|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“I have heard people say, ‘I can’t help it, I am a man — I have to spill my seed,’ ” said Regan. “That’s using science to justify your bad behavior.
If there's anything that infuriates me more than this constant barrage of here's-the-latest-scientific-evidence-that-males-a re-scum articles, it's the common attitude (which I guess is supported by the attitudes of certain idiotic men - the ones they always select for quotes) that this will only make things even easier for the dudes. Never mind the fact that monogamy is the veritable bedrock of civilization, and to insinuate a greater monogamous imstinct in females is tantamount to deeming them morally superior. Oh, no - it's still in men's favor - because now we have an excuse to fool around. Poor, poor ladies - stuck with these inferior brutes.
No wonder so many people scoff at the men's movement. They're convinced that men are incapable of being hurt by anything. If all the men in the world, fed up with the bigotry that's coming at us from all directions, committed a mass suicide tomorrow, you know what they'd say? "Damn those men! As usual, they left us women here to clean up their mess."
By the way - I believe I recently read an article (maybe it was posted here, I can't remember) on the same topic. Except this article claimed that females also have advantages in being promiscuous. The thinking is that, while it's important for a mother to secure a stable provider, that doesn't mean he has to be the actual father of all her children (although he must always think he is). Just a little food for thought.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is a reason why those who major in psychology get a Bachelor of Arts degree and not a Bachelor of Science degree: because psychology ain't science.
If the methodology of the "experiment" is described correctly in the article, it is about as far from the scientific method as you can get. People listed the number of partners they would like to have in a month?? What kind of experiment is that?
The experiment was further quoted as "irrefutable" in the article, yet these "evolutionary psychologists" can't even determine whether their results were due to biological factors or sociological/anthropological ones. How in the bloody hell can the results be irrefutable if it can't even be reasonably surmised that the results are due to biological factors?
Gawd, the only thing this expermiment proves is that our higher learning institutions will give away a Ph.D. to anyone who can stumble their drunk ass into class long enough to pull a D- on a test...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday August 05, @10:47PM EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
Im actually quite stunned to see men berate this article.Gentlemen, men and women are differant particularly when it comes to sexuality,and yet here i find men using a logic created by feminists to discredit the reality pointed to in the article,namely that if there are any differances described its actually an attempt to describe one as inferior.Differances between people do not automatically describe one as inferior and one as superior,and there is nothing more inherantly "moral' about the female approach to either sexuality or relationships.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Im actually quite stunned to see men berate this article.Gentlemen, men and women are differant...Differances between people do not automatically describe one as inferior and one as superior...
I like your attitude, but I did not see that reflected in the article. I felt it was biased in favor of the traditional view of monogamy, and that these findings are something to be regarded with dismay.
My biggest issue was that it then speculated that men, armed with a scientific pass, will be only too happy to get banging away, so to speak. And I resent that implication - because whatever evolutionary advantages promiscuity may have had, I feel it's a dishonorable thing to do. Accusing men of wanting to have many partners is one thing, but accusing us of gleefully being dishonorable is another.
I take your points, Anonymous - but I just didn't get the impression that the people who researched, wrote or edited this article were approaching the material with the same attitude you have.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday August 06, @11:09AM EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
I was refering to the comments made by posters who themselves were commenting on the findings made in the study.Saying things such as"here's-the-latest-scientific-evidence-that-male s-are-scum articles" or suggesting that these findings would lead to people dismissing the mens movement since men are incapable of being hurt.My only referance to the content of the study itself was to agree men and women are differant.I would also like to add that every single scientific study ever done supports what we already no but more so it supports what all previous generations already new and thats there are reasons men and women do what they do and thats because we are men and women.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday August 06, @02:26PM EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
"Because of society’s double standard, Fisher said, women are hesitant to report their true sexual desires. "
"But she also found that women’s scores changed depending on how confident they were of remaining anonymous. In the study, both men and women had been told to hand their questionnaires to a researcher. But when women were told to deposit their answers in a locked box supervised by a researcher, their average score jumped to 1.53. And when the women took the test alone in a locked room and then deposited their answers in a locked box — ensuring privacy and anonymity — their score shot up further, to 2.04. The men’s answers did not change significantly, indicating they were less concerned about their opinions being discovered."
