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

[BotanyBoy]

Ha - that would be an interesting bit of research.

I'm sure if you give NYU enough they would be happy to generate that "research" for you.

 

[HisArpy]

I'm sure if you give NYU enough they would be happy to generate that "research" for you.

You notice that they can't defend the research other than saying that I didn't bother to PAY SOMEONE to read an article which the researchers admitted (in the part I could read) was pure and utter bullshit?

 

[Dribble]

They never ever fail to disappoint. Pure comedy.

 

[CandiCame]

You notice that they can't defend the research other than saying that I didn't bother to PAY SOMEONE to read an article which the researchers admitted (in the part I could read) was pure and utter bullshit?

I posted a link to the same information for free.

 

[Que]

Critiquing a methodological approach without actually reading the methodological approach.
You're really winning at 'proper science' there.

Points and laughs at all of you finding validation now and no doubt for years to come in this pablum.

You cannot draw any meaningful conclusion from disparate events by disparate people all residing in a geographical area when you have no idea which individuals have which opinions and which conducted which searches.

Statistics never lie and liars frequently use statistics.

I can take the exact same data and prove by correlation that leftists surrounded by Trump supporters feel inadequate by comparison thereby suffering from fragile masculinity as evidenced by their frenetic internet searches trying to find ways to compensate for their inadequacy.

This "study" by "researchers" is just as inane, flawed, and self-serving as the idiotic one claiming that "Fox viewers" (never verified in anyway to be as identified) are less knowledgeable about "facts" (as defined by smug researchers) than the paltry few that self-report viewing other outlets.

If you were to you call yourself a researcher and you can't even structure a study for basic controls you can't be taken seriously at all.

The fact that this idea was even undertaken in the first place says more about the insecurities of those conducting such a study then what it purports to show about those that they already had those opinions about before they ever decided to try to find some correlation to make themselves feel more potent.

 

[CandiCame]

Points and laughs at all of you finding validation now and no doubt for years to come in this pablum.

You cannot draw any meaningful conclusion from disparate events by disparate people all residing in a geographical area when you have no idea which individuals have which opinions and which conducted which searches.

Statistics never lie and liars frequently use statistics.

I can take the exact same data and prove by correlation that leftists surrounded by Trump supporters feel inadequate by comparison thereby suffering from fragile masculinity as evidenced by their frenetic internet searches trying to find ways to compensate for their inadequacy.

This "study" by "researchers" is just as inane, flawed, and self-serving as the idiotic one claiming that "Fox viewers" (never verified in anyway to be as identified) are less knowledgeable about "facts" (as defined by smug researchers) than the paltry few that self-report viewing other outlets.

If you were to you call yourself a researcher and you can't even structure a study for basic controls you can't be taken seriously at all.

The fact that this idea was even undertaken in the first place says more about the insecurities of those conducting such a study then what it purports to show about those that they already had those opinions about before they ever decided to try to find some correlation to make themselves feel more potent.

Que, you started out so strong in this post and then just went completely off the rails.

 

[Que]

Que, you started out so strong in this post and then just went completely off the rails.

This study is not even within the railroad right away much less on the rails so it's impossible to derail a study like this.

 

[CandiCame]

This study is not even within the railroad right away much less on the rails so it's impossible to derail a study like this.

You didn't derail the study, you derailed your own point.

 

[KimGordon67]

You notice that they can't defend the research other than saying that I didn't bother to PAY SOMEONE to read an article which the researchers admitted (in the part I could read) was pure and utter bullshit?

I would only bother defending it against actual critiques, which you haven't provided, because you're critiquing something you haven't actually read.
Basically, your argument is entirely based on supposition. Quelle surprise.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Que, you started out so strong in this post and then just went completely off the rails.

Hey, hey, hey now.

Don't ever make light of those who have been touched and/or kissed by the Sun God. They are said to be special and should be placed in divine care, not to be mocked!

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxpj6grFIe1qcaomb.gif

 

[IG_88]

Yes, I'm coming to that conclusion. He really like a version of LJ with a better thesaurus.

No he's smarter than LJ in most respects. Doesn't make him smart tho. He's mostly pretty dumb, just not THAT dumb.

 

[Libsam]

This JRE is great.

Joe invited two scientist to his show to talk about the fake scientific journals they wrote about SJW approved topics, and how they passed peer review and were published. It's great!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZZNvT1vaJg


Edit to add:
Actually, it was 3 scientist, but the female couldn't make it to the JRE

 

[KimGordon67]

That's not the same everywhere.

