such as DDT (I only mention that because I stumbled on such a paper long ago).
> and clearly born with a DES-feminized brain in a male body.
> However, this debate strikes me as a bit naive, a bit too ideological, and a bit too lacking in context.
We need to fight the tendency to polarize. In our resistance to trans insanity it's tempting to reject everything that suggests that it might give comfort the the enemy. But as the author shows, 'trans' is a real phenomenon and whereas we absolutely reject the wholesale mutilation and poisoning of disturbed children, there will be genuine cases where concessions should be made. That video above, who would deny Sara the 'right' to live as a female?
What an interesting and new perspectiv to bring to the gender issues boiling thru our current era!! I really appreciate the work the author put into this and the happy multiple conicidences that lined up for her. I now have to wonder where or if birth control medications might be included? This also shows me that what we like to call "medical science" still has a deep problem with fads and too much pharma influence and not nearly enought REAL SCIENCE. It makes me believe the FDA and other related Govt health agencies need to be even more rigorous, do more in house science so less dependent on phamra labs hoping for big $$ profits, and NO fast track ever. I can't say enough kudos to the author. Thank you Ms Escher!! Hopefully you've opened a healthy and important avenue for discussion and real science.
Thanks for this fascinating essay. I think you are right on the money -- when something strange is happening with biology, then probably.... something strange is happening with biology.
Paired with the absolutely cratering rates at which young people are even having sex with one another, and the resultant drop in fertility, it's well past time to pair our critical cultural / sociological / political / economic takes on these inter-related phenomena with a look at biology and ecology.
Also -- on a personal note -- what a thing to find out about one's earliest development! Answering so many questions but also squeezing your heart for your own fetal self. It must have been quite a journey and it's very generous of you to share it with us.
Thank you for your kind and thoughtful comments. Yes, it was all shocking and bizarre and has taken me nearly 14 years to sort through, and I'm still learning every day. There should be a law allowing people to obtain the records of their prenatal drug exposures — millions of us were unconsenting victims of pervasive medical malpractice.
Although I doubt DES per se was associated with influencing my nature, It's quite possible some other synthetic progesterones may have been involved, especially given my mom's history of miscarriages (which may have preceded my birth.. I assumed they were after) . I'm definitely going to dig deeper.. should be a very interesting conversation the next time I talk to my mom! I mean at this point it doesn't matter, but it would be some closure if I discovered prenatal synthetic hormone exposure may have been a significant factor. Thank you so much for having posted this information!
Considering the widespread usage of DES, I have always been surprised by what appeared to be the relatively modest impact on behavior of the impacted population. We seem to be looking at an impacted population in excess of 10^7, and I certainly did not observe what appeared to be a significant delta that stood out over the rather tumultous changes that started in the mid 60's. I am a DES exposed male, born in 1951 and my mother told me about it when I became an adult. But I have been looking for a long time and never seen much about DES exposure impact on the exposed individuals - beyond the now obvious medical issues. The progestin family of compounds impact that you discuss is interesting.
Wow what an eye opening perspective!!! I greatly appreciate all the work that went into this. As a side note, we once again are presented with "medical science" seemingly driven too much by fad and the pharma industry and not near enough on REAL SCIENCE. The FDA regs and process needs tightening and NO fast track option allowed. Many thanks to the author to open a new discussion in this confusing and current gender discussion.
By the way, Ms Escher's perspective opens a new avenue of explanation for SOME of this gender stuff. BUT I still believe there is a significant portion of the current gender confused that is largely social contagion: 1) among doctors psychologists who are far too eager to push the issue maybe for notoriety or money or perversion or very poor scientific understanding; 2) among anxious parents who are suseptible/ gullible to contagion or read too much popular literature ( and who didn't grow up among a lot of other kids or see practical parenting like I grew up with in the late 50's early 60's and; 3) fad ,social contagion, mass hsyteria among our over indulged over exposed (internet) kids. All urged on by a ruthless big pharma seeking the next oxycontin jackpot via pseudo science.
