We've had many conversations on this forum that included genetics even when they were on OTHER topics. In a "For females Only" thread we discussed physical attributes acquired ranging from full eyebrows to light or dark hair/eyes. In some of the picture threads, we discussed many of these same things. In other threads, we've discussed the differences in our children or siblings. In the thread originally discussing a weirdo with a squirt-gun, we discussed genetic predispositions towards sexual orientation, and in the Reincarnation thread, we find ourselves discussing genetics once again.

There's no question in my mind that we are a product of our genes and the results are a strange roll of the dice. We have no control over our physical attributes, and perhaps have only limited control over the other attributes passed to us, but how is it that some of us are peacocks in early childhood that become hedgehogs in adulthood, or are ugly ducklings as children that develop into beautiful swans?

Do these genetic predispositions influence the decisions we make in life? If so, to what extent? Are we to be forever envious of the traits of others that we feel got a better "shake"? If so, WHY? It's easy to believe that a person with physical attributes on the plain side might spend more time in reflection of spiritual pursuits or understanding, yet we see countless examples of people with both attractive physical attributes and attractive personalities. Were these folks simply given genes that contributed to BOTH?

Have I asked enough questions yet to warrant a reply? [grin]

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 24, 2000

Answers

If it's true that "We have no control over our physical attributes", then why has every Playmate of the Month for the past decade had *identical* tits, and every one of them outside the range of human variation?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), May 24, 2000.

Flint: LOL, I believe they are called 'implants'

(shaking head cuz i dont have no implants, but wishing i did)

Uh oh, I can see where this is gonna go. :-)

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), May 24, 2000.

Anita,

I disagree. I have yet to meet "countless" physically attractive people with attractive personalities. In my experience, there is absolutely no correlation between physical beauty and any other personality characteristics. I have met beautiful women who were delightful... and those who were spoiled children.

Whatever our "personality," every mature adult is responsible for his or her decisions. At some point, we must transcend nature and nurture. To me, this is the essence of being human... that we can rise above our genetic material and environment.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), May 24, 2000.

Flint:

I suspect it's a prerequisite of Playboy to have breasts that surpass average. I'd disagree with Consumer on assuming implants. AFAIK, the implant phenomenon is still relatively rare. My daughter's friend's mother [still following?] applied for a job at a local bar/restaurant known for the attractiveness of the waitresses. She was turned down because her breasts weren't large enough.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 24, 2000.

Ken:

I don't think I said there was a CORRELLATION between physical attractiveness and personality. I think what I said was that we ASSUME that nurturing of the personality occurs when physical attributes aren't so profound, which is a gross exaggeration. I'll gladly replace the term COUNTLESS with SOME.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 24, 2000.

Anita,

Do you think that genetics plays any role in what physical characteristics we seek in a partner. Although I find all ladies attractive, I'm particularly attracted to ladies with dark hair and dark eyes. Why? I can find no obvious explanation.

Regarding boobs, although some guys are really fixated on big ones, many of us are happy with what nature gave you. There is some risk of future problems with implants, so why risk it unless you are really flat? Even then, I "wrestled" with a couple of fairly flat gals and they were plenty of fun and I went back for more. If all that matters to a guy is big boobs, then he's a boob himself. Tell him to take a hike!

We love you all, the long and the short and the tall!

-- Bachelor (bachelor@love.ya.ladies), May 24, 2000.

Consumer:

Count your blessings for the body you were given. You may decide to accept HRT soon, and [trust me] you will MUCH prefer the development that turns a 34B into a 38C to that which turns a 38C into a 64D. In fact, if you make this your choice, you may hear similar words to those uttered by Itchie in Fried Green Tomatoes. "How many of them there hormones are you takin'?"

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 24, 2000.

Ken,

Physically attractive people (due to genetics) can also be assholes. (due to genetics) Just because the genes were kind to the outer package does not mean that the same genetic pool was kind to the inner package.

Ted Bundy anyone?

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), May 25, 2000.

There is a correlation between physical attractiveness and perceived intelligence, niceness, etc. There have been numerous studies that have had people rate subjects with a description of their work and/or life, the only variable being the picture attached to the summary. Invariably, the more attractive were rated higher than the less attractive with the same characteristics.

