Y-chromosome, hairiness and male phenotypical traits

[Power77]

As Maciamo stated on this forum quite a lot of time, there is a likely correlation between a man's Y chromosome and his agressiveness, hairiness and fertility. Such a factor may explain the current repartition of modern haplogroups as well as the tendendancy of behaviour among certain men from specific parts of the world which happen to be largely dominated by a particular Y-chromosome haplogroup. The Y-chromosoe may influence voice pitch as well which may expalin why some men whether from the same or different phenotypical/racial stock are able to sound or sing so differently. So what are your opinions about this phenomenon. Share.

 

[kamani]

I want to believe it, but you need to source some studies.

 

[LeBrok]

There are very hairy women without help of Y chromosome. On other hand Y chromosome is a very mutated X chromosome, so there is some truth in it, maybe.

 

[Fire Haired14]

There are very hairy women without help of Y chromosome. On other hand Y chromosome is a very mutated X chromosome, so there is some truth in it, maybe.

It's common sense 99.99% of women don't get noticeably hairy. With most guys you can see leg hair and what not but it's not extremely obvious. I think hairiness is is also determined by genetics not in-born manliness. Most of us(in America, Canada, Europe, etc.) are European who are west Eurasian(BB, ANE, WHG) who are probably the most hairy people in the world(with small exceptions), and some of us assume everyone has the same standards. Many east Asians, south Asians, Sub Saharan Africans, etc. can't grow facial hair and have very little body hair. I've gone to mostly

I bet dark haired west Eurasians are more hairy than light haired west Eurasians, it may just be because of hair color but I don't know. So that may be why middle easterns(even women) are known to be very hairy. I saw statistics though showing that people in Scandinavia are as hairy as west Asians though(from wikpedia). Something weird I've noticed is that there's only a handful of people(out of over 1,000 guys) in my school who can grow facial hair and or hair on their cheeks. My dad, all 6 of my uncles, both of my grandfathers, 4/5 of my older cousins could grow a beard in high school. Hardly anyone in my school has obvious arm pit hair, any chest hair, etc. while all older male relatives I know say they had it by high school. Plus my grade is much smaller(short and skinny) than when my older cousins generation when they were in that grade. I swear it seems people are getting smaller. I'm kind of creeped out honestly. I've heard conspiracy theories that the government is sending stuff out into the air that makes men less masculine so there's less resistance. I know that's absolutely crazy but i couldn't help but connect it to how small and unmatured my generation seems to be.

 

[LeBrok]

It's common sense 99.99% of women don't get noticeably hairy. With most guys you can see leg hair and what not but it's not extremely obvious. I think hairiness is is also determined by genetics not in-born manliness. Most of us(in America, Canada, Europe, etc.) are European who are west Eurasian(BB, ANE, WHG) who are probably the most hairy people in the world(with small exceptions), and some of us assume everyone has the same standards. Many east Asians, south Asians, Sub Saharan Africans, etc. can't grow facial hair and have very little body hair. I've gone to mostly

I bet dark haired west Eurasians are more hairy than light haired west Eurasians, it may just be because of hair color but I don't know. So that may be why middle easterns(even women) are known to be very hairy. I saw statistics though showing that people in Scandinavia are as hairy as west Asians though(from wikpedia). Something weird I've noticed is that there's only a handful of people(out of over 1,000 guys) in my school who can grow facial hair and or hair on their cheeks. My dad, all 6 of my uncles, both of my grandfathers, 4/5 of my older cousins could grow a beard in high school. Hardly anyone in my school has obvious arm pit hair, any chest hair,

It might be due to shaving and waxing being in fashion these days.

etc. while all older male relatives I know say they had it by high school. Plus my grade is much smaller(short and skinny) than when my older cousins generation when they were in that grade. I swear it seems people are getting smaller. I'm kind of creeped out honestly. I've heard conspiracy theories that the government is sending stuff out into the air that makes men less masculine so there's less resistance. I know that's absolutely crazy but i couldn't help but connect it to how small and unmatured my generation seems to be.

In 70s through 90s huge amounts of growth hormones were added to animal feeds. Some of it remained in meat and was consumed by people. Youths matured slower and grew for longer time, thus taller. I knew a guy, who's parents had a chicken farm. They both were short 160-165 cm, but their son grew to be 190cm. He loved chicken and ate chicken every second day or so. At current times food industry is better regulated with limits on growth hormone. New generation consumes much less of it in foods, and will be shorter than their parents who grew up in 70s.
Well, this is my hypothesis only. Future will tell if I'm right.

