Article: Study Supports Theory That “Men Are Idiots” – Wait… What?

.

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

OK, there are a few women who are idiots. I concede that. However, we all know that most idiotic stunts are performed by men. It's not even rare for young men to do stupid, high risk things.

a reply to: Tangerine

Or perhaps it has more to do with the person than the person's sex?
But I cannot expect someone soo mired in obvious sexist thinking or lacking an ability to critically examine said thinking to understand the concept.
So meh.

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Quite right, and it took females taking risks to advance technology and exploration through prehistory too. There is no rational suggestion that it was an exclusively male affair.

That's very true and I think it's important to make a distinction between taking calculated risk and idiotic risk.

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
a reply to: Tangerine

Or perhaps it has more to do with the person than the person's sex?
But I cannot expect someone soo mired in obvious sexist thinking or lacking an ability to critically examine said thinking to understand the concept.
So meh.

No, it actually does have something to do with gender. Haven't you spent any time around teenage boys and young men? In my experience, a significant percentage of them engage in idiotic risky behavior. Only a tiny percentage of teenage girls and young women engage in that kind of behavior. I have personally never witnessed teenage girls or young women doing it. I'm talking about voluntary "play" behavior with a very high risk of injury.

a reply to: Tangerine

And you'd think I haven't already illustrated the problem with biased personal sampling.
All well.

a reply to: Tangerine

Hello again

It's pretty well known that countless thousands of women (certainly in the UK and USA, especially younger ones), engage in the highly risky and idiotic pursuit of getting blind drunk to the point of passing out around drunk men who are total strangers and risk (and are often subjected to) sexual assault. This is sadly all too common, and many certainly play at the sexual titillation game without thinking of the consequences or intending to carry through with an act. You are not aware of this?

a reply to: Bluesma

Ah but aren't they supposed to be the stalwart bringers of equality?
Does the identification of inequality need the target of such inequality to call it so?
I think not on both counts to be fatally honest.

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

Ah the usual No True Scotsman Fallacy argument.

Not really. There are radical feminists.

The simple fact is you share the same fundamentals with "RadFems".

No. I really don't. I don't believe women to be superior to men.

You tell me one thing. Your actions speak another.

How's that exactly?

In your mind, I'm not trying to point out an inequality in what is allowable in society, I'm ATTACKING FEMINISM!

What inequality is that? You are attacking feminism.

Problem is, when have I mentioned feminism in anything but maybe passing in this thread? It's certainly not in the OP.

Oh... am I supposed to pretend your other threads don't exist?

Which is par for the course really. Saying that men can be victims too is apparently, somehow, hating women.

I don't recall ever saying that men can't be victims (I don't think this situation is an example) or that to claim such is hating women... again as I eluded to earlier, attacking feminism isn't the same as misogyny.

Like what happens with the vile crap aimed at MRAs to characterize all of them as misogynists.

Some are, some aren't. Sound familiar? What of the vile crap hurled at feminists in general but specifically by MRA's?

Where are feminists when men are getting treated unjustly?

Based on their gender? Like with this satirical article written by men?

Maybe doing what you are doing here perhaps?

What should I be doing instead? Shall I write to all the sites that have mistakenly published this as a genuine study? Shall I write to the men that published the original article and tell them it isn't fair? That we as a society should no longer make jokes about men? Sorry, not gonna do that, I don't do it for women either.

And satire you say? I point out the Time article. It's being taken seriously. Kind of makes my point for me.

And that's the fault of a societal wrongdoing? Seems to me that the only thing to blame are people not understanding satire. How is that feminism's fault?

So, yea, the above is indicative of a movement for equality exactly how?

So it's appeared on a few sites... all feminists are supposed to know this and break out our equality signs and start marching?

Finding this crap acceptable is equality exactly how?

I find humor acceptable. Especially gender humor about both men and women... hilarious.

And don't give me that "Patriarchy hurts men too." crap.

It does.

Things like what I am talking about is supported by, if by silence if not direct support, those who are supposedly all for equality.

Feminism has a list about a mile long on things it needs to address... somehow I don't think trying to CONTROL someone's sense of humor is going to make that list.

Why aren't MRA's all over this?

a reply to: Kali74

No. I really don't. I don't believe women to be superior to men.