We also have a built-in predisposition to judge attractiveness by symmetry. The more symmetrical your facial features, the more attractive. If you cover half the face of a movie star, man or woman, and then cover the other half after looking at the first half, you'll find they are almost perfectly symmetrical. Everything else is secondary to this one characteristic when it comes to who is rated as attractive.

BTW, the least symmetrical face found during one study was Alfred E Neuman, the cartoon character from Mad Magazine.

-- Jim Cooke (JJCooke@yahoo.com), May 25, 2000.

Bachelor:

Of course I do. If I hadn't had long legs, I'm quite sure I wouldn't be sharing a bed with the man I am today. [Kindof brings up images of a spider, dontcha think?] Regarding breasts, it appears that men who concentrate on legs care little about breast size. Heh. Should I say this in public? [Is that you, Lilith?] The HRT develops one further in ALL womanly areas. Where I once had long, stick-like legs, I now have long, shapely legs. Where I once had an acceptable butt for my thin body, I now have one that corresponds more with the overall picture, and it seems that a concentration on legs by one's mate extends to the upper portion of those legs. [grin]

So where's the downside? There's ALWAYS a downside. 1) The HRT is apparently similar in design to replacement hormones offered to men that opt for sex-change operations. I don't know this to be fact, but how else can I explain the rapid changes I've experienced? 2) It's downright uncomfortable finally having a more "normal" sized body when one is accustomed to being slim-jim. 3)While a more "Ruebenesk[sp]?" figure may have been desirable in ancient times, it's a lot more fun doing leg-lifts and sit-ups in a prophylactic way than it is in a remediation way.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 25, 2000.

Jim:

I've seen those studies, and I believe EVERY word. [I didn't know about Neuman, however. What a laugh.]

My oldest daughter was born beautiful. At 14 months the Doberman I mentioned in another thread ripped a hole in her forehead, hit her right cheek on the way down, and the bottom of HIS jaw caught HER in HER jaw. She spent hours in an operating room while a plastic surgeon attempted to put her face back together again.

She was seemingly unaffected by this ordeal, and went merrily on her way as a happy child UNTIL she started school. At school she was referenced as "scar-face." When her permanent teeth replaced the temporaries, they slightly protruded, offering the "scar-faced bucky" label. All of this is behind her now, as the forehead scar moved into her hairline, braces controlled her teeth, and the remaining scars on her cheeks are hidden by well-applied makeup [although now that I think of it, I don't notice those when she's sans make-up.]

Her life was CERTAINLY harder than that of her younger sister. It wasn't until 2 years or so ago that she was offered a position as "door-girl" for a local club because the owner wanted to attract more men by placing a pretty girl at the door. This "proposal" allowed her to realize that she was no longer scar-faced bucky, but a beautiful young lady. Suddenly she changed. Where she'd not previously been interested in school, she enrolled in college. Her self-esteem enabled her to "meet the criteria for the attractive". She participated more in class, thereby drawing the attention of her professors. In turn, the professors treated her differently than the teachers had in previous years.

This explanation is a form of saying that it isn't so much the genetic role that reinforces society to accept or dismiss folks, but how they see themselves.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 25, 2000.

Anita,

I'm sorry to hear about your daughter. I hope you went after the doberman's owner, not that money, in and of itself, is much consolation.

These are totally un-scientific personal observations, but here goes:

Let me say first that beauty is highly subjective. I've met people who were physically very attractive (by current standards -- remember, they change!), but who were ugly because of their personalities. The opposite has also been true.

But speaking in general, I agree on the ugly-duckling/swan thing, and I've often found the opposite to be true there as well.

When I was a kid, one of the girls at school looked like Annette Funicello by the time she was 12 years old -- cat eyes, a playmate's body, you name it. Absolutely ADORABLE.

When I saw her again a few years ago, she wasn't overweight, nor had she "let herself go," so to speak -- it's just that those same angles and curves that had made her a precocious beauty had, over the years, sharpened and hardened. She wasn't pretty at all.

Likewise with my best (male) friend from school. All the women loved him; he had that Paul McCartney face and big smile. I saw him again a few years ago and didn't even recognize him at first. He had uglied up pretty badly. :)

I'm more interested in how we perceive "beauty" and how we interact with it. For one thing, the standards DO change. 400 years ago, if you didn't weigh at least an eighth of a ton, no man would have found you truly "beautiful." [g]

Me? I'm personally not attracted to skinny girls (and it's frustrating to me that Hollywood is so fascinated with them right now). My idea of "classic" beauty would be a Marilyn Monroe, an Adrienne Barbeaux or a Cheryl Ladd; the Darryl Hannahs and Helen Hunts are sticks, as far as I'm concerned.

