Masculine Overcompensation Thesis

by **ZeroHaven** » Sat Aug 06, 2005 6:01 pm

This study brought to you <a href="http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/Aug05/soc.gender.dea.html" target="top">by Cornell University</a> "I found that if you made men more insecure about their masculinity, they displayed more homophobic attitudes, tended to support the Iraq War more and would be more willing to purchase an SUV over another type of vehicle," said Robb Willer, a sociology doctoral candidate at Cornell. In a separate study, Willer verified that support for the Iraq War, homophobia and interest in purchasing an SUV were all considered masculine by study participants. I'm sure the many sensible male members here will want to offer arguments against this finding... <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)"> <img src="http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a239/ZeroHaven/tinhat.gif"/>

by **GDN01** » Sat Aug 06, 2005 6:55 pm

and they needed to do a study to figure this out?? <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/tongue.gif ALT=":p">

by **antiaristo** » Sat Aug 06, 2005 7:11 pm

ZeroHaven, I have no doubt that "you" have that power. Who is "you"? Who would be likely to "make men more insecure about their masculinity", pray tell?

by **antiaristo** » Sat Aug 06, 2005 7:13 pm

ZeroHaven, I have no doubt that "you" have that power. Who is "you"?Who would be likely to "make men more insecure about their masculinity", pray tell?

by **Sweejak** » Sat Aug 06, 2005 7:38 pm

<img src="http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/9862/rice17jn.jpg" style="border:0;"/>

by **Avalon** » Sat Aug 06, 2005 8:25 pm

I'm sure the many sensible male members here will want to offer arguments against this finding...  I'm afraid I've not yet met a male member that had an ounce of common sense. There are no brains in that little head, only drives. And they don't make keyboards with keys large enough for them to do hunt-and-pecker typing, thank heavens. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/laugh.gif ALT=":lol">

by **AnnaLivia** » Sat Aug 06, 2005 8:27 pm

ROFLMAO!! and then there's the polar opposite: In a world of steel-eyed death where men are fighting to be warm, "come in", she said, "I'll give you...shelter from the storm." (thanks Bob Dylan for one of the most beautiful songlines ever.) ...she use her love to make him strong...is another i like. and JJ said in FW: "Who but crippled-with-children would speak up for dropping-with-sweat?"

by **robertdreed** » Sat Aug 06, 2005 10:43 pm

<a href="http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/blog/malven/">www.mensnewsdaily.com/blog/malven/</a>

by **AnnaLivia** » Sun Aug 07, 2005 1:07 am

SHARING VIOLATION! Robertdreed, that was so awful...but i kept reading because something tells me stupidity ought to be better-studied. i thought my head would explode here: "Why is it that the Left are so vocal in their criticism of President Bush and so silent about the evil we are at war with?" (Avalon, that was a funny visual!)

by **Avalon** » Sun Aug 07, 2005 1:15 am

But then you look at the photo that came out this year of what appears to be Cheney's ...endowment... and it throws the compensation theory out the window.

by **robertdreed** » Sun Aug 07, 2005 8:58 am

I thought we were talking about "masculine insecurity", not male genital size. That shows where vulgar pop Fruedianism leads people. Although the sophisticated version isn't necessarily that much more insightful. Swallowing Fruedianism hook, line, and sinker narrows people, and makes them dumber than they really are. What I find even more amusing is that the study in question wasn't a Social Psychology study, it was a Sociology study. Not by a professor, but by a "doctoral" candidate. Yeah, a "study." I'd like to read the methodology. Masculine insecurity is associated with an obsession with power and control. Omnipotence and omniscience. Concerns with power and control are a masculine domain. ( That's why I agree with Dennis Prager, that the G~d of moral law manifests itself as male, not as a Goddess tradition. Because otherwise, male humans won't listen. For all of their powers, females can't seduce males into acting wisely. And "acting wisely" does not equate to doing everything the "female/feminine perspective" says. ) Once again, that book recommendation- The Demon Lover, by Robin Morgan. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p097.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=robertdreed>robertdreed</A> at: 8/7/05 7:49 am

by **ZeroHaven** » Sun Aug 07, 2005 11:32 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Avalon - But then you look at the photo that came out this year of what appears to be Cheney's ...endowment...<hr></blockquote> You mean <a href="http://www.freakingnews.com/view.asp?entry=15903&display=photoshop" target="top">THIS one?</a> <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/happy.gif ALT=":D"> antiaristo - I'm not sure I understand your question(s). Willer does say "the point isn't to suggest these are the only factors that can explain these behaviors". I found it interesting that someone percieved to have authority telling people bogus facts does affect their behavior, like in <a href="http://p097.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm10.showMessage?topicID=217.topic">the diet thread</a>. <img src="http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a239/ZeroHaven/tinhat.gif"/>

Masculine Overcompensation Thesis

Masculine Overcompensation Thesis

Re: Masculine Overcompensation Thesis

Human Relations

Human Relations

Re: Human Relations

If only that little feller could talk

Sweejak answers the question

a textbook case?

a real richard-cranium

paradox

...

Cheney

Who is online