I'm turning feminese, I'm turning feminese, I really think so

Head nod to I'm Turning Japanese by the Vapors.

I almost ignored this because I despise studies which try to show profound but spurious biological differences based on political orientations.  It is trite even though there may be some marginal underlying empirical reality.  

From Study: Testosterone Treatment Turns Democrat Voters More Conservative by Natalie Winters.  It plays to multiple not implausible biases against the milquetoast emo liberal and for the manly man.  It of course correlates with the well documented tendency in the US and other countries for men to vote for the more traditional or conservative parties while women favor more liberal or social parties.

But is it really true?  Could electoral success depend on the administration of testosterone?  The study seems from a credible source.

The study – Testosterone Administration Induces A Red Shift in Democrats – was published on November 14th, 2021 by Professor Paul Zak, the Director of the Center for Neuroeconomics Studies at Claremont Graduate University.

“His research has made a substantial impact in explaining the variation in human social behaviors and has been cited by other scholars over 18,000 times placing in the top 0.3% of all scholars,” explains his professional biography.

So possibly real.  What about the sample size? 

Zak’s latest findings reveal a link between testosterone levels and political preference through analyzing 136 voting-age males throughout the 2012 election season.

OK.  No point in proceeding.  Too small a sample size to be meaningful.  

I did scan the rest of the article and don't necessarily disagree with the findings.  I simply don't see any reason to have much confidence that the study findings are reliable.

The article makes mention of a different issue which I have seen widely reported in recent years, here and abroad.

The study comes amidst an ongoing discussion about declining testosterone levels

I am not overconfident that this purported trend is real but there does seem to be some credible evidence to support the claim. 

I am ready to dismiss the first article, but then I also saw this.  From Puberty Starts Earlier Than It Used To. No One Knows Why.  Some girls are starting to develop breasts as early as age 6 or 7. by Azeen Ghorayshi.  The subheading is Researchers are studying the role of obesity, chemicals and stress.

Declining testosterone and rising estrogen levels perhaps both driven by increasing trace chemicals in the environment.  

If true, that would certainly have some interesting implications both for politics, governance and decision-making.  

Is it true?  Maybe, the jury is out but it is something to keep in mind when we hear repeated claims about polarization and such arguments.  Maybe there is something else causing that polarization and not just the existence of competing ideas.