This is why I think the article is a biased load of bad science. The scientists themselves have found a huge error in their data, mainly that 1/2 the study group is not telling the truth. How on earth can you take seriously a study where the data is admittedly skewed? If the data is wrong, the conclusion is wrong.
Quite frankly, the human animal has been fairly monogamous for many hundreds of thousands of years. The same reasons monogamy is benificial now were applicable then. If the child did not survive to adulthood those genes would not be passed on, so having the men protecting the women would have been necessary, as it was impossible for women to do both. Also, boys needed then, as they do now,male role models to teach them how to become men. Again, something women alone cannot do properly.
What this report is aimed to do is to pound another nail in the coffin of men's respectibility. Blaming the problem of infedelity on men and their genes ignores the fact that men do not cheat by masturbation,few with other men, and that women cheat as often as men. Another words, women are equally ready and willing to stray as men are. And apparently more ready to lie about it. Where is that in the title?
Jen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday August 06, @04:40PM EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
Terri Fischer is not the researcher that conducted this study but the Ohio State University psychologist that the writer of the article contacted to provide critisism of the study so whether this notion of secure and secret voting had an effect or is even a valid argument is not known,since it was not reported by David P. Schmitt,the chief researcher of the study who is an evolutionary psychologist at Bradley University in Peoria, Ill.
I do find it interesting that the first critisism provided by Fischer is that she fears the study will be misused,since studies such as this always result in the men in her classes nodding in agreement.And thats when her subsequent critisisms follow such as providing numbers that werent actually reported by the study,but by Fischer the critic of the study.Other researchers that were contacted for the story gave such statements as “It is the first systematic, massive, scientific study of these sex differences,” said David M. Buss, an evolutionary psychologist at the University of Texas in Austin who wrote “The Evolution of Desire.” Calling the Schmitt paper definitive, Buss said, “The evidence he presents is irrefutable.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was refering to the comments made by posters who themselves were commenting on the findings made in the study.
Understood. Well - what can I say, we're not all going to agree with each other here. But, that just keeps things interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Religious,social, and moral rigidity and dogmatism are,often, no more than disguised psycopathy.The same has always promulgated persecution.A healthy sex drive is a sign of both mental and physical health. A healthy sexual life promulgates both mental and physical health. Psycopathy has one of it's natural components a dislike and intolerance of sexuality and of the opposite gender. So no matter how you describe the "moral" and/or "religious" definitions of acceptable sexual behavior, the oppression of the same in males is reflective of gender feminist psycopathic motives and ends not the natural and good ends of the mutual respect between human beings of both genders and their meeting their natural physical and emotional needs through sexuality. The article, then, reflects the psycopathy of the gender feminist oppression of males through sexual oppression and deprivation for the inherent purpose of unjustly promulgating the ends of female elitism and feminism.
C.V. Compton Shaw
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't find the article so bad. I enjoyed the feminist academes freaking out about the findings. Their tired message of sameness is boring and wrong and this research is yet another whack on their pointy heads. I think it is true that men and women are biologically different and this difference plays a part in our psychological differences. As men we have hormones, mostly testosterone, which creates a desire to have sex. It has been my observation that in general men want more sex than their female partners. If men could, we would like to have sex with lots of women. Most of us don't. This is an important point. Men are to be honored and admired because they are able to deal with a biology that encourages them to have lots of sex with lots of women and most men are able to honor their committments and stay monogamous. The woman otoh has a biology that is consonant with this cultures' traditional push towards monogamy. Her biology says "NEST" settle down with one man and raise the kids. TEND AND BEFRIEND. She doesn't have to fight her hormones she rides along with them. Important difference and a good reason to honor men.
Stand Your Ground Forum
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
