It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Media Enforced Gender War

page: 2
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons


There have been studies, larger ones, done on males an it shows that males with high testosterone are more even minded and fair in their interactions with others.

 


So link us to the studies then...




Do you see though, that I was DEFENDING men, and yet you could not see it?


Sorry, but men don't need defending. Absurd...

There is a reason why our hormones have the effect they do. It has to do with natural survival. Hence all the bloodshed over the past few thousands of years. With each other and the animal kingdom.




posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   
uk.reuters.com...


A Swiss and British study found evidence that debunks the myth that testosterone causes aggressive, egocentric behavior, suggesting instead that the sex hormone can encourage fair play -- particularly if it improves a person's status.


The conclusion reached in the previous article lacks coherence with the actual effect studied.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eidolon23There's more, but I've got to knock a character sheet together.

edit on 2-2-2012 by Eidolon23 because: Loves saves. And rolls for extra damage.




I salute your geekiness.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 



I want to start a thread where we can document examples of blatant media created Gender War. Not where women and men are actually fighting about something, but where some piece of media is clearly intended to provoke gender war.


I can see already that almost everything in this thread might be seen as an attack - but I have to ask (because I am sincerely curious) - what would be the point of this 'war'? What is the prize?

We could start by agreeing that there is journalism - good journalism...and then there is everything else

Wherever you're seeing this war being fought - it's happening in the 'media'

The 'media' is out (even factoring in good, very good and then just breathtakingly good journalism) to make a buck

The genders - no matter how you define them - are fascinated by and with each other

Any little thing we write about men, women and sexuality - pro or con - is going to be gobbled up like candy. Especially if we're dishing dirt. And then, even extra-specially if we can call the dirt a study

I'm just wondering if you can define what you're after and make it a little more clear - you really think the gender wars are a conspiracy - by the media?



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Spiramirabilis
 


Conspiracy might be overselling - though perhaps it isn't.

People are fascinated by each other. To provoke them into readership, and engagement with media by feeding people conflict is an excellent way to make money.

Good relations don't sell as well as provocation.

Therefore any and every opportunity to sell something as conflict between the sexes is taken. Even when they have to outright lie.

The original study is a prime example of this method of manipulation.
edit on 2012/2/2 by Aeons because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 06:15 PM
link   
Eidolon23:


Dude, for sure, the old wiring is still in play, but it gets checked at the executive level by our higher functions. That there is a struggle between what we once were and what we now are doesn't mean we should throw our skirts up and race back to the dawn of man just b/c being human isn't always easy.


Allowing higher brain functioning to come on line is a choice. And men typically make the wrong one. It is the same thing when confronted with doing the 'right thing' versus the 'wrong thing'; and then doing the 'wrong thing' because it is easier.

Which is why men need defending, Boncho.

Let's fess up, we forget this because it is convenient for us to do so. It allows us to go back to secrecy, hiding and lying, which we excel at like no other species.

The problem is having a woman tell us that. It is as though we can only hear it from other men and it damn well better be on the right day, at the right hour, and during the correct phase of the Moon, but of course the details of when that might be are hidden. Cuz that is what we do best.

I'm not sayin' that Aeons' thread necessarily has to be your personal 'come to Jesus' session around all this, but; no honesty = no progress.

X.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 06:28 PM
link   
I would say that my son at very least deserves my protection, even if one were to say that I should stand in defense of any other male.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 06:36 PM
link   
Boncho, Other Guy,

There is an = sign in Aeons' OP but I do not see the word equality.

F equality, this is about survival.

How much longer would you gentlemen like to go on like this, with men and women never being able to have a real conversation about this.

What Aeons posted is important to both genders and here you both are immediately trying to drag this in to a discussion about how this cannot be discussed. Cut it out. Your rusty gears are squeaking.

Do you think it's possible that human beings might make some progress towards autonomy and self-sufficiency if men and women actually tried to talk about this stuff without censoring themselves and fearing one another? I think it is our only hope. We have to gang up on it. And I think Aeons, by offering a place to post suspicious stuff has simply offered a simple place to gang up on the problem.

Guys, it's 2012, are we really going to pretend that by keeping the genders at each other's throats that nothing is accomplished that is desirable to our 'handlers'?

Cuz it's a farm, fellas, and you are the livestock. Do I have to drag that old Manly P. Hall story over here? It makes for a good analogy.

Also, Boncho, with all due respect, sir, Sociology and Anthropology are the Queen sciences, all other sciences serve them. And now that DAPRA is interested in the things they are interested in, both SOC and ANTH are coming back stronger than ever from their unfair banishment. They are turning in to engineering sciences because we finally have the computers to get the big work done. So be ready for Socio-Informatics, it's looking over your shoulder, copying your math homework. You might also like to peruse the MIT open coursework site if you would like to get an idea of how this is all changing.

Gotta keep up.

X.
edit on 2-2-2012 by Xoanon because: .



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by Spiramirabilis
 


Conspiracy might be overselling - though perhaps it isn't.

People are fascinated by each other. To provoke them into readership, and engagement with media by feeding people conflict is an excellent way to make money.

Good relations don't sell as well as provocation.