My jaw dropped several times during reading. It’s so important for information come to light. There is so much that laypeople, like myself, just don’t know about, but trying to learn. Thank you for the great article!
There are gay men who have had sex with thousands and thousands of men. I’m one of those men, perhaps on average one different person per week for 40 years, though when I lived in Paris London and Amsterdam it was more one a day. I’ve see and felt a lot of penises.
When I moved to Houston in 2000 we began having naked pool parties monthly for about 10-12 years, through the summer. I was shocked seeing all those naked men, because they genitals were so much smaller than those in Europe. I found that men born roughly after 1970-1972 were on average a couple of inches shorter that those born before. It seemed to reverse slightly for those born after 1990 or so, but so don’t hang around younger guys.
A couple of fiends were shocked at my remarks because they were the pre-70s men, and they had roughly the same size as back Amsterdam. They had been noticing for years. Likewise hypospadas (we called hammerhead) was not uncommon at all.
A second observation was that Americans were shorter than Europeans, and likewise were fatter. I called it Height, Length Width problem.
Artificial estrogens can cause all three issues, and since the 70’s xenoesteogens from plasricisers to herbicides enters the environment in force. Xenoesteogens cause abnormally accelerated epiphysal plate sealing in long bones (shortness), can cause excess adipose (estrogen receptors in fat) and if flooding a male fetis in the first 6-12 weeks or in the first 4 months, will severely distort the penis
Your points on endocrinal manipulation is on point in the same hypothesis. It can also cause hight issues and fat tissue issues.
(I had also long understood DES boys were all gay)
Love to compare notes. I sampled self-reported penis size on gay sex apps back in 2005, and it was startling, US boastful men still were routinely smaller that global average. Biggest are west Europe (Greece was an anomaly). I’ve always wondered why correlation studies were never done. It’s a pure map of what drugs went where
I wish my iPhone wouldn’t autocorrect so badly; my vision is not so good late at night, amusing words sprinkled out.
Yes, I’ve been in the position of very few living men - perhaps military doctors during draft, but they saw soft penises.
In Holland the _average_ man is over 6 feet tall, and the average woman is 5’7” or more. All nice but what’s not generally known is there is a national club (stichting) for men whose penis is roughly 7” long or longer; for comparison the US average is 5.5” or so. There are many many Dutch men who are 25% longer than Americans.
This is not to get people to look at Dutch sex clubs but this was entry-level size; there were exclusive events for ++ members. [I was friends with the club secretary - he was a model in the photographer Andres Serrano’s series “A History of Sex” (also a book) remember the “Piss Christ” controversy? If you have the book look for a church pew.]
When I was of legal age in the early 80’s, HIV hit hard and everyone curtailed sex somewhat in LA, but by 1990 I moved to Europe with a different attitude. That’s why after a decade later, moving to the US I was flabbergasted at our naked parties. It was utterly different from naked parties in UK, Germany, France, Belgium, Holland, Spain and Italy. Was it Texas? No naked parties in California, New York, Florida, Louisiana, Massachusetts, DC, Washington, Tennessee and Hawaii were the same.
All you have to do is look for Xenoesteogens like Pthalates, and penile deformity and you’ll find teams of studies connecting the two.
I connected the two strange things reading an article in the New Yorker in 2004
Estrogen is a major limiting factor on human height, and the primary reason why boys are taller than girls.
And then with weight:
And “Fast Food Nation”
You’ll see the American waistline takes off in the 70’s,
Height flattens in the 70’s, cocks begin shrinking, and everyone gets fatter.
One thing can explain it all: Estrogen and estrogen mimics - Xenoesteogens - became widespread in the early 70’s - think all soft drink bottles became plastic, with prhalates for flexibility.
