The Hegemonic Masculinity Magnet

By the same token, I don't think Trump is a racist. I see what he's done for the black community, for example. He devoted a lot of money toward historically black colleges and implemented many criminal justice reforms that mostly benefited black convicts.

 

From a physical standpoint, that might be true. I'm not so sure about the mental health part, however. Western society in general seems to be riddled with more mental illness than before.

 

Yeah that's why more than half if the incoming Republican Freshman class is female we hate women good catch...

 

They always leave that well known and well understood statistic out. Doesn't serve the narrative.

They think being 65, obese, divorced, and living alone with a cat in a rented one bedroom apartment, is a step up for womanhood. A real win.

Sooo much better than growing old in decent health in one's much loved and paid for home, surrounded by loyal and loving family, and still feeling very much needed and valued.

 

Sure, and for every one of those psycho's who raped or beat their wives, there were a hundred who were good and decent men. Also far less likely to abandon her and their children, far less likely to be financially irresponsible, far less likely to fail to secure a family home for his wife and children, and far more likely to protect her and their children if it ever came to that. He also didn't mind working all week to support them, and then spend all weekend doing yard work and taking kids to sport etc. He was a trusted neighbour, and cared about the simple human dignity of keeping yourself, your home, and your environs (however modest) clean and tidy. His family came first, then his community, and then himself. He put himself last - instead of first, like today's younger males.

 

That’s like saying you can’t be a misogynist because you have a wife. Moreso that’s actively ignoring the massive gender discrepancy republicans have for years.

 

That would fall under physiological, yes, though do not mistake that with the personality-based differences in the ways we express that pain. And yes, also, I'm sure that, in many species, the need of the female to not just give birth, but gestate its young, and provide for its needs, is central to the reason for its physiological strength. But there is more, besides.

With respect to humans, female children are less likely to die than male children, who are also more susceptible to harm from various environmental factors. Interestingly, I remember hearing that there was a bristling backlash, right after 9-11, against scientific research showing a greater vulnerability of males to certain chemical or mineral pollutants, because of the same dynamic of our society's embracing the masculine ideal, in the wake of that attack. What is most interesting to me is why so many more would be embracing this framework for their perceptions, and doing it so much more passionately, at this particular time. The article--parts of which, I admittedly only skimmed-- listed some things fueling the growing feeling of outside threat, but really didn't seem to point to the match that torched it (other than Trump, but at the same time, not attributing the dynamic to him). Can a more patient reader fill me in, if I missed something?

But, continuing, the body's ability to repair itself is in part attributable to our stem cells, some of which stay with us into adulthood. Very ironically, all research with stem cells was done with male cells until recently, under the assumption, presumably, that sex made no difference. But it was recently discovered that female stem cells are twice as active as male ones. I would not be at all surprised if females have a superior immune system, as well (as noted by Jonsa, females live longer).

Lastly, beyond the bounds of just our species, females are the overwhelmingly dominant sex, amongst the populations of colonial insects, like ants & bees, in which males have been relegated to, and kept around for, merely their task of spreading genetic seed.

 

Which has nothing to do with misogyny. Please note almost all the people caught up in the #metoo snare were Democrats and heavy contributors there to including numerous showbiz big wigs.

 

As long as we can admit such “data” can be outright nonsense we are in a good place. I personally have a problem with compensation and financial gain from both sides of the “research” coin. I got too close to it when offered a chance to conduct research on ruminant mineral supplements. I know it’s how the world turns, but I don’t want to be part of that world.

It wasn’t that big of a deal for me. I was doing work I loved and would have done anyway, even if it wasn’t funding education. Hell, I cleaned the school to help pay my tuition in grade school so working to pay for college didn’t seem abnormal.

The problem is we can’t even get kids through high school. Something like 50% of high school grads can’t read well enough to follow a doctor’s or pharmacist’s instructions. Kind of hard to make them successful in college when they didn’t glean much from the previous 12-14 years of free education. That said, I agree tuition today is outrageous. It shouldn’t cost that much to educate someone.

Our society doesn’t desire educated critical thinkers. If it did, we would be producing them.

 

Yeah it kinda does have a lot to do with misogyny. Like what are you trying to say?

 

Not a lesbian. I've been with lots of guys, though strangely never dated one.

 

Misogyny, like racism is an individual problem not limited by or to certain groups.

 

Aren't you transgender?

 

I am.

 

My congressional district has always elected white men. Most of them have been democrats....

 

Absolutely no doubt about it, the rise in single parent families has been dramatic. Almost 20 million kids live in single parent households. OTOH, I bet a lot of them are much better off without the other parent - the alkie, or the abuser, and have a more loving supportive environment because of it. Not the majority, but a big chunk.

 

Yet a study with paid participants in clinical trials and a relatively small sample set can be extremely informative and as often is the case is further validated in following larger studies. If they are paid for commercial studies on product evaluation/promotion purposes or other ulterior motive then I agree its bullshit.

I fear there will always be far more demand than supply for years to come.

 

Leafs lost in overtime last night.

 

They should have recruited more players from the Women's National Team.

 

now seriously, that's just a cheap shot. We are in first place in our division.

 

It is kind of the thing that I find a bit amusing. The one thing that I have in common with many young Marines, is that we tend to see the civilian world as filled with out of shape men. Many horribly so. From this perspective, it is kind of funny that masculine homogamy is a driving force behind the attraction of a creature such as the Trump. But then isn’t that kind of the psychology behind the popularity of spectator sports. Where the spectator, usually un-athletic himself, lives vicariously through the athletes on the field. There is probably a reason that a conservative is more likely to be a sports fan, than a liberal. Why NASCAR is such a conservative cultural thing.

While obesity is rampant on both sides of the political spectrum, the data shows that people who live in the Colorado mountains and along the West Coast tend to live longer healthier lives than people who live elsewhere. Both places that tend to lean Democratic. Boulder Colorado, the most liberal city in the US, has a culture that is built upon healthy eating and living. Compare that to the Southern culture that is built upon a diet that that bursts with overindulgence.

 

I was once at a social gathering. In the course of the conversation, the subject of one if my ex-girlfriends came up. When I made the comment, “If it wasn’t for crazy women, I would have never gotten a girl friend.”, a women in our group came back with, “If it wasn’t for a@@ holes, I’d never have a boyfriend”. We all had a good laugh.

 

The "study" lost me within the first lines of its abstract, making the same tired, rehashed accusations right out of the DNC playbook: Trump's a racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe. They're making these freewheeling accusations without any considerations to their bases; they just state them as if they are self-evident truths and use them as the basis for their study. It's silly, pedantic, and something that should be best placed in the forum of the Daily Kos.

 

I guess it's a matter of terminology. When I was using the word "strength", I meant it more literally. Figuratively, strength can obviously have many meanings.

It sounds like, overall, women are more resilient in terms of exposure to certain hazards. It also makes sense that women would be better able to survive certain things due to their importance in continuing the species. It all comes back to evolution.

You are correct that females dominate many hive-based species, but this is not so true with species that are closer to our own in terms of evolutionary development.

 

FTM or MTF?