Therefore any and every opportunity to sell something as conflict between the sexes is taken. Even when they have to outright lie.

The original study is a prime example of this method of manipulation.
edit on 2012/2/2 by Aeons because: (no reason given)


That's pretty much what I just said. I'm just trying to figure out your perspective, and why this article in particular bothers you.

First of all - it's the Daily Mail - so - garish anti-facts and malleable reality are what we've come to expect from them. A better question might be: Daily Mail - WTH?

:-)

They do some pretty fancy editing with whatever information they get - and they're always trying to provoke

Here's a bit from another source

"Our behaviour seems to be moderated by our hormones -- we already know that oxytocin can make us more cooperative, but if this were the only hormone acting on our decision-making in groups, this would make our decisions very skewed. We have shown that, in fact, testosterone also affects our decisions, by making us more egotistical.
www.sciencedaily.com...

Maybe they used women because tweaking testosterone in women might make observing results easier than tweaking testosterone in men. Just guessing - I'm not a scientist so my take on this means diddly probably - but - how is this lying?

I think it's fascinating - and that probably makes me a bad feminist. But, apparently - our body chemistry affects our behavior...who knew? :-)

Listen - I really am interested in the implied conspiracy angle - and here's why

Yesterday I was reading - all over the internet - opinions of a new study that says bigots are stupid. Now, they didn't really say that out loud, but - holy crap - right? As you can imagine - opinions varied

So, you see why this is interesting? Is this good science - any of it? Or is it just science being science - and it's our interpretation of it that's messed up? Should we not be trying to figure out why we are the way we are?

What gender wars? See what I mean? There are just genders - and the obvious dance between them - the rest is just interpretation

If it's just about selling papers - problem solved - but that is pretty boring...do you really think men and women would get along fine if someone out there wasn't messing with us?



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 08:57 PM
link   
Heres the source of the gender war. It's the socialist party.
www.sp-usa.org...

THE SOCIALIST PARTY strives to establish a radical democracy
that places people's lives under their own control - a non-racist, classless, feminist socialist society...



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by thehoneycomb
Heres the source of the gender war. It's the socialist party.
www.sp-usa.org...

THE SOCIALIST PARTY strives to establish a radical democracy
that places people's lives under their own control - a non-racist, classless, feminist socialist society...


so - is there a downside?

:-)



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by thehoneycomb
Heres the source of the gender war. It's the socialist party.
www.sp-usa.org...

THE SOCIALIST PARTY strives to establish a radical democracy
that places people's lives under their own control - a non-racist, classless, feminist socialist society...





posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Eidolon23
 


Was the maker of that picture a socialist?

Because the socialist can not spell.




posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Spiramirabilis
 


No... just keep drinking the kool aid.

"We'll have you all dead pretty soon."

Those are lyrics from a coheed and cambria song by the way, not a threat or anything like that BTW.
edit on 2-2-2012 by thehoneycomb because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Spiramirabilis


If it's just about selling papers - problem solved - but that is pretty boring...do you really think men and women would get along fine if someone out there wasn't messing with us?


How could we fail to stand a better chance at getting along absent the extra static, whether we're being polarized for profit or to serve other concerns? To fail to recognize toxic cultural dynamics when we see them does not exempt us from the wreckage they likely wreak in our personal lives.


So, I guess this is all about us spotting this crap in the flow, and then pointing it out. Let pattern recognition and discussion do their stuff.
edit on 2-2-2012 by Eidolon23 because: doh.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by thehoneycomb
 


Hee. True enough.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eidolon23
How could we fail to stand a better chance at getting along absent the extra static, whether we're being polarized for profit or to serve other concerns? To fail to recognize toxic cultural dynamics when we see them does not exempt us from the wreckage they likely wreak in our personal lives.


So, I guess this is all about us spotting this crap in the flow, and then pointing it out. Let pattern recognition and discussion do their stuff.
edit on 2-2-2012 by Eidolon23 because: doh.


the extra static?

here's the topic: The Media Enforced Gender War

my question is: what? (in it's simplest form)

so, how does the media enforce a gender war?



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Spiramirabilis
 


We're citing examples of things in the media which seem to be aimed at polarizing the genders and then discussing them. The OP is coming from the position that there is a concentrated effort to leverage the gender gap, and I think we all agree that profit suffices as a motive in that scenario.

You may disagree with the OP's thesis, but it might be helpful to address the studies, articles, shows being posted from your particular angle, rather than to keep asking the OP to restate it.
edit on 2-2-2012 by Eidolon23 because: Jittery fingers.



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by thehoneycomb
reply to post by Spiramirabilis
 


No... just keep drinking the kool aid.

"We'll have you all dead pretty soon."

Those are lyrics from a coheed and cambria song by the way, not a threat or anything like that BTW.
edit on 2-2-2012 by thehoneycomb because: (no reason given)


thanks for the explanation - but I wasn't worried

I totally get that wishing socialists dead is just a pleasant and harmless pastime for some :-)



posted on Feb, 2 2012 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Eidolon23
 


and I think (unlike you) that the OP is more than up to the challenge :-)

it's a fair an honest question - and not at all antagonistic

problem?

I read the study - even quoted a bit - said a few things about it too...

anything more to offer?



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join