That’s why the DES and progesterone article shocked me. I put my data on the shelf a decade ago waiting for someone to stumbled on the same idea;
Not only the same idea, but same period, different source
Thank you for this very thought-provoking article. You are correct in that there is a complex relationship between societal/environmental factors and biology (from molecules to systems) that, together, shape the person that we become. It is also true that the interactions are complex and often poorly understood even by the so-called experts. Https://everythingisbiology.substack.com/p/there-is-biological-evidence-for
Thank you again for this very interesting read. Sincerely, Frederick
What a great and well researched piece, thanks for your efforts to write this.
Besides providing some really interesting data and scientific discussion, I was struck by your comment that it's time to expand the discourse (especially struck by being able to get this posted on this particular Substack!). Unfortunate that the current discourse is being so ideologically driven right now, rather than focusing on the biological complexities you consider in the context of humanity.
For my whole health care career, I discouraged the use of hormones for birth control, and for various other modifications. In fact, I discouraged the unnecessary use of pharmaceuticals in general. People seem far too willing to alter themselves using exogenous substances, even those from manufacturers who are all too willing to kill humans, and commodify their parts. These manufacturers should not be the ones telling us what is natural or optimal for a human. If more of us can find purpose and satisfaction in what we do, perhaps this drive to alter ourselves will abate.
Wisely said.
Fascinating article. As a MD , I applaud your diligence in presenting the evidence in such a clear and compelling fashion. Well done!👍🏻
This article provides data that helps humans understand themselves. My daughter’s good friend, a chemical engineer/ physio therapist discussed the potential connection between his own scenario and environmental chemical influences many years ago. He is a well adjusted, generous, smart person.
"Clothes with frills or flowers or flounces or lace or anything girlie made me miserable." There is no flower/flounce/lace DNA code on the XX chromosome. Clothing standards are completely arbitrary. This would be like saying men who don't like to wear a suit and tie must have been exposed to something in utero. Then there's the man that supposedly was unhappy for not having more "masculine behaviors." While there's no doubt behavior differences between males and females that we can generally observe, it' not a recipe. We're not bees or ants in a hive with assigned roles. Accepting oneself seems to be the problem, no matter whether the cause of variations amongst us is environmentally induced or something else.
Throughout history plenty of men wore "flouncy" clothes, I think of the French nobility and really any other European nobility back in the day. Also, really, flowers? Has the author never seen men in Miami? She should also google the flower men of Saudi Arabia. This is an incredibly sexist article and the author seems to be 1) looking for a way to uphold sex stereotypes and 2) ignoring studies that show there really isn't a clear cut male-female brian. Now, there are behavioral patterns, which mainly involve level and violence and altruism, which can be witnessed at the sex class level. But it seems as a girl she related certain clothing characteristics to social coding and thus refused to wear anything associated with Western, modern femininity as that equated to weakness. I was like this too as I was an athlete. Then I decided it was stupid. Now I wear whatever I want.
Excellent points. I wear mostly t-shirts and loose, comfortable slacks, but I will dress in more "feminine" attire for my husband when we go out. I have zero interest in clothing fashion, but like comfort, and I don't mind sometimes wearing something that pleases my husband.
I am switching to skirts and dresses for work because although I can find comfortable jeans, I have always found dress slacks troublesome. Dresses and skirts and now easier and it has nothing to do with my brain or chromosomes!
Women throughout history and across cultures dress differently than men, and the patterns of dress show commonalities (accentuation of hips, breasts, etc). This is not a coincidence or a social construction but likely reflects the evolutionary imperative to compete with other females for the attention of high-status men. Just because you think you're an exception isn't really relevant.
Stereotypes are stereotypes for a reason.
As for the accentuation of the hips and breast's, also not universal clover cultures or time. Plenty of traditional female outfits were flowing due to heat (Berbers, etc) or the breasts were just not as accentuated. A lot of African clothing was very similar in terms of male and female wraps. I don't even get me started on ancient Japan throwing that out the window. The Tail of Genji was very revealing. Many traditional Native American outfits also were practical and not meant to sexualize.
