Thread replies: 16
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
File: 1487094660794.jpg (121KB, 960x696px) Image search:
[Google]
121KB, 960x696px
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Calhoun#Mouse_experiments
>nitially the population grew rapidly, doubling every 55 days. The population reached 620 by day 315, after which the population growth dropped markedly, doubling only every 145 days. The last surviving birth was on day 600, bringing the total population to a mere 2200 mice, even though the experiment setup allowed for as many as 3840 mice in terms of nesting space. This period between day 315 and day 600 saw a breakdown in social structure and in normal social behavior. Among the aberrations in behavior were the following: expulsion of young before weaning was complete, wounding of young, increase in homosexual behavior, inability of dominant males to maintain the defense of their territory and females, aggressive behavior of females, passivity of non-dominant males with increased attacks on each other which were not defended against.[2] After day 600, the social breakdown continued and the population declined toward extinction. During this period females ceased to reproduce. Their male counterparts withdrew completely, never engaging in courtship or fighting. They ate, drank, slept, and groomed themselves – all solitary pursuits. Sleek, healthy coats and an absence of scars characterized these males. They were dubbed "the beautiful ones." Breeding never resumed and behavior patterns were permanently changed.
Reminder that the increase in competition for the opposing gender is driving people into homosexuality.
>>
But SUPPLY and DEMAND are constant.
>>
>>7755460
Is there a similar explanation for being trans?
>>
>Mice and humans are exactly the same
>>
>>7757363
>Among the males the behavior disturbances ranged from sexual deviation to cannibalism and from frenetic overactivity to a pathological withdrawal from which individuals would emerge to eat, drink and move about only when other members of the community were asleep.
Sure fuckin looks like it
(Well, not the cannibalism maybe)
>>
>>7757363
I doubt you are saying that when medication testing on mice extends our lives.
Also, why is anybody upset about this? All species have interesting changes in their population based upon their environment. Being insulted when somebody says that your homosexuality or transexuality may have something to do with birth trends is like me being offended if somebody says I have brown eyes because my mother has brown eyes. This shit ain't concrete proof of anything, but it is wildly interesting if you read it instead of being salty.
Shit... I bet you'd have anonnymously told Pavlov
>Dogs and humans are exactly the same
>>
>>7757794
Also, sounds to me more like it causes NEETS than like it causes gays. I exhibit some of the mentioned characteristics, but my family has since way before it was a social change. We are real trailblazers! Centuries of nocturnal hermit lifestyles!
>>
>>7757842
Eh, not that anon, but there's a huge difference between this unnatural environment set up for mice and the actual world humans live in. To automatically assume this mouse study has any real relation to human society is a bit much.
>>
>tfw you hate modern women and wish for anything between 'force them to stop being feminists somehow' and 'kill them all and replace them with sex dolls', but technically you're one of them with an even more masculinized brain than usual
>>
>>7757856
I don't think it is concrete, but it is wildly interesting and tells us something interesting. Everything in an experiment is on some level artificial. I think this just tells us about a possible outcome of us doing too well for ourselves.I think we are smarter than mice and can find a solution if it starts to go this way. My eyes example was a bit over the top because that one is something we have a pretty great grasp of, but I was trying to get something across.
I feel like a lot of LGBT people get offended by this when that is super silly. We should be testing it further, learning what we can from it, which I think is potentially a lot!
>>
>>7757842
Because homosexual behavior in mice doesn't really have any relation to homosexual identity in humans. Dudes who go gay while in prison are closer to the mice in this study.
>>
>>7755460
>Reminder that the increase in competition for the opposing gender is driving people into homosexuality.
Maybe you can explain more, but I don't see how the mouse experiment supports that. Looks to me more like mice are biologically programmed to collectively go psycho once they reach about 2/3 of environmental capacity.
>>
>>
>>7758008
I don't know if you're actually fascinated with all this, but keep in mind this study is from the 1960s. I'm not saying that means it's bad, but take it with a grain of salt.
https://nihrecord.nih.gov/newsletters/2008/07_25_2008/story1.htm
>>
>>7758037
I am wildly fascinated by it! I don't get why somebody with anonymity would be dishonest or sarcastic. That is for protecting face when people know who you are. I am one hundo on the boards.
I get that it needs taken with a grain of salt, which is why I want it repeated a lot, tweaked, and see if we can learn from it. Maybe even use a species that doesn't have that weird 2/3 thing.
>>
>>7758008
>Thank you for the mouse information! Didn't know that 2/3 thing!
Well that's not any new information, that's just a comment on the experiment that population went into decline when the population was 2200 mice, yet there was nesting space for 3840 - meaning the actual achievable population was only about 57% (which I rounded to 2/3 for simplicity) of the theoretical environmental capacity. Based on the experiment, I get the impression that they must have some sort of strong claustrophobia instinct, which caused birth rates to drop off long before the actual environmental capacity was reached. If so, it would make sense that such a trait evolved to deal with the unpredictability of nature - real environments in the wild don't have a fixed capacity of population they can support, the practical capacity varies quite a bit based on factors like weather and populations of other species in the area. If a species was near the maximum supportable population, there's a risk that an environmental change could drop the supportable population and leave the species population beyond what the environment supported. So the reduction in population growth long before that would be an adaptive trait, to ensure the species doesn't end up "living beyond its means".
Thread posts: 16
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1