If approximately half any given geographic area is pro-Trump, how did Clinton win over half the popular vote, and yet Trump's still President?

 

[toeskr]

If approximately half any given geographic area is pro-Trump, how did Clinton win over half the popular vote, and yet Trump's still President?

WTF do you even care when you don't live here?

Life (yours), must be pretty fucking boring to spend as much time on here as you do beating your head against a wall.

Wall... lol.

 

[KimGordon67]

WTF do you even care when you don't live here?

Life (yours), must be pretty fucking boring to spend as much time on here as you do beating your head against a wall.

Wall... lol.

Such a winning response ... when all else fails, just resort to the 'it's none of your business' retort.

(Interestingly, the post-years of membership ratio for you is somewhat higher than mine [edited after I did the actual mathing] ... but apparently I'm the only one with a 'fucking boring' life?)

 

[CandiCame]

Such a winning response ... when all else fails, just resort to the 'it's none of your business' retort.

(Interestingly, the post-years of membership ratio for you is somewhat higher than mine [edited after I did the actual mathing] ... but apparently I'm the only one with a 'fucking boring' life?)

You don't have to take that from someone who sucks toes.

 

[KimGordon67]

You don't have to take that from someone who sucks toes.

Now now ... each to their own. (And well spotted - I honestly hadn't worked out that's what the screen name means.)

 

[CandiCame]

Now now ... each to their own. (And well spotted - I honestly hadn't worked out that's what the screen name means.)

I don't know that it does. I took a shot in the dark hoping he'd come out guns-a-blazing to defend toe sucking and that I could watch the rant.

I feel like now that I've disclosed that information it won't come to pass.

Edit: I'm pretty sure it does though. Like that looks like leet speak or license plate talk for "toe sucker".

 

[toeskr]

Such a winning response ... when all else fails, just resort to the 'it's none of your business' retort.

(Interestingly, the post-years of membership ratio for you is somewhat higher than mine [edited after I did the actual mathing] ... but apparently I'm the only one with a 'fucking boring' life?)

You and candi are good editors. Prolific even.

That you took enough time to do math is proof, pretty fucking boring.

 

[toeskr]

Now now ... each to their own. (And well spotted - I honestly hadn't worked out that's what the screen name means.)

You don't have to take that from a catfish that takes it in the ass, but only for the next meth fix.

 

[CandiCame]

You don't have to take that from a catfish that takes it in the ass, but only for the next meth fix.

This was actually a decently good burn but... very surface level. There was so much much /specific/ shit you could have pulled from. There are threads where I've talked about being into voluntary cannibalism.

 

[KimGordon67]

This was actually a decently good burn but... very surface level. There was so much much /specific/ shit you could have pulled from. There are threads where I've talked about being into voluntary cannibalism.

I actually can't work out if the 'catfish' comment was directed at you or me ... although it's not really important.

 

[KimGordon67]

You and candi are good editors. Prolific even.

That you took enough time to do math is proof, pretty fucking boring.

The odds are pretty high that if I'd left my original estimate in, someone else would have opened their calculator app and declared me either stupid or a liar based on the results. That's pretty much standard practice on the GB.

 

[KimGordon67]

Points and laughs at all of you finding validation now and no doubt for years to come in this pablum.

You cannot draw any meaningful conclusion from disparate events by disparate people all residing in a geographical area when you have no idea which individuals have which opinions and which conducted which searches.

Statistics never lie and liars frequently use statistics.

I can take the exact same data and prove by correlation that leftists surrounded by Trump supporters feel inadequate by comparison thereby suffering from fragile masculinity as evidenced by their frenetic internet searches trying to find ways to compensate for their inadequacy.

This "study" by "researchers" is just as inane, flawed, and self-serving as the idiotic one claiming that "Fox viewers" (never verified in anyway to be as identified) are less knowledgeable about "facts" (as defined by smug researchers) than the paltry few that self-report viewing other outlets.

If you were to you call yourself a researcher and you can't even structure a study for basic controls you can't be taken seriously at all.

The fact that this idea was even undertaken in the first place says more about the insecurities of those conducting such a study then what it purports to show about those that they already had those opinions about before they ever decided to try to find some correlation to make themselves feel more potent.

TL : DR - I didn't read the actual research either.

 

[oO00Oo]

Que, you started out so strong in this post and then just went completely off the rails.

I read that he is a tweaker. From his spazzy posting style I would have to agree.