For much of history, men were also as adorned as women unless they were in the labor class. It was a class thing. And long hair among men was very common. You also have cultures where women traditionally have short hair. African cultures, Amazon cultures, etc. I wasn't talking about myself I am talking about the anthropological record.
But wait! We (females) have it beaten into our heads like a religious mantra that men are overwhelmed with their sex drive and easy, so no need to compete. They're just simple creatures who don't even pay attention to clothing and grooming. There's the old joke that all he wants from a woman is to show up naked with a pack of beer. Which is it? I've never "competed" for a male, and I didn't spend my day revolving around what clothing/hair/makeup would attract a male. I dressed for MY comfort. From my experience I find all this crap makes young women low on self-esteem and that's where the "compete" garbage comes from.
Although dress is indeed culture-specific, that doesn't mean all sex-based stereotypes are wrong. Stereotypes are stereotypes for a reason.
The decades-long feminist attempt to call these stereotypes "sexist social constructs" is based on a denial of biology and genetics (not to mention ignorance of cross-cultural norms, history, the behavior male and female toddlers, and even primatology).
"We're not bees or ants in a hive with assigned roles."
Sure, but failing to recognize our shared evolutionary history with other animals is also incorrect. As they say, evolution does not stop at the neck.
Clothing fashion is absolutely a social construct and has zero to do with behavior.
I think a lot of people try to figure out the "why" to many complex subjects by distilling them down into more "simple" parts. Trying to separate out issues that are intrinctly woven together proves to be a rather difficult process. When we break down human beings into separate "parts" I feel we do a disservice to our species. Delving into the "why" of a persons personality is one such complex issue- what are the effects a maternal medication, paternal medication ( for example does excessive marijuana use adversely affect sperm and how does that affect the fetus?), the age old nature versus nurture, etc. I am not saying discard investigations into what the medications can do- just be careful of the conclusions we draw.
Wow. Such an amazing discovery to find that out! I used to spend a lot of time in junior high school trying to figure out why I felt so different (GID), what might have caused it, going over to the nearby university library where I stumbled upon Canary Conn's "Canary", as well as intersex medical journals, which I would anonymously read on the lam in the stacks. That was in the early mid 1980's, when GID related things were far off the radar of normies, and not yet sucked into the identity politics circus and related "critical gender theory" lunacy. That was always such the question... why? how? Eventually I came to realize, what does it matter. It IS. I AM. As I AM. The sad and maddening thing, is how this has all been politicized, because to me it's personal, just an aspect of who I am. Jubal, proverbial Stranger in a Strange Land. Couldn't imagine being any other way. Grok!
I asked my mom if she had ever been on DES during the pregnancy (I was born in 1970), though she denied it. I was however born significantly premature. My mom also recently disclosed that she had had several stillbirths between my birth and that of my sister and brother, following ~2.5 yr between each, after me. Other potential factors to consider in this line of research, are longer term multi-generational epigenetic influence of chemicals/endocrine disrupting agents, such as the increased cancer rates 2+ generations downstream from maternal grandparent exposure to pesticides such as DDT (I only mention that because I stumbled on such a paper long ago).
> and clearly born with a DES-feminized brain in a male body.
> However, this debate strikes me as a bit naive, a bit too ideological, and a bit too lacking in context.
We need to fight the tendency to polarize. In our resistance to trans insanity it's tempting to reject everything that suggests that it might give comfort the the enemy. But as the author shows, 'trans' is a real phenomenon and whereas we absolutely reject the wholesale mutilation and poisoning of disturbed children, there will be genuine cases where concessions should be made. That video above, who would deny Sara the 'right' to live as a female?
What is GID?