Oh really so you don't believe patriarchy theory?
That women are victims of men?
That men have through out history oppressed women for their sole benefit and the entire system is slanted to benefit men?

Yet, farther down you talk about how "patriarchy does hurt men too".

I don't recall ever saying that men can't be victims (I don't think this situation is an example) or that to claim such is hating women... again as I eluded to earlier, attacking feminism isn't the same as misogyny.

No, it's just not right because no true scotsman.................

Some are, some aren't. Sound familiar? What of the vile crap hurled at feminists in general but specifically by MRA's?

Lets see some shall we?
I on the other hand can show how MRA's can't even have a conference without being attacked in a number of ways.
Hell if men did what is being pulled their butts would be in jail.
Not so much vice versa.

Based on their gender? Like with this satirical article written by men?

So, being intentionally obtuse or what?
Remember my whole comment about how it's being taken seriously?
Yea.
Hell your comrade in arms who posted recently made my point quite nicely for me.

What should I be doing instead? Shall I write to all the sites that have mistakenly published this as a genuine study? Shall I write to the men that published the original article and tell them it isn't fair? That we as a society should no longer make jokes about men? Sorry, not gonna do that, I don't do it for women either.

Not actively trying to sink the conversation would be nice.
The thing is you're proving my point more and more as we go.
Holistically speaking.
So, yes, please continue.

And that's the fault of a societal wrongdoing? Seems to me that the only thing to blame are people not understanding satire. How is that feminism's fault?

Maybe the howls of indigination when they find a problem with how women are portrayed.
And the lack in the converse?
Yet, supposedly, they're about "equality".
Right.

So it's appeared on a few sites... all feminists are supposed to know this and break out our equality signs and start marching?

Oh wow.
Look, you're using absurdist logic now.
Color me surprised.

I find humor acceptable. Especially gender humor about both men and women... hilarious.

Easy to claim.
Impossible to prove.
And in fact runs quite contrary from what little I've noted of your actions accross multiple threads now.

It does.

Let's see if I get you right.
Men oppress women and themselves?
Fascinating.
I can't help wondering why you claim you don't want to see us wiped out too.

Feminism has a list about a mile long on things it needs to address... somehow I don't think trying to CONTROL someone's sense of humor is going to make that list.

Really now?
Lets take this a notch or two above that shall we?
Like they're not trying to control what a person can and cannot say?
What a person can or cannot wear? *Again the reference to #shirtstorm.*
What a games a person can make or play?
Where a person can or cannot look?

Why aren't MRA's all over this?

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

Oh really so you don't believe patriarchy theory?

I do but not to the point extremists do.

No, it's just not right because no true scotsman

K. Whatever floats your boat.

You're pretty much just ranting now. You clearly aren't interested in fixing anything, discussing anything or anything at all but attacking feminism. I was pretty clear in my posts, I'm not going to caveat every post with I don't hate men or think they're inferior to appease your manufactured outrage. You're going to insist I am something that I'm not regardless of anything I say and in doing so it is you who makes my points for me... that you are perfectly okay with the hypocrisy of condemning generalizations while committing them yourself.

ETA: Just to be clear... the shirt thing, was beyond idiotic. It was a shirt and I'm far from the only feminist to say so... but that doesn't matter to you, does it?

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

Study Supports Theory That “Men Are Idiots”

Agreed. This is not to support the idea that women aren't. But, there is nothing wrong with this study IMHO

We are damn retarded animals. On multiple levels.

originally posted by: Aliensun

originally posted by: violet
They needed a study to figure this out???!

Sorry, couldn't resist

c'Mon, Violet, you are sitting on the answer to the problem. Tell us what it is.

(Couldn't resist either.)

What it is???
It was a joke

Nothing more.

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

Just like I predicted, this is another woman-hating rant on ATS.

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
a reply to: Bluesma

Ah but aren't they supposed to be the stalwart bringers of equality?

? They are? I am not familiar with this idea? Who feels that way?
One thing that I sometimes see as reasonable with those who refer to a Patriarchy culture is the recognition that both men AND women are responsible for the whatever oppression is going on towards women- women too, are instilled with "patriarchial" values, so part of the idea is that they need to look at themselves and how they encourage subtly exactly that which they wish to change.