There are genetic predispositions toward all sorts of things. I have my mother's chin and quite British nose. (You'll have to ask Sandy if it looks good on me[g]).

My personal opinion is that women don't really become truly beautiful until they're over 30. (Have to give the genes time to work, y'know.)

:)

-- Stephen M. Poole, CET (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), May 25, 2000.

Anita, I think implants are much more common than you indicate, at least based on "geographic location". Case in point: I had to make an appointment for a mammogram shortly after I moved here. The first question I was asked over the phone (before "do you have insurance" and "what is your name") was "do you have implants".

I understand it to be a similar situation in LA.

I'll get back to you later on the original question.

-- Patricia (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), May 25, 2000.

Interesting, Patricia. I only knew one woman in my lifetime who got implants. I also only know one who got the breast reduction surgery.

What about some other traits? I thought I was a klutz because I'd never had ballet lessons [combined with a tall body]. I've actually watched men walk and if they didn't trip at least once, I considered them undesirable. [Who needs contrast?] Knowing I was a klutz, I made a point of including ballet, gymnastics, etc. in the lives of my kids. It didn't help. Two out of three have the klutz gene. My daughter and I were discussing this the other day after she ran into a wall. I said, "I really wish I could say I wasn't responsible for that." She said that her roommate remarked, "Do you realize that you've hurt yourself 9 times just on the way to the pool from the house?"

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 25, 2000.

Jeez Anita, are we related or something? Yeah, I was born with the "klutz" gene, though neither of my parents has it; nor does my brother. I think I'm the first in the entire lineage. I'm the only person I know who's fallen UP an ESCALATOR (and I have the scars to prove it). I broke my foot ..... walking out of a ladies room. When I go on vacation every year to Mexico, it's always a matter of "where did she fall THIS time" (fell off a curb once and twisted my ankle to the point of unrecognition). I trip over things that aren't there (and SO has seen this; hey, it's good for Comic Relief). Yet I have always been able to dance (took all those lessons you mentioned, and more). I can drive better than most I know and I was always good at sports. I'm just a danger when I *WALK*. I suppose that's a good thing for humanity, unless they happen to be walking down the same street at the same time.

-- Patricia (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), May 25, 2000.

Anita,

I'd say you've done pretty well for a "klutz". Glad to hear that your daughter got past the scar biz.

Although I guess I'd have to admit to being a leg man, I've always been attracted by a lady's overall balance of proportions.

I'm with ya, love the proportional leg-lifts and indoor exercise!

-- Bachelor (bachelor@love.ya.ladies), May 25, 2000.

Patricia:

Indeed it's a comic curse. We laugh about it regularly around here. I think I met SO years back when he caught me when I tripped on an ant or something equally miniscule. He tripped almost immediately thereafter, so I was able to return the favor.

I met my match, however, when I lived in an apartment complex in a Chicago suburb. Across the parking lot was a somewhat middle-aged black man who was VERY strange looking [which euphemistically means he was probably the ugliest looking man I've ever met.] It went beyond physical characteristics. He was downright spastic. I don't know whether he was spastic in childhood or whether he simply had a "superior" klutz gene that compounded this feature, but by the time I'd met him he'd already been hit by cars on THREE separate occasions. I have an aunt who was born with cerebral palsy, so I understand spastic. She was graceful in comparison.

One day we got to talking and when he learned that I was once a member of the SDS, he shared that he was once a member of the Black Panthers. We talked quite a while and he said he'd drop off some free tickets to an upcoming baseball game. That evening there was a knock on the door and the kids looked through the peephole and reported on a VERY strange looking man. I said, "That would be Patrick. Let him in." He gave me the baseball tickets and I told him I had to walk to the store and invited him to walk along. He did quite well on the way to the store, but on the way home, a poltergeist reached out and pulled his legs out from under him. [grin] He laid splayed on the ground, glasses three feet ahead of him [lenses popped out]. I helped him up and he held my groceries while I popped the lenses back into his glasses.

On another thread I mentioned a neighbor who visited only when she was drunk. She lived across the hall from Patrick. On one of her visits she shared how Patrick had fallen down the stairs in her building. Patrick didn't fall down stairs like other people. By the time he fell to the second floor from the third, his attempts at regaining balance failed and he slipped and flipped over the bannister to land on the first floor.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 25, 2000.

