Trump Appeals to Men Who Suffer From ‘Fragile Masculinity’: Psychologists

[Cubantripod]

Seems as their are is research out there contradicting this study. Weak makes are more likely to be socialist, while stronger males are more likely to be capitalist.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/...alist-strong-men-more-likely-to-be-capitalist

 

[KimGordon67]

Seems as their are is research out there contradicting this study. Weak makes are more likely to be socialist, while stronger males are more likely to be capitalist.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/...alist-strong-men-more-likely-to-be-capitalist

Nope - you're confusing 'physical strength' with 'masculinity' there. It's entirely possible to be physically strong and still have what the original researchers referred to as 'fragile masculinity'. (You're also comparing different cultural contexts, but my initial point is really the more relevant one.)

 

[adrina]

WTF is it with The Blaze, Daily Caller etc. And why is anyone reading that tripe?

Sigh.

Birdcage liner. Even in digital format.

 

[KimGordon67]

WTF is it with The Blaze, Daily Caller etc. And why is anyone reading that tripe?

Sigh.

Birdcage liner. Even in digital format.

I did think about checking the actual publication this appeared in, but it wasn't really necessary - this piece and the topic of the OP are reporting on different concepts.

 

[adrina]

I did think about checking the actual publication this appeared in, but it wasn't really necessary - this piece and the topic of the OP are reporting on different concepts.

Interesting tidbit... apparently The Blaze is Glenn Beck's brain child. And it will be merging with CRTV - another highly biased "media" outlet. Two for the price of one.

 

[KimGordon67]

Interesting tidbit... apparently The Blaze is Glenn Beck's brain child. And it will be merging with CRTV - another highly biased "media" outlet. Two for the price of one.

I had to Google him - not many surprises, really.

I love the interweb and everything, but the capacity for ridiculous things to have the appearance of 'news' sites is not its best feature.

 

[adrina]

I had to Google him - not many surprises, really.

I love the interweb and everything, but the capacity for ridiculous things to have the appearance of 'news' sites is not its best feature.

Agreed. It's very easy to be fooled into thinking something is legit. Especially if it says something or even close to something that someone wants to hear. It helps to do a bit of research on source material.

But these are the same fools that believe what Hannity et al spews, so... eh.

 

[BotanyBoy]

fuck it.

 

[KimGordon67]

They aren't totally separate unconnected things though unless you have some special definition of masculinity that totally separates the physical and thus mental well being of a person.



But rather unlikely.



Healthy fit males generally speaking do not have that problem.

It's the noodly armed/chubby soyboys raised being told competition is bad, conflict is bad and most of all that masculinity is toxic by single mothers who have those issues.

Some of them are most surely trying to re-claim what they have been robbed of...a father figure, which is why DJT appeals to these guys.

The fit, aggressive people with high drives that get up a 0330 to PT, hustle money and dominate life harder than they ever have, every day? Those overachievers???

They generally don't have those security issues....but they are far fewer than the former.

I saw it turning civilian softies in to lean, mean killin machines.

Lots of soyboys out there desperate for a father to put a boot up their ass and tell them to grow a fuckin' hide.

Lotta hard charging females desperate for that structure and challenge too for that matter....my only complaint is that the military gives them a double standard, which is bull fuckin' shit.

Standards should be to the job, not the genitals.

You pretty much shot your 'you can't socialise biology out of males' argument in the foot there.

 

[BotanyBoy]

You pretty much shot your 'you can't socialise biology out of males' argument in the foot there.

How do you figure?

 

[KimGordon67]

How?

If anything I provided evidence the exact opposite.

(a) You didn't provide any actual 'evidence' of anything at all.
(b) You basically stated that 'single mothers' socialised males into something other than 'real masculinity'.

(The whole post is pretty much flawed from go to whoa, but it's the irony of the complete contradiction to your prior arguments that's the most glaring.)

 

[Cubantripod]

Nope - you're confusing 'physical strength' with 'masculinity' there. It's entirely possible to be physically strong and still have what the original researchers referred to as 'fragile masculinity'. (You're also comparing different cultural contexts, but my initial point is really the more relevant one.)

Physical strength is a characteristic of traditional masculinity which is now considered "fragile masculinity."

 

[KimGordon67]

Physical strength is a characteristic of traditional masculinity which is now considered "fragile masculinity."

