BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Science & Gender: Fire Ants.

 
 
grant
16:18 / 05.07.05
I just read this interesting thing in Nature about fire ants.

Apparently, there are some very odd issues around fire ant models of gender and reproduction. In essence, the female ants create nothing but clones of themselves, while the males come along, gank the female DNA out of the eggs they find and replace it with male DNA -- making clones of *themselves*.

The two populations, male and female, are genetically distinct. By modern definitions, that means they're actually two different species of ant, a male species and a female species.

It really seems like there's a way to use this as a postmodern model for gender, but I'm not sure exactly how.

It also seems directly relevant to the prior discussion of scientific concepts of gender -- which sort of devolved into people discussing a possible future in which the ladies don't need the gentlemen to create beautiful little babies.

And here it's going on already....
 
 
sine
19:51 / 05.07.05
This is why its more important than ever for you to keep your beard Grant - species signifier.
 
 
Jack Denfeld
20:05 / 05.07.05
Does that mean that the male fire ant could go extinct and the female fire ant would live on?
 
 
grant
20:21 / 05.07.05
Yep.

That's exactly what it means.
 
 
Cat Chant
09:48 / 06.07.05
Wow. So male fire ants could be from Mars, and female fire ants could be from Venus?

What I mean to say is I don't know about postmodern, but this is one of the ways in which human sex/gender is conceptualized already, in pop culture and, I think, sometimes in evolutionary biology too. I looked at a terrible book in a bookshop (and I keep referring to it - I really have to find out who wrote it and what it's called) recently which was talking about mitochondrial DNA (or something - if this sounds even vaguely familiar to anyone, i would really appreciate some information so I can actually inform myself about this properly rather than making these vague and stupid posts) and asserting that female humans are genetically antagonistic to maleness - the writer was saying that male homosexuality was caused by the desire of the mitochondrial DNA that there not be any male humans, so if a woman is unlucky enough to conceive a boy baby, on some selfish-gene-type level a process is activated which makes the boy baby gay, so that at least he won't have any offspring (and thus he doesn't count evolutionarily). So models of the genetic distinctness between men and women are starting to emerge, just as people raised on Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus get old enough to be funded to do research...
 
 
Jack Denfeld
16:01 / 06.07.05
Do the girl ants even need the boy ants then? Can the girl ants defend themselves and do all the work? If they can, it does make the males like parasites doesn't it?

But if the males serve a purpose, it's symbiotic?
 
 
skolld
17:28 / 06.07.05
according to the article it is both.
The queen lays two types of egg, one is meant to go unfertilized and become a queen clone. The other eggs are meant to be fertilized and become sterile workers. So the male does serve a purpose. however it appears that on some occasions of fertilization, that the male DNA destroys the female DNA and makes a clone of itself.
To go so far as to say they are two distinct species is just wishful thinking on the part of gender studies people i think.
 
 
grant
18:42 / 06.07.05
Well, the guy in charge of the study wasn't actually looking at gender differences, just reproductive strategies -- and he's the guy who brought up the species thing.
 
  
Add Your Reply