 

[Power77]

While I agree with Fire Haired14 about hairiness. I'd like more views about how the Y-chromosome influence male bahaviour and testosterone production and of there may indeed be differences between haplogroups in this respect( which I highly suspect).

 

[Power77]

While I agree with Fire Haired14 about hairiness, I'd like more views about how do you think the Y-chromosome influence male behaviour and testosterone production(which in turn affect hairiness and baldness) and how different Y-haplogroups may differ in this aspect(which I highly suspect they do anyway).

 

[Fire Haired14]

It might be due to shaving and waxing being in fashion these days.

Well, then look at Indian woman in south America. I don't know why you're stubborn on this issue. Sure, women would be a little bit noticeably hairier if they didn't shave, etc. Hair on women is not attractive to men, if it does exist in some(chest hair, lol) they won't be able to pass their genes down.

In 70s through 90s huge amounts of growth hormones were added to animal feeds. Some of it remained in meat and was consumed by people. Youths matured slower and grew for longer time, thus taller. I knew a guy, who's parents had a chicken farm. They both were short 160-165 cm, but their son grew to be 190cm. He loved chicken and ate chicken every second day or so. At current times food industry is better regulated with limits on growth hormone. New generation consumes much less of it in foods, and will be shorter than their parents who grew up in 70s.
Well, this is my hypothesis only. Future will tell if I'm right.

Something's up. It's not in my head.

 

[mihaitzateo]

Well I do not think it is a relation between hairiness and fertility at males.
Being more hairy or not I think is related to your race,for example people with strong Fino-Ugric genetics are very lacked of hair.
This would mean all people with strong Feno-Ugrian descent are quite infertile.
We will not take into account that most of these people (with strong Feno-Ugrian descent) likes to drink a lot,which leads to problems with fertility.
I also noticed most Chinesse are lacked of hair,same about Japanese and other East Asian people.
I also doubt that these people are infertile.
Now taking Africans,who are also usually lacked of hair on their bodies,I think they are between most fertile in the world,not between most infertile.
Now since I said hairiness is quite related to your race,for sure is quite linked to your paternal HG and even more linked to your autosomal genetics.

 

[mihaitzateo]

It might be due to shaving and waxing being in fashion these days.




In 70s through 90s huge amounts of growth hormones were added to animal feeds. Some of it remained in meat and was consumed by people. Youths matured slower and grew for longer time, thus taller. I knew a guy, who's parents had a chicken farm. They both were short 160-165 cm, but their son grew to be 190cm. He loved chicken and ate chicken every second day or so. At current times food industry is better regulated with limits on growth hormone. New generation consumes much less of it in foods, and will be shorter than their parents who grew up in 70s.
Well, this is my hypothesis only. Future will tell if I'm right.

What about communist countries,they gave hormones to animals also?
Neither of my 2 grand fathers had too hairy legs,but I got quite hairy legs,but a very lacked of hair chest.
My 2 grandmothers had no hair on their bodies,same about my mother,but my sister is quite hairy.

 

[LeBrok]

What about communist countries,they gave hormones to animals also?
Neither of my 2 grand fathers had too hairy legs,but I got quite hairy legs,but a very lacked of hair chest.
My 2 grandmothers had no hair on their bodies,same about my mother,but my sister is quite hairy.

I don't think the communist countries had money for hormones, but I've read somewhere that antibiotics were very popular and used without control, some of these antibiotics had a function as growth accelerator. I'm not sure how it is possible but this was a reason they were used as such.

Here is article of an expert, in Polish though.
http://www.wysokieobcasy.pl/wysokie...1,Kurczaki_w_Polsce_sa_dobrze_traktowane.html

But if it can happen that such a breeder of poultry feed is added to the growth boosters, for example. Hormones?


No. Since the early 90s, since I picked up the iron curtain, poultry production in Poland has changed substantially. In communist times in Poland we had chickens, which slowly grew, because there was no foreign exchange for importation of new genetic lines. Then chicken ate a lot of chicken feed and grew slowly - in eight weeks achieved weight to 1.6 kg. It was economic disaster, so some added some growth accelerators. Regarding same hormones, I do not know any manufacturer who did it. Anyway, veterinarians say that hormones administered in feed are ineffective because too quickly destroyed, and can not imagine doing injections to chickens. Therefore rather there were certain antibiotics that acted as growth promoters added to the chicken feed.

 

[andrewqazx]

"I saw statistics though showing that people in Scandinavia are as hairy as west Asians though. Something weird I've noticed is that there's only a handful of people(out of over 1,000 guys) in my school who can grow facial hair and or hair on their cheeks." i was able to grow a beard and hair on my cheeks in high school and my paternal great great grandfather was from sweden (got hairiness from my dad)