Sigh.
If you say so.

 

[BotanyBoy]

(a) You didn't provide any actual 'evidence' of anything at all.

You're right, I put forth an argument of the opposite.

There is however a LOT of evidence to support that argument thought.

(b) You basically stated that 'single mothers' socialised males into something other than 'real masculinity'.

I argue that more than one major social issue is resulting in the degrading of masculinity, and it's a fucking disaster for the young money of this society.

(The whole post is pretty much flawed from go to whoa, but it's the irony of the complete contradiction to your prior arguments that's the most glaring.)

It's not flawed, it's arguing against the myth that gender has NO connections of any kind to biology.

Testosterone, cortisol, ACH, estrogen etc. all have major influence over our self identity no matter how badly the left wants to pretend otherwise because science doesn't care about political ideology.

 

[KimGordon67]

Testosterone, cortisol, ACH, estrogen etc. all have major influence over our self identity no matter how badly the left wants to pretend otherwise because science doesn't care about political ideology.

... but apparently can by over-ridden by the might of the single mother. Who knew she wielded such power?

 

[BotanyBoy]

Sigh.
If you say so.

Not just him, but biology....want to guess who's seen as more "masculine"???



The non binary noodly armed guy growing bitch tits from soy soy soy?

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/52e8378ae4b047d1a5cccc20/t/591e09c2cd0f6802d57755a0/1495140804230/


Or the still jacked Army Ranger who made a small fortune with his coffee/T shirt company and getting rich on Youtube making videos?

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5c/b6/cb/5cb6cb0af65a00cc1ee10d72ca03d3a5.jpg


Want to guess who's testosterone levels are higher? Not that biology has ANYTHING to do with masculinity or gender....even though part of "transitioning" is hormone therapy which not only changes the physical shape of the brain but how it runs too....

 

[BotanyBoy]

... but apparently can by over-ridden by the might of the single mother. Who knew she wielded such power?

Where did I say it can be over-ridden???



Citation please.


Ohhhhh you're making shit up because you just can't admit, gender along with all senses of identity are DEEPLY biological.

Because the cognitive is 100% subordinate to the physical, from macro to molecular.

That is a verifiable, indisputable, biological fact the Gender PC Police keep ignoring when they keep repeating the lie that gender is entirely a social construct, separate from biology.

 

[Que]

(a) You didn't provide any actual 'evidence' of anything at all.
(b) You basically stated that 'single mothers' socialised males into something other than 'real masculinity'.

(The whole post is pretty much flawed from go to whoa, but it's the irony of the complete contradiction to your prior arguments that's the most glaring.)

Why are you calling them 'researchers" when they conducted nothing of the sort?

Assigning correlation to unknown people in order to advance a particular narrative is nothing even close to research.

 

[Luk]

Why are you calling them 'researchers" when they conducted nothing of the sort?

Assigning correlation to unknown people in order to advance a particular narrative is nothing even close to research.

This would hold more weight if you ever backed up anything you said, Cliff.

 

[BotanyBoy]

This would hold more weight if you ever backed up anything you said, Cliff.

Says Cpt. Logical Fallacy who NEVER backs up anything.


Go drink some more soy buddy.

 

[Luk]

Bot

 

[BotanyBoy]

Bot

What?

You come up with a white privilege yet?

Maybe grow enough of a nut to admit "abolish ICE" is fucking retarded???

 

[Luk]

Two other people and I told you exactly how/what would happen if ICE was abolished. It's not our fault that you're too dumb to comprehend the words.

 

[Que]

Says Cpt. Logical Fallacy who NEVER backs up anything.


Go drink some more soy buddy.

To be fair, he rarely actually articulates anything that would require "backing up."

This entire concept of backing up and citations amongst these little keyboard gangsters is sociallyretarded. No one in the history of mankind ever provided citations of any sort in your basic social Congress where there is a difference of opinion. People either advance their arguments or they didn't on the merits and strength of their arguments. You didn't have to go and find some other idiot who happens to agree with you so you can cut and paste a citation on to your forehead on a Post-It note in a bar.

 

[RoryN]

Seems as their are is research out there contradicting this study. Weak makes are more likely to be socialist, while stronger males are more likely to be capitalist.

Everyone as is if are laughing at you.