Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
(1) Higher testosterone = conservative = more aggression = more crime
(2) Higher testosterone = black men 20 to 39 in age = possibly maybe more aggression = possibly maybe more crime.
You can't do both. Either it equals more aggression and crime for both or it possibly maybe means more crime for both.
I have already answered your question, but as usual, you are pretending to yourself that I haven't. You have nothing else to go on, so you are picking on my use of an = sign, which was nothing more than a shorthand convenience. For the zillionth time, as I said in post #51, it is all about tendencies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond 007
But the reality is, you decided to pick on me using the = sign because I did not respond the way you thought I would. The study I cited in post #26 couched the association in the usual manner one would expect in a scientific study, and I used the = as a convenient shorthand, but you're conveniently ignoring what I said in post #51 about all of this being tendencies and likelihoods as opposed to absolutes because my stating that leaves you with nothing else to attack me on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond 007
And some conservatives have low testosterone. So what? The tendency would be for men with high testosterone to be conservatives, and the tendency for men who are aggressive and with criminal tendencies would be for them to have high testosterone. Thus, the tendency would be for men with high testosterone to be conservatives, and to engage in increased levels of aggression and criminality. Once again, if any criminal happens to be a democrat, then the likelihood would be for them to be a conservative democrat.
I have already answered your question, but as usual, you are pretending to yourself that I haven't. You have nothing else to go on, so you are picking on my use of an = sign, which was nothing more than a shorthand convenience. For the zillionth time, as I said in post #51, it is all about tendencies.
No you didn't answer this question. You are having it both ways.
You are pretending that you can't comprehend the differences between "tendencies" within your argument and your "certainty" of the argument. I refuse to concede that you are not intelligent to comprehend this simple difference.
You simultaneously hold these positions:
(1) More testosterone = conservatives = more aggression = more violence
You were certain here of the tendency.
(2) More testosterone = black men 20 to 39 = possibly more aggression = maybe more violence.
When black men are brought up you use uncertain words for this tendency like "possibly" "could" "maybe."
I want you to not have it both ways. Why are you being illogical, is it to appease the woke?
Either both conservatives and black men 20-39 have this tendency or they "possibly maybe could" have this tendency.
Quite the assumption. I was referring to the subjects of the thread, hence Dems.
According to you, less testosterone results in "weakness and entitlement".
"Testosterone is the primary sex hormone and anabolic steroid in males." "On average, in adult males, levels of testosterone are about seven to eight times as great as in adult females."
According to you, less testosterone results in "weakness and entitlement".
"Testosterone is the primary sex hormone and anabolic steroid in males." "On average, in adult males, levels of testosterone are about seven to eight times as great as in adult females."
I said it makes sense with the weakness and entitlement…you’re trying to deflect and using a strawman argument by bringing up women, lol…as nowhere in the article mentions women being injected with testosterone.
Study: strongly affiliated Democrats average less testosterone than weakly affiliated Democrats. If Democrats are given extra testosterone, they become more Republican in beliefs.
This doesn't surprise me. I don't know about before the 1960s, but since that time the Republican Party has tended to represent traditional (??? couldn't think of a better word) male values and the Democratic Party the traditional female ones.
Last edited by Angry-Koala; 05-22-2022 at 11:52 AM..
I live with a full grown man who has 0 testosterone due to a very aggressive form of prostate cancer. He has had hot flashes every 90 minutes for the last 8 years.
These days he can no longer support either party. The crazies are running both.
But he does want me to drive now. He says he'd rather put up with my driving than get yelled at. SO much for aggression.
I said it explains the weakness and entitlement…you’re trying to deflect and using a strawman argument by bringing up women, lol…as nowhere in the article mentions women being injected with testosterone.
You claim that less testosterone causes weakness and entitlement. If that's true, since they have less testosterone, women are weak and entitled.
Nobody's going to argue that on average women are physically weaker. But in my experience, men are more entitled and unaware of their entitlement (not all men, of course!) and surprisingly, Republicans tend to be entitled and, at the same time, unaware of their entitlement (again, not all Republicans, of course!)
You claim that less testosterone causes weakness and entitlement. If that's true, since they have less testosterone, women are weak and entitled.
Nobody's going to argue that on average women are physically weaker. But in my experience, men are more entitled and unaware of their entitlement (not all men, of course!) and surprisingly, Republicans tend to be entitled and, at the same time, unaware of their entitlement (again, not all Republicans, of course!)
I said it makes total sense. Nowhere did I or the article say anything about women. You’re simply deflecting and using strawman arguments because you obviously don’t like the results of the study, but muh science…and now you’re bringing Republicans into it too, lol.
And since you’re deflecting to women, I know plenty of women that aren’t weak and entitled. Their feelings don’t get hurt easily and they don’t expect others to pay their way. They even voted for because Trump and plan to again if he runs.
I live with a full grown man who has 0 testosterone due to a very aggressive form of prostate cancer. He has had hot flashes every 90 minutes for the last 8 years.
These days he can no longer support either party. The crazies are running both.
But he does want me to drive now. He says he'd rather put up with my driving than get yelled at. SO much for aggression.
I am not sure you comprehend the study.
It wasn't ironclad as there are exceptions and it said adding testosterone to people who are more strongly set in their beliefs didn't make much of a difference.
Also you comment on aggression, you seem to be in agreement with the concept of testosterone makes someone more aggressive as you say he wants to avoid aggression and has 0 testosterone.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
