#bone posting

I've also found other small animal bones, beer cans, glass bottles, tractor panel and more

@bliss-bliss-bliss-bliss you got the spirit of scoring: looking at some specific aspects of the bones that are used as sex indicators, then estimating if they fall more on the F side of things, on the M, the degree to which they are F and M, or whether they are in the exact middle. Then you consider all the different traits together to estimate the sex of the bone, and then all the bones together to give a final estimate for the skeleton. Not all bones are sex indicators (phalanges, are useless in this regard, for example) and some of them are more reliable than others (the pelvis wins over the mandible), so you have to keep that in mind (also single traits are more reliable than others so that is an ulterior complication yay!). Another thing that can complicate the process (aside from fragmentation or absence of bones) is that most of the traits have to be scored on the basis of morphology, which is to some extent described subjectively. For example, one of the traits of the cranium is the supraorbital margin (the upper margin of your eyesocket), which is sharper in females than in males. So you have to look at something and be like "ok so is this sharp? How sharp it is?" and then score it and...yeah, you need experience and references to know when something is sharper than something else. That's also why there are guides about this sort of thing and plastic casts. I can get more in-depth about the traits that are used for each bone, but it is a lot and it varies slightly depending on methods. To give you an idea, this is an image from "Recommendations for age and sex diagnoses of skeletons. (1980). Journal of Human Evolution, 9(7), 517,IN1,533-532,IN3,549". These are some (not even all!) of the characteristics used in the WEA method, which is quite old and was critiqued in some regards (but it is still used sometimes).

I was looking for the cool cranium pics, but I can't find them right now, so here, have an os coxa. Now, in the drawing, the differences are very clear, but as you can imagine reality is not going to play by idealisation rules. Some os coxa fit the picture perfectly, most don't and you have to deal with it.

The last thing that I want to mention, scoring methods exist also for age and age estimation is also an important part of the skeletal analysis. Age is really useful to create categories and plays an important role in many many different areas of research, from pathologies to activity and occupation, to societal structures and roles. However, I have yet to see someone try to restrict access to fundamental medical cures and nursing homes on the basis that "yOu dON't hAve tHe rIghT sk5leTal Bi0loGicaL struCtUrE!" and "you aRe deNyinG tHe orDer 0f NatuRe if YoU sAy tHat skEleTal aGe InDicaTorS aRe n0t str8fOrwArd aNd tHat th5re iS m0Re tHan 0Ne wAy tO be Old!1!1"

Bones are good! Never been better! Experiencing thoughts on characters and reblogging silly posts. No achey joints!!

- Shark teeth: covered in sand and fine with it

- Raccoon teeth: quietly missing the jawbone i saw them on

- deer teeth: in need of fillings

- Rabbit bone: permanently covered in mud. Won the card game against the raccoon teeth.

- Deer antler: Nervous about the little clown staring at it.

- Pile of bones in the woods: Covered in moss, slowly being eroded by the rain.

Today is a no-bones day for me. :[

Whole skeleton is aching like it’s ready to hatch.

My other bones are great though!

- Jar of shark teeth: Thriving

- Deer teeth: Vibing

- Rabbit bone: Sitting still and being calm :]

- Deer antler: Gently being warmed by my lamp

- Raccoon teeth: living dangerously

- Pile in the woods: ??? (Free, perhaps.)