(ETA, rolling back to look at other comments you made, I see we do not at all have the same understanding of that Patriarchy theory. I see it as as a description of a cultural value system- meaning the majority of a society holding this up, that majority made up of both genders.)

Does the identification of inequality need the target of such inequality to call it so?
I think not on both counts to be fatally honest.

Oh, I think so! Yes! Victimization is directly relative to how it effects the perceived "victim"!
If someone wants and enjoys something, it is absolutely irrational to claim them a victim of that thing, and even more irrational to try to "save" them from it!

It doesn't respect the right of individuals to choose their experiences, and I don't see that as any more rightious than the feminists trying to "save" me from the "slavery" of being a wife and mother, when it is exactly what I wanted to do!

I don't expect anyone to tell me, "yeah you say that, but deep down you are really suffering and being victimized" and I certainly wouldn't say that to a guy who is claiming he is not suffering either.

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: Tangerine

Hello again

It's pretty well known that countless thousands of women (certainly in the UK and USA, especially younger ones), engage in the highly risky and idiotic pursuit of getting blind drunk to the point of passing out around drunk men who are total strangers and risk (and are often subjected to) sexual assault. This is sadly all too common, and many certainly play at the sexual titillation game without thinking of the consequences or intending to carry through with an act. You are not aware of this?

I am aware of that. But the objective of getting drunk isn't to put oneself in danger (even if that is sometimes the result). I've known many people who, in their youth, made a practice of getting blind drunk and, surprisingly, most were not preyed upon. I was thinking more about idiotic stunts that are almost certain to result in injury such as jumping off a roof onto a rubber dumpster lid and catapulting onto concrete or riding a bicycle off a 20' cliff or "surfing" on the hood of a fast-moving car or riding a skateboard down the metal stair railing on a set of concrete stairs that end on concrete.

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: Tangerine

Hello again

It's pretty well known that countless thousands of women (certainly in the UK and USA, especially younger ones), engage in the highly risky and idiotic pursuit of getting blind drunk to the point of passing out around drunk men who are total strangers and risk (and are often subjected to) sexual assault. This is sadly all too common, and many certainly play at the sexual titillation game without thinking of the consequences or intending to carry through with an act. You are not aware of this?

I am aware of that. But the objective of getting drunk isn't to put oneself in danger (even if that is sometimes the result). I've known many people who, in their youth, made a practice of getting blind drunk and, surprisingly, most were not preyed upon. I was thinking more about idiotic stunts that are almost certain to result in injury such as jumping off a roof onto a rubber dumpster lid and catapulting onto concrete or riding a bicycle off a 20' cliff or "surfing" on the hood of a fast-moving car or riding a skateboard down the metal stair railing on a set of concrete stairs that end on concrete.

Most men don't ride on the roof of a moving car or surf down concrete stairs while wearing the beer hat and smoking a bong. Honest, they really don't.

Men don't get preyed upon when drunk as much as women (and yes, men do get robbed and beaten when drunk) as they are generally a lot better at fisticuffs and defending themselves from rape, plus their bums are hairier (usually) and this detracts from the appeal in many cases.

Women do heaps of risky stuff and put themselves in harm's way all of the time, just you fail to see it for some reason.

a reply to: skalla

plus their bums are hairier (usually) and this detracts from the appeal in many cases.

LOOOOL...you nailed it

Even though not talked about...this is the single most common reason of fewer men rapes

It sounds like rubbish to me but then again a lot of these types of studies do. I am left handed, at least once a year I see a study posted on why left handed people are worse off than right handed people. These types of studies are just a simple way for others to get paid while getting their name published. This little study appears to be nothing more than a few people counting from one list, and yet it has received a lot of attention.

Even though I believe there is an agenda to portray men as idiotic and threatening I do not think this study had that in mind. It was just an easy way to get one's name published and garner attention. No real reason to give it any more thought.

There is something good to be said for risk takers anyhow. If it wasn't for risk takers some of us might have a Queen instead of a President. If it wasn't for risk takers the Wright Brothers might have continued to just fly kites. If it wasn't for risk takers we might not have NASA, no moon walking, no thoughts on space travel etc...