feminine-genius

Genetic signature

How very cool is this!

About 3.5 million of today's Ashkenazi Jews -- about 40 percent of the total Ashkenazi population -- are descended from just four women, a genetic study indicates.

And how do we know this? From the interpretation of mtDNA:

The study involved mitochondrial DNA, called mtDNA, which is passed only through the mother. A woman can pass her mtDNA to grandchildren only by having daughters. So mtDNA is "the perfect tool to trace maternal lineages," Behar said in a telephone interview.

If God withholds His judgement for another century or so (at least) and if we would just use science for the good, we'd be astonished at how much brilliant data is floating just beneath our fingertips. In fact, the more science reveals, the more that it ends up backing up Revelation in the long run.

Take this tidbit as an example. Judaism is a matriarchal religion. If only the father is Jewish, the child is not technically Jewish. While many want to dismiss this prescription, we see here that God said it for a reason. The genetic imprint is from the mother.

Each woman left a genetic signature that shows up in her descendants today, he and colleagues say in a report published online by the American Journal of Human Genetics. Together, the four signatures appear in about 40 percent of Ashkenazi Jews, while being virtually absent in non-Jews and found only rarely in Jews of non-Ashkenazi origin.

Imagine who those four women they were. They had absolutely no idea that they would be responsible for millions of progeny (remember that there are 3.3 million alive today, but how many have existed in these family lines over the milennia?). One can scarce take it in. Of course, simple exponential math would make it clear.

"Be fruitful and multiply" was an edict that had results beyond comprehension.

For a primer on the Ashkenazi, go here.

Is gender hard-wired?

I cannot vouch for this test, but it looks interesting, as explained in the article. What is always a net good is empirical evidence that men and women are different (beyond the you-know-whats). If anyone takes it, let us know how the results look. Something to reach for if the weekend slows down.

A little comfort here

Without departing (much!) from the solemnity of the day, this just in from the Beeb:

Institute of Preventative Medicine in Copenhagen researchers found those with wider hips also appeared to be protected against heart conditions. Women with a hip measurement smaller than 40 inches, or a size 14 would not have this protection, they said. The researchers say hip fat contains a beneficial natural anti-inflammatory.

In the good old days, I think they were referred to as something that would detract from the reverence we're trying to maintain today. All in all, we take comfort in knowing we were right all along. Carry on.

Find the logic in this statement

I am perplexed. "Break down the barriers" is the battle cry over at NOW, and yet I cannot see what walls they mean. What barriers??

More than 6,000 women scientists, engineers, educators and other professionals urged Congress on Wednesday to remove barriers to women and girls who want to enter the fields of math, engineering, information technology, physics and other "hard sciences." The call came in a letter asking for an investigation and corrective legislation and received at a May 11 public event by Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and George Allen, R-Va., as former chairs of the Senate Subcommittee on Science, Technology and Space. Sen. Allen has noted that the U.S. is lagging far behind other countries in graduating engineers, placing this country at a competitive disadvantage.

Is there a plot we don't know about?

Are there admission criteria which hobble women?

If we don't have enough engineers for the available work, does that mean just the women are missing? Wouldn't men fill the gap for the sake of supply and demand?

Could women be avoiding the "hard sciences" for reasons other than imaginary barriers?

Is it possible that secondary schools prepare too few students in general for hard sciences, or are just the girls being held back in some subversive way?

Is it possible that some girls on their own are thinking of other life commitments that might not mesh with high-powered careers like these?

Didn't I just read that girls are performing better in all sorts of academic areas than boys?

What planet are these people on? And what exactly is "corrective legislation?" Call me paranoid, but why do quotas jump immediately into my mind?

Risky behaviour

Women in Korea were encouraged to donate "spare" eggs for experimentation with cloning. This involves hyperstimulating the ovaries, and then:

The process, which is known as somatic cell nuclear transfer, involves taking a donated egg (or oocyte) from which the nucleus has been removed, and replacing that nucleus with DNA from the non reproductive cell of a patient. The result was 11 lab-cultivated embryos that developed into blastocysts. At this stage, a small cavity (blastocoele) forms inside the embryo whose inner cells are undifferentiated and a source of embryonic stem cells.

Embryonic stem cell research, which is "morally and ethically unacceptable," is discussed in many places, so we'll reduce our comments to this observation concerning the women involved:

Professor Koo Young-moo, from the University of Ulsan, raised ethical questions about the donors, not about the embryos. For him in fact, “Hwang might face some problems since he did not discuss the risks associated with egg extraction with the 18 donors and did not specify in the signed agreement that the eggs would be destroyed”.

Hmmm, the women were not fully informed before the procedures -- either of the complete scope of the experiment or the medical risks to themselves? Has this ever happened before?? What might those risks be?

"Imagine the worse case scenario in which a donor suffers from ovarian hyperstimulation, a dangerous condition for a woman’s reproductive capacity."

Medical "advances" using dangerous procedures which ultimately harm women. Procedures offered without adequate information given beforehand. Consent given by women who didn't have all the facts at their disposal. Fiddling with reproduction for dubious ends. I see a pattern here. And from the feminists -- not a peep.

Stop the presses -- men/women differ

What hath feminism wrought?? Increased alcoholism in women.

The obvious answer is the rise of feminism as the dominant ideology in British society. As women became more affluent and achieved equal rights in the work place, their alcohol consumption rose. The Cinzano generation brought laudable reforms. But the power of the women’s liberation movement and the blanket application of feminist ideas to every aspect of our lives meant that it became impossible to criticise any element of the rapidly-changing culture, from its detrimental effect on men and boys to the pressures it put on women themselves.

OK. Next stunner -- alcohol absorption in women differs from in men, to their detriment.

If a woman and a man drink the same amount, even allowing for differences in body weight, the woman will have a higher blood-alcohol concentration. Women have lower levels of ADH, an enzyme involved in the metabolism of alcohol. Their bodies also have a higher ratio of fat to water, which affects the way they metabolise alcohol. This is not fair, but it is fact.

But here's the kicker: women in Britain have so lashed their government into shape (about gender-blind society) that now they're angry that this fact hasn't been addressed. "Hey, Gov," sez they, "why didn't you warn us?"

There is no winning with this crowd. Can't argue with facts, though many try. "Biology is destiny" echoes from deep recesses of the brain...

Ch-ch-changes

Onset of puberty in children seems to be happening sooner, according to report in BBC. Whole variety of theories of why -- from tv habits, to father-daughter relationships, to diet -- though it certainly might be a combination of factors.

It is accepted that the normal age for a girl to begin to develop the first signs of puberty is 10 and above. Boys develop slightly later, generally at eleven-and-a-half. However, the age appears to have been decreasing in developed countries. In 1990, the first signs of puberty were around the age of eight for girls - the whole process taking two years to complete. Now, according to researchers, some enter puberty as young as seven.

And if we're looking for a more personal relevance than our children or grandchildren, consider this:

But equally, it might mean more women reach the menopause earlier too ...