Two points...

First, I think our culture makes far too much out of physical attractiveness. It's sad, even pathetic, that the average person can name at least one "supermodel" and not one Nobel prize winner.

Second, at most genes influence personality, as does environment. I'm not sure there is any proven scientific basis for the theory personality is "driven" by genes. (Perhaps someone can check with the human genome project and find out if they have isolated the "cheerleader" gene).

Genetic determinism? Bah, humbug.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), May 25, 2000.

Ken,

I agree with you. I suspect that genes affect basic predispositions, but cheerleader genes? Baloney! I also found Jim's references to the studies on facial symmetry interesting.

I have always suspected that people who were more attractive as children and teenagers tend to develop their personalities in ways that reflect the frequent attention they got while growing up, whereas those who were more average or more plain looking or klutzy tend to develop more personality depth and emphasize education and achievement. What are your thoughts on this?

I've heard it said that in California, the further north you go, the more brains and less blondes you find. Having lived in both San Diego and the SF Bay area, I certainly agree. Of course maybe having Stanford and UC Berkeley around might have something to do with this.

-- Flash (flash@SV.today.too), May 25, 2000.

Ken:

I'm not following here. What is a "cheerleader" gene? Before you speak, I might mention that daughter #2 was a cheerleader for her junior-high school. She was a "natural" in gymnastics [unlike her older sister], and when the gymnastics club changed hands, we decided we didn't like the new owners. Cheerleading for HER was an extension of gymnastics. She could do 10 back-flips followed by splits, and oftentimes did just for exercise and entertainment. Her coach in cheerleading demanded the same discipline and training of her gymnastics coach. She LIVED to use her body.

It appeared to ME that daughter #2's ability to use her body was due to her body slowly changing. She was one of those kids who could wear the same shoes for 3 years in a row while others complained that their kids outgrew shoes in 3 months. Like many gymnasts, she didn't have rapid growth spurts. She was quite short until about age 16 when she grew to 5'8". In contrast, her sister had bursts of growth earlier. She was probably about 5'5" by the time she was 13, yet never grew taller later. I would have had problems with gymnastics myself, as I went from 4'11" to 5'8" in one summer when I was 13. That was one PAINFUL summer. I was convinced I had polio or something; my legs REALLY hurt. The point I'm trying to make is that people who have expectations of their bodies are rewarded when those bodies stay the same, while others simply fall off the high-beam because the body they had last week isn't the same one they have today. How does practice make perfect when the size of the tool keeps changing?

Are these bodily changes environmentally produced? WHAT are you saying?

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 25, 2000.

Anita, your daughter walking into a wall and her "klutz" gene gave me a good belly laugh for the day! Thanks for sharing that!

A quick genetic tale: Having spent my teen years playing sports and always being considered "one of the guys" by the boys, I tried to sway my daughter into more feminine persuits. I offered her dance lessons, gymnastics, cheer, figure skating and piano. I begged her to try them. She asked for (demanded) Karate, Softball, Football, and Ice Hockey. She eventually won out. The fact that she chose those sports over the more female endeavers tells me there is something genetic going on here. Another Tomboy rolls off the Ritter assembly line.

Back on topic: I am sure people are judged first by their looks before anything else. This is part of what makes discussion groups on the internet enlightening...people finally listen to your words first, no preconceived notions of who you are. I try not to judge the book by it's cover, but it just happens sometimes. It's hard to rid yourself of subconcious bias. I commenly expect very beautiful women to be airheaded or mean...and very handsome men to be egotistical or aloof. I gravitate towards "average" looking people every time. I'm sure this habit has made me miss out on perfectly wonderful people. I can't even figure out where I got those notions from...

-- kritter (kritter@adelphia.net), May 25, 2000.

Here is something to think about. What about the occurence of little people by otherwise normal sized people? Some have never had the history in their family of little people, but the curious mix of the parent genes from two supposedly unrelated people results in little people.

And also, consider the fact that little people have [i don't recall how common it is] normal sized children.

Of course we are dealing with recessive and dominate genes here, but it is interesting to me that two otherwise normal people, with no family history of little people manage to have little people as off-spring.... the joining of two with the recessive gene?

And have you noticed the frequency of [normal height]parents to be shorter than their adult children? Thru each generation?