Gender Identity Disorder (at least the 'medicalized' establishment definition).
thanks
What an interesting and new perspectiv to bring to the gender issues boiling thru our current era!! I really appreciate the work the author put into this and the happy multiple conicidences that lined up for her. I now have to wonder where or if birth control medications might be included? This also shows me that what we like to call "medical science" still has a deep problem with fads and too much pharma influence and not nearly enought REAL SCIENCE. It makes me believe the FDA and other related Govt health agencies need to be even more rigorous, do more in house science so less dependent on phamra labs hoping for big $$ profits, and NO fast track ever. I can't say enough kudos to the author. Thank you Ms Escher!! Hopefully you've opened a healthy and important avenue for discussion and real science.
Thanks for this fascinating essay. I think you are right on the money -- when something strange is happening with biology, then probably.... something strange is happening with biology.
Paired with the absolutely cratering rates at which young people are even having sex with one another, and the resultant drop in fertility, it's well past time to pair our critical cultural / sociological / political / economic takes on these inter-related phenomena with a look at biology and ecology.
Also -- on a personal note -- what a thing to find out about one's earliest development! Answering so many questions but also squeezing your heart for your own fetal self. It must have been quite a journey and it's very generous of you to share it with us.
Thank you for your kind and thoughtful comments. Yes, it was all shocking and bizarre and has taken me nearly 14 years to sort through, and I'm still learning every day. There should be a law allowing people to obtain the records of their prenatal drug exposures — millions of us were unconsenting victims of pervasive medical malpractice.
Although I doubt DES per se was associated with influencing my nature, It's quite possible some other synthetic progesterones may have been involved, especially given my mom's history of miscarriages (which may have preceded my birth.. I assumed they were after) . I'm definitely going to dig deeper.. should be a very interesting conversation the next time I talk to my mom! I mean at this point it doesn't matter, but it would be some closure if I discovered prenatal synthetic hormone exposure may have been a significant factor. Thank you so much for having posted this information!
FWIW as a non-scientist your work here strikes me as simply brilliant. Thank you.
Considering the widespread usage of DES, I have always been surprised by what appeared to be the relatively modest impact on behavior of the impacted population. We seem to be looking at an impacted population in excess of 10^7, and I certainly did not observe what appeared to be a significant delta that stood out over the rather tumultous changes that started in the mid 60's. I am a DES exposed male, born in 1951 and my mother told me about it when I became an adult. But I have been looking for a long time and never seen much about DES exposure impact on the exposed individuals - beyond the now obvious medical issues. The progestin family of compounds impact that you discuss is interesting.
Wow what an eye opening perspective!!! I greatly appreciate all the work that went into this. As a side note, we once again are presented with "medical science" seemingly driven too much by fad and the pharma industry and not near enough on REAL SCIENCE. The FDA regs and process needs tightening and NO fast track option allowed. Many thanks to the author to open a new discussion in this confusing and current gender discussion.
By the way, Ms Escher's perspective opens a new avenue of explanation for SOME of this gender stuff. BUT I still believe there is a significant portion of the current gender confused that is largely social contagion: 1) among doctors psychologists who are far too eager to push the issue maybe for notoriety or money or perversion or very poor scientific understanding; 2) among anxious parents who are suseptible/ gullible to contagion or read too much popular literature ( and who didn't grow up among a lot of other kids or see practical parenting like I grew up with in the late 50's early 60's and; 3) fad ,social contagion, mass hsyteria among our over indulged over exposed (internet) kids. All urged on by a ruthless big pharma seeking the next oxycontin jackpot via pseudo science.
My jaw dropped several times during reading. It’s so important for information come to light. There is so much that laypeople, like myself, just don’t know about, but trying to learn. Thank you for the great article!
Laura
There are gay men who have had sex with thousands and thousands of men. I’m one of those men, perhaps on average one different person per week for 40 years, though when I lived in Paris London and Amsterdam it was more one a day. I’ve see and felt a lot of penises.
When I moved to Houston in 2000 we began having naked pool parties monthly for about 10-12 years, through the summer. I was shocked seeing all those naked men, because they genitals were so much smaller than those in Europe. I found that men born roughly after 1970-1972 were on average a couple of inches shorter that those born before. It seemed to reverse slightly for those born after 1990 or so, but so don’t hang around younger guys.
