posted
A National Geographic special called "The Testosterone Factor" is scheduled to air tonight. Among the research it will present are the results of a study done in Jamaica.
quote:Previous research conducted in North America and East Africa has shown that fathering results in a lowering of testosterone levels. The research in Jamaica expanded on the research in the field by examining the hormonal patterns associated with different types of fathering.
Hormonal concentrations of testosterone, prolactin, oxytocin, cortisol and vasopressin were analysed from 43 Jamaican men aged 18-40 who fell into one of three relationship groups: (1) single, (2) biological fathers engaged in visiting relationships, and (3) biological fathers living with their youngest child. The results showed that testosterone levels were significantly lower in fathers than in single Jamaican men, as expected. An interesting and unexpected finding was lower testosterone levels among visiting fathers than men living with their children, after a period of interacting with their children. One possible reason for this could be the intense fathering that occurs during the intermittent fathering process associated with visiting relationships.
I'm curious how hatrackers see this results. Do they jive with your personal experience? Are there noticeable changes in mens behavior that track with this biological change. Does nurturing children tend to make men (and perhaps also women) overall less aggressive.
Do you suppose similar effects might be observed from other nurturing relationships with children such as teaching?
The study didn't compare biological fathers with adoptive fathers. I wonder if they would see a difference.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, they're making a lot of assumptions of causality.
I think it's just as likely that men with lower levels of testosterone are more amenable to getting married and having children in the first place.
I can't really explain the bit about visiting fathers. Perhaps men with really low testosterone are less likely to stay in a marriage, but keep seeking?
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
pooka, In the study, they found that visiting father's testosterone levels dropped following a visit while other hormone levels rose. This isn't proof of a causal relationship but it comes fairly close.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Too lazy to look it up, but aren't there some animal models as well that back these theories up? Animal models are fun because you pretty much remove free will- they mate with who you tell them, when you tell them to (unless you work with a mutant that doesn't).
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, there are animals who follow this model. I've seen stuff about birds where the male testosterone levels increase when they are seeking a mate and then decrease when they are caring for eggs and young birds.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
My husband is on kid three, is quite the nurturer, and still has fairly high testosterone levels (as noted at his latest physical-- high side of normal-- as well as physical signs visible from day to day...) But of course that's purely anecdotal. Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Since we know submissive behavior reduces testosterone, I'm not at all surprised that visiting fathers experienced a drop. There is nothing more submissive than having to visit your own child.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: My husband is on kid three, is quite the nurturer, and still has fairly high testosterone levels (as noted at his latest physical-- high side of normal-- as well as physical signs visible from day to day...) But of course that's purely anecdotal.
Did they actually measure his testosterone levels or are you speculating?
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: My husband is on kid three, is quite the nurturer, and still has fairly high testosterone levels (as noted at his latest physical-- high side of normal-- as well as physical signs visible from day to day...) But of course that's purely anecdotal.
Did they actually measure his testosterone levels or are you speculating?
Yeah, they did it as part of his routine bloodwork.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
(Also of course, they didn't have a baseline before that, so I don't know if it's down or not.)
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:It is unclear to me from the OP whether the fathers were visiting the children or v.v.
I don't think it matters. Even if the child is being dropped off at your doorstep, you're still aware that this is a visit, and the child isn't really yours to "keep." It's got to be pretty emasculating.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:I don't think it matters. Even if the child is being dropped off at your doorstep, you're still aware that this is a visit, and the child isn't really yours to "keep." It's got to be pretty emasculating.
Whether or not its emasculating I suppose depends on whether you chose the situation or it was forced on you.
If the mother of your child left you and took the kid, I could see that visitation would be a reminder of emasculation.
On the other hand, if that Dad walked out on the wife and kids and is happier visiting them on Saturday than living with them every day of the week, why would he find visitation emasculating?
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:On the other hand, if that Dad walked out on the wife and kids and is happier visiting them on Saturday than living with them every day of the week, why would he find visitation emasculating?
Because even if the Dad is nominally "happier" visiting on Saturday and dodging responsibility the rest of the week, that Saturday visit is likely to be hedged 'round with rules and reminders from all corners that the Mom in question is the "real" parent. Every non-custodial father I've ever known has seen visitation as a singularly terrible experience, albeit worth it just for the occasional glimpse of their children.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I heard a couple of women whose husbands had visitation with children from prior marriages, and they saw it as being hard on everyone all around. It may not have been the most unbiased source, but they were also the Primary and Relief Society presidents (heads of the children's ministry and sisterhood organization). You know, there were so many strange things about that ward, that interaction never really struck me as peculiar until just now.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tammy: I think having children has made me more agressive. I used to be nice.
Yeah, me too.
-o-
I don't really know much about this, but I thought I'd mention, mildly, that the thread title seems to suggest that having testosterone and being civilized are in opposition to each other. I'm guessing that's tongue-in-cheek. I find it funny, at least.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:On the other hand, if that Dad walked out on the wife and kids and is happier visiting them on Saturday than living with them every day of the week, why would he find visitation emasculating?
Because even if the Dad is nominally "happier" visiting on Saturday and dodging responsibility the rest of the week, that Saturday visit is likely to be hedged 'round with rules and reminders from all corners that the Mom in question is the "real" parent. Every non-custodial father I've ever known has seen visitation as a singularly terrible experience, albeit worth it just for the occasional glimpse of their children.
That is unfortunate, but anecdotal. And in conflict with my anecdotal evidence.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
My daddy says that seeing me (okay, me and my bratty brother ) was always the high point of his week, and he didn't mind jumping through hoops if it meant seeing me. And that he would have given up more, and jumped more hoops if he had to. He wished the whole situation weren't so screwed up, but he didn't find it emasculating.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:he didn't mind jumping through hoops if it meant seeing me
That he was willing to jump through hoops to see you means that you were important enough to him to jump through hoops, not that he didn't jump through hoops. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:he didn't mind jumping through hoops if it meant seeing me
That he was willing to jump through hoops to see you means that you were important enough to him to jump through hoops, not that he didn't jump through hoops.
Agreed. But you know, many fathers don't have to jump through hoops to see their kids. The visitations are regular and consistent (at least after 1-2 years post-separation).
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Unless you get my parents' situation going on...
Anyway, my point was not that the hoops weren't there, but that they weren't emasculating, at least not in his view.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, you don't want to start this. What I just thought of is far too dirty for a family forum...
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: Unless you get my parents' situation going on...
Anyway, my point was not that the hoops weren't there, but that they weren't emasculating, at least not in his view.
Non emasculating hoops you say? Shipping them to my house you say?
quote:Oh, you don't want to start this. What I just thought of is far too dirty for a family forum...
People are still not sure why Wham-o thought hula hoops with razor blades embedded in them would be a product that anyone would want to buy. It's the Amelia Aerhart of marketing decisions.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
The presidential primaries thread has that Los Alamos gateway to hell ad.![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
) was always the high point of his week, and he didn't mind jumping through hoops if it meant seeing me. And that he would have given up more, and jumped more hoops if he had to. He wished the whole situation weren't so screwed up, but he didn't find it emasculating.
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