Seems that we are getting taller as a race as time goes on.

-- Little people, gotta love 'em! (tomthumb@lilliput.comm), May 25, 2000.

Ken:

I did a search for you and didn't turn up a "cheerleader gene". You might want to try yourself at Genome Data Base

It is good to see that you have expanded your absolute expertise from economics to genetics. :^)

From the silent geneticist.

Best wishes,,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), May 25, 2000.

I was making a joke, people! Perhaps sense of humor is genetic?

The physical form (and abilities) are largely inherited... and greatly influenced by environment. We see evidence of what malnutrition and poor health care can do in the African nations.

With the best environment and training in the world, I could have never been a world class sprinter. Nor could I have been the male version of a "supermodel." In the game of genetic poker, I did not draw a royal flush... nor do the vast majority of people.

As an aside, we could have this same discussion about race. How does race effect development? Is it possible to separate the genetics of race from the culture of race? Does one's race influence one's perspective on race... after all, skin color is just a genetic trait.

Anita, I found you easier to read (and less testy) discussing Y2K. First, did you really think I meant there was a genetic marker that predisposed individuals to like pom poms and school fight songs? (laughter) Second, as noted above physical growth can be profoundly influenced by environment, however, the phenomena of human growth to maturity is governed largely by genetics.

The reaction to this natural process is chosen by an individual. Barring a chemical imbalance in the brain, personality and attitude are self determined. If you have growth pains in your legs, you can choose to bear the pain without surliness. Or you can choose to act poorly because you happen to be in pain.

I enjoy watching small town high school athletics. The vast majority of these athletes have no chance of competing at even the college level. They still work hard, train and occasionally do something heroic... all with rather average genetic material. On the other extreme, I see extraordinary physical specimens who make millions of dollars playing games... and then behave quite badly.

If you want to see what happens when society idolizes the physical form, look at the behavior of professional athletes. What happens when an individual is treated as exempt from the rules of civil society? Have some O.J.

I would prefer a society where inviduals are respected for earned accomplishments... not just the accident of great genes. Of course, this is America where education takes a back seat to entertainment. Far more people read "People" and gaze at the list of the world's "most beautiful" people than read literature.

There is something disheartening (and scary) about the idea of genetic determinism. It takes us into the realm of eugenics... and it's not a neighborhood I like. Of all the advances of man, the most frightening to me is our ability to wield the genetic hammer. Have we matured enough as a society to choose our children... height, weight, hair color, etc? How much to breed a super athlete? How long before we dabble in creating a better soldier?

I'd rather think all of us have the seeds of greatness within us.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), May 25, 2000.

I don't know about any "cheerleader gene" but I do know that I have the "wanna humpa cheerleader gene".

And, while I agree that both nature and nurture play a role in personality formation, I have seen studies that have concluded genetics may play a much more significant role in our personality traits than was first suspected. Most of the interesting stuff came from studies of twins who had been separated through adoption.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), May 25, 2000.

>>There is some risk of future problems with implants, so why risk it unless you are really flat?

Why risk it at all? Women who are basically flat will *never* sag. Mmmmm. I like thinking long term. Back to work...

-- (kb8um8@yahoo.com), May 25, 2000.

For those who are genetically programmed for masochistic reading--

EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), May 25, 2000.

I'm not following here. What is a "cheerleader" gene? Before you speak, I might mention that daughter #2 was a cheerleader for her junior high school.

Come on Anita, that isn't fair. If you were offended by his stereotyping Cheerleaders because of your daughter you should have come right out and said so. Yes it is a common thing for people to do, stereotype others, kinda like you did about your black neighbor being spastic. My brother has cerebral Palsy and I do not feel the need to publicly correct people who use the term spastic where it does comes off as a derogatory charicterization.

We need to allow others to express their opinions without the fear of recrimination or they will not feel comfortable expressing anything at all and that will be our loss. We all see the world out of different eyes, and except for blatant derogatory remarks, all should be allowed a little lattitude.

Back to the point, like the attitude that blondes are air heads have been propagated, so has the idea of cheerleaders.

Unfortunatly all to often those who prove the stereotype correct are far more visible than those who prove otherwise.

This goes back to my harping on the media.

As long as these stereotypes are accepted by the general public they will continue.

Now instead of just bitching about the media, I will also offer somewhat of a solution.