A couple of fiends were shocked at my remarks because they were the pre-70s men, and they had roughly the same size as back Amsterdam. They had been noticing for years. Likewise hypospadas (we called hammerhead) was not uncommon at all.
A second observation was that Americans were shorter than Europeans, and likewise were fatter. I called it Height, Length Width problem.
Artificial estrogens can cause all three issues, and since the 70’s xenoesteogens from plasricisers to herbicides enters the environment in force. Xenoesteogens cause abnormally accelerated epiphysal plate sealing in long bones (shortness), can cause excess adipose (estrogen receptors in fat) and if flooding a male fetis in the first 6-12 weeks or in the first 4 months, will severely distort the penis
Your points on endocrinal manipulation is on point in the same hypothesis. It can also cause hight issues and fat tissue issues.
(I had also long understood DES boys were all gay)
Love to compare notes. I sampled self-reported penis size on gay sex apps back in 2005, and it was startling, US boastful men still were routinely smaller that global average. Biggest are west Europe (Greece was an anomaly). I’ve always wondered why correlation studies were never done. It’s a pure map of what drugs went where
Wow. Talk about your observational skills! :-) And sure enough, the pole vaulter who knocked the bar down with his penis…West Europe.
I wish my iPhone wouldn’t autocorrect so badly; my vision is not so good late at night, amusing words sprinkled out.
Yes, I’ve been in the position of very few living men - perhaps military doctors during draft, but they saw soft penises.
In Holland the _average_ man is over 6 feet tall, and the average woman is 5’7” or more. All nice but what’s not generally known is there is a national club (stichting) for men whose penis is roughly 7” long or longer; for comparison the US average is 5.5” or so. There are many many Dutch men who are 25% longer than Americans.
https://www.horsemen.nl/horsemen-knights/
This is not to get people to look at Dutch sex clubs but this was entry-level size; there were exclusive events for ++ members. [I was friends with the club secretary - he was a model in the photographer Andres Serrano’s series “A History of Sex” (also a book) remember the “Piss Christ” controversy? If you have the book look for a church pew.]
When I was of legal age in the early 80’s, HIV hit hard and everyone curtailed sex somewhat in LA, but by 1990 I moved to Europe with a different attitude. That’s why after a decade later, moving to the US I was flabbergasted at our naked parties. It was utterly different from naked parties in UK, Germany, France, Belgium, Holland, Spain and Italy. Was it Texas? No naked parties in California, New York, Florida, Louisiana, Massachusetts, DC, Washington, Tennessee and Hawaii were the same.
All you have to do is look for Xenoesteogens like Pthalates, and penile deformity and you’ll find teams of studies connecting the two.
I connected the two strange things reading an article in the New Yorker in 2004
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2004/04/05/the-height-gap
And then finally with a book
https://www.amazon.com/Mutants-Genetic-Variety-Human-Body/dp/0142004820/
Estrogen is a major limiting factor on human height, and the primary reason why boys are taller than girls.
And then with weight:
And “Fast Food Nation”
You’ll see the American waistline takes off in the 70’s,
Height flattens in the 70’s, cocks begin shrinking, and everyone gets fatter.
One thing can explain it all: Estrogen and estrogen mimics - Xenoesteogens - became widespread in the early 70’s - think all soft drink bottles became plastic, with prhalates for flexibility.
That’s why the DES and progesterone article shocked me. I put my data on the shelf a decade ago waiting for someone to stumbled on the same idea;
Not only the same idea, but same period, different source
Fascinating.
FDA, acknowledge that hormone treatment during pregnancy can cause intersex and transgender!
https://www.change.org/p/the-us-food-and-drug-administration-fda-acknowledge-that-hormone-treatment-during-pregnancy-can-cause-intersex-and-transgender