When you see a movie, TV show or advertisement (print or electronic), find the address of the company being represented and let them know how you feel about it. They understand for each person who contacts them, there are a huge number who feel the same way who do not contact them.

Also people who see pretty children and tell the child they are pretty are part of the problem of those children growing up thinking all they need to be is "pretty". If they are told they are smart and are complimented on things they have control over instead of how they look, which they do not have control over, then they will put an effort towards non superficial accomplishment. It is sad when they get less positive reinforcement for the things they accomplish than for their looks.

And if we could only get rid of Barbie.

I know...I know... a lot of girls grow up with Barbie and are just fine, but a lot are not. Her shape being a model of which they are constantly subjected to can cause negative feelings about their own bodies.

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), May 25, 2000.

Good post, Cherri.

It's indeed a looks-ist world - attitudes ABOUT looks are what I see.. Flint in a thread discussed his observation that "pretty girls play by different rules" - and it's so often true. Even if they don't want to play this game, it's expected. It can take a long time for a teenage girl to sort this tyranny out, when she's on either end of it. Not that boys are immune either, but studies have shown that girls have much more dramatic personality disturbances for the worse, once they hit puberty, as compared to boys. She learns to switch gears and be "at the effect" of her environment. And a pretty girl is unlikely to be taken seriously if she reacts negatively to this "problem"!- as I did as a teenager. Why should she not react with confusion? We pick up these subliminal messages early, then spend our adulthood sorting them out.

Beyond a certain genetic thing going on where good looks does help propagate the species, I think this society is nuts in our obsession with it. Plenty of other healthy qualities contribute to survival too. Primitive man didn't have mirrors, TV and print advertising, so this extent of it can't be said to be in our genes. Fortunately, most of us grow up and learn to take it all with a grain of salt, but the message is still there, as soon as kids are old enough to start picking it up.

-- Debbie (dbspence@usa.net), May 26, 2000.

Interesting responses. I think I can address both Cherri and Ken in the following: I honestly didn't KNOW what Ken meant, but I thought it could be 1 of 3 things: 1) He saw cheerleading as simply a function of cheering a team on with a few basic moves and a few jumps [like my high-school cheerleading team] 2) He saw it as a beauty contest, 3) He has sour grapes about cheerleading perhaps due to a personal experience. Certainly, if he saw it as 1), I would agree that genetics play no role, but I had to first explain MY experience with cheerleading wherein the girls engaged in gymnastic feats for exhibition and competitive meets.

I apologize, Cherri, if you see/saw the term spastic a derogative term when applied to folks with the klutz gene. As I said, my aunt has Cerebral Palsy as well, and if anyone called HER spastic, I'd take great offense. However, Patrick and I had the same klutz gene so neither he nor I saw anything derogatory in the term. My friends in high-school affectionately called me "spas" when I'd trip over nothing. My ex-husband did as well. Much like Patricia's experience, it was comic relief.

Regarding genetic studies, I find them exciting. Science has moved too slowly for my patience level. I want answers in MY lifetime. I enjoy following the studies and each one brings more evidence that our genes are responsible for many more traits than we thought. I could see three separate personalities with my three kids from infancy. Certainly environmental factors, including birth order, what parents learned between each child, etc. play a role as well.

I could very well speak less clearly on topics off Y2k, Ken. I stuck pretty much to technical topics on Y2k. I'm not even sure I ever responded to any of your posts there. It could be, however, that when all is said and done, the only thing we ever agreed on was the outcome of Y2k.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 26, 2000.

Good article, Lars. I had a bit of trouble following all the players, but it brought back fond memories of sociology classes. I hadn't thought of Margaret Mead in YEARS. It also pointed to genetic studies that had been done 20-30 years ago, the results of which are still thrown around as though people knew something at that time. Medical research hasn't progressed much farther than genetic research, but at least we're not still using leaches and shock treatment.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 26, 2000.

>>There is some risk of future problems with implants, so why risk it unless you are really flat? Why risk it at all? Women who are basically flat will *never* sag. Mmmmm. I like thinking long term. Back to work...

-- (kb8um8@yahoo.com), May 25, 2000.

KB8: Agreed, I'll never have sag problem..Anita: how'd ya know..lol

OT a lil now, I had a friend who just recently had the implant thing saw her in dressing room of dept store, she told me she had surgery.

(Now this to me is a WOMAN's thing )so I asked if I could see (getting bolder in my old age!!) She proceeded to show me. I must admitt, I was horrified. She is all scarred up and looks like Frankenstein on her breast region. I was in shock and didnt know what to say. All I could do was stare in disbelief. I would NEVER have that done to my body. So I'm a lil flat, so what? Me will be happy w/what God gave me.

sorry to be 'off topic', just had to speak my mind.

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), May 26, 2000.

>>Me will be happy w/what God gave me

Good for you, Consumer! And have a safe Memorial Day. I'll be hanging around the house weeding and grilling, although I won't be grilling what I'm weeding...

-- (kb8um8@yahoo.com), May 26, 2000.

k8, LOL,again. why not grill what your weeding? (eg) Thanks I'll be attending family thing, on sunday, I will grill the best BBQ ribs on the West Side along w/some bratwurst on Monday!!!

LOL reminded me of hee haw "hey granpa whats for dinner?" To all here, have a safe memorial day as well.

Sheesh, at work, clock watching only 2:35 dog-gone it....wishing I was at home.

no yard work, done, pool almost finished and house clean....YEEE HAAA

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), May 26, 2000.

Off topic again but at least I didn't start it this time :-)

Patricia you mentioned L.A. and it's true. Never attracted to the idea of implants (I'm happy as a B), in health-club locker rooms around L.A. I've seen enough bad implant jobs to turn me off of it forever - they are so obvious, with a rock-hard, fake look. (Well, at least the obvious ones are obvious....) Maybe the technology has gotten better lately? but no thanks. "Large enough for what?" is the relevant question.

I say spend the money on the important stuff - like here in L.A., a nose job. :^) <-- she needs one.

-- Debbie (dbspence@usa.net), May 26, 2000.

Unc, loved your response to cheerleaders! :)

Anita, who cares if we get the ugly gene or not? Got to agree with Ken. Americans spend way to much time and $ on their appearance. Now if you're talking that old question of environment versus genes I'll put my two cents in. Our environment determines our personality more than our genes. Our genes only gives insight to our physical including health. How we look doesn't define how we behave.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 26, 2000.

Anita,

I apologize, Cherri, if you see/saw the term spastic a derogative term when applied to folks with the klutz gene. As I said, my aunt has Cerebral Palsy as well, and if anyone called HER spastic, I'd take great offense.

No, I apologise, I didn't get across what I was trying to say, a pretty common problem I have :o)

What I meant was, although spaz etc is used to describe certain attributes, in the same way a "cheerleader" is used to describe certain negitive female attributes, people do use them in their daily life and I accept this as a fact of life, and am not offended by others useing it. At least when it is not used against a spastic person in a hurtful manner.

I felt that you were being oversensitive about the cheerleader charicturization as it may have felt like it was directed towards your daugher. My letting you know about the spastic thing was to try to show you that his remark about cheerleaders was not intended to offend anyone personally as your spastic remarks were not meant to do so and I did not take them to be.

I certainly do not have the gift of words~~~ :o(

I hope you can understand what I'm trying to say.

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), May 28, 2000.

in the same way a "cheerleader" is used to describe certain negitive female attributes

Without a doubt a female comment. From a guy's perspective "cheerleader" genes are a good thing, attractive, bubbly, and can do splits.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), May 28, 2000.

Thanks, Cherri. I think a lot of us are having difficulties expressing ourselves. To be honest, I didn't know the term cheerleader was used to stereotype women. It's serious business here in Texas. You might have heard of the Texas Cheerleader Mom case.

Maria: It goes way beyond the ugly gene, IMO. Spelling ability is an inherited trait. Some folks can visualize a word in their head and others just can't. My oldest can't spell correctly. Her father couldn't either. Every week, I'd put her spelling words into an old TI99 my dad had given me and she'd listen while the computer said the word, type it in, etc. I changed the "reward" sounds each week just to keep her interested. She studied and studied, and MAYBE she'd get 100 on her tests, but a week later she'd be spelling the same words incorrectly again. My second daughter could "see" the words. She flicked through HER spelling homework in just a few minutes.

Another feature is [for lack of a better word] direction-ness. Would that be orientation? My oldest daughter always knows in what direction she's going. My second daughter is more like me. If the highway sign doesn't tell us, we look to the sky and recite "rises in the East...sets in the West." Noon is a bad time for us to travel.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 28, 2000.