Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion General Science Discussion Forum Are All Male's Liars

I'll let you know when I make my plans and will be there sometime in May. You can discuss my rough exterior with Blacknad who I met, with his lovely wife, in Birmingham England last year. My bark is substantially worse than my bite. But I must confess that nothing you have posted, to date, would have led me to conclude you were anything other than a male between age 25 and 32.

However when you write: "Men are treated abysmally by women." I must strongly disagree. I've yet to figure out why it is that women tolerate male behavior. When women take the lead committing murder, armed robbery, rape, torture, starting wars, and getting in street fights I will start to consider the playing field even.

Yes there are some over-the-top females around. But there are far more under-the-gutter males. Far far more. And a quick review of history will clearly demonstrate that the vast majority of human misery and suffering has been at the hands of men.

The facts do not support you.

How about this?

Martin S. Fiebert
Department of Psychology
California State University, Long Beach

Last updated: January 2007

SUMMARY: This bibliography examines 196 scholarly investigations: 153 empirical studies and 43 reviews and/or analyses, which demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 177,100.

http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

Here are more facts from another site:

Violence against children by women is another issue where the public
attitude is very different than the facts revealed by formal studies.

* Women commit most child abuse in intact biological families. When
the man is removed from the family the children are at greater
risk.
* Mother-only households are more dangerous to children than father-
only households.
* Children are 3 times more likely to be fatally abused in Mother-only
Households than in Father-only Households, and many times more
likely in households where the mother cohabits with a man other
than the biological father.
* Children raised in Single-mother Households are 8 times more likely
to become killers than children raised with their biological
father.

Other studies reveal more about female violence against children:
* Women hit their male children more frequently and more severely than
they hit their female children.
* Women commit 55% of child murders and 64% of their victims are male
children.
* Eighty two percent of the general population had their first
experience of violence at the hands of women, usually their mother.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/fam27.htm

While you portray men as violent, containing all that is evil in the world, you ignore the fact that men are the resuers. Which gender routinely puts their own lives at risk for others? Which gender comprises the bulk of firefighters, cops, etc? Which gender is used when the risk of death is high?

Men are treated as the disposable gender.

BTW, the book I linked in an earlier post was written by a man who was the President of the NY chapter of NOW.

Men are very aggressive towards other men, and this may partially be due to the social stigma associated with venting their emotions in other ways. Men are forced by societal norms to bottle up their emotions, or to express them in an aggressive manner towards other men. Bottling up leads to eventual high-pressure release, usually (again) in the form of aggression. That men are the participants in gang fights and in violent crimes is no surprise to me - there's no other socially accepted way to get those feelings out.

Women are allowed to cry and emote in any way they want. They have less need for violent outbursts.

But that's just part of it. The other part is that violent crimes by women go largely unreported. Few men are willing to admit to being raped by a woman, few men are willing to admit to being beaten up by their wives, and police are more likely to let women go with a warning than to arrest them when the situation is in a gray area.

Men are far less likely to report spousal abuse against them than are women. If a man hits his wife, he's likely to go to jail. When a woman hits her husband, she's likely to receive a bouquet of flowers from him apologizing for whatever he did that instigated the violence.

The fact that most women can't hit as hard as most men enters into it a little bit: A punch from a wife is less likely to do real damage than a punch from a husband. But that doesn't make it any less aggressive, nor should it make it any more acceptable. In fact, it may be because of this discrepancy that women are more likely to use weapons in domestic disputes than men. When's the last time you heard about a man throwing a pot at a woman?

Remember when Tanya Harding threw a hubcap at her boyfriend? Most news outlets reported it as just another whacky behavior from a celebrity. If he'd thrown it at her, they would have reported it as the truly maniacal behavior that it was.

Men are jerks. I have no illusions about that. I used to think that a few men were jerks and made the rest of us look bad. But I eventually came to realize that the vast majority of men on this planet are total a-holes and that just a few of us are nice guys. But to confuse that with the idea that men are truly the dominant gender is a mistake made by too many people.

w

DA Morgan; after reading many of your responses to posts on this website, I have come to the understanding that you are nothing more than a troll. A troll who has set themselves up as moderator.Your harsh replies to scpg02 were in poor form and quite uncalled for. If you had taken the time to read her posts at least twice,you may have had a better understanding of who she is and what she was trying to say. I was just listening to a podcast of Aristotle's philosophies, were he was commenting that, "to the vulgar man, the world is absolute and there is no swaying his opinion."........

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_33.html

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_35.html

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_37.html

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_39.html

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_40.html

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_42.html

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_45.html

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_48.html

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_51.html

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_54.html

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_57.html

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_60.html

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_63.html

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_66.html

Knock yourself out looking for excuses ... the numbers don't lie here any more than they do in climatology.

It is exactly, and precisely, what it appears to be.

And why women tolerate it is beyond my wildest imagination.

Yes they do when you get to pick and choose. You think your 15 odd charts compare to the 196 scholarly investigations: 153 empirical studies and 43 reviews I cited above? You didn't even look at the list did you?

Dan,

Part of what Wayne says is relevant here.

People are less likely to report a crime, especially things like assault, if it is a woman doing the hitting.

Your figures may be a long way off the reality.

Interesting that male crime goes down by 7% over ten years and women's goes up 7%. Wonder what's behind that. Any ideas?

Blacknad.

Wayne wrote:

"Men are very aggressive towards other men, and this may partially be due to the social stigma associated with venting their emotions in other ways."

Now, Wayne, have you not seen any other species in its natural habitat? It's totally natural. Where humans differ is that culture can offset this natural inclination to some extent.

scpg02 asks:
"You think your 15 odd charts compare to the 196 scholarly investigations"

When my "15 odd charts" are the official reports of the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation and are the actual basis of essentially all scholarly work ... yep ... sure do!

Blacknad wrote:
"People are less likely to report a crime, especially things like assault, if it is a woman doing the hitting."

I agree. But then I suspect you will agree that women subject to rape and abuse grossly under-report that crime so touche'.

Be honest here ... when you were in college ... did you ever meet a male forced to have sex or beaten up by his girlfriend?

Now ... and equally honest ... did you ever date a girl who hadn't had to fight some guy off who was trying to get into her knickers?

And for those among you who are base ... yes even the ugly ones.

I do have a suspicion as to why the crime rates are equalizing. But lets put that in a different thread. Care to start it?

No, but oh how often I wished it would happen

Blacknad.

Blacknad wrote:
"No, but oh how often I wished it would happen"

Exactly my point.

There is a huge amount of whining about how males are too embarrassed to report being sexually assaulted. Yeah. Sure. We are biologically wired to say THANK YOU to any woman who so much as shows up.

Of course there are exceptions. We are talking about human behaviour after all. But those exceptions are few and far between and being pointed too in an attempt to promote a point with near zero-value.

Let's not be so ignorant about a terrible crime:


* There were approximately 4,890 rapes of males age 12 and over in the United States in 1994. The rate for rapes of males was .8 per 1,000 persons age 12 or older. (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1997).
* In 1985, the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics reported in The Crime of Rape that there were 123,000 male rapes over a ten-year period. (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1985).

And that's just the REPORTED incidents. Non-reporting of male rape is so common that burglars have been known to rape the victims of their home invasion robberies just to keep them from going to the police.

Trust me, these people did NOT say "thank you".

Rape is not a sexual act. It is a power play. Being raped is not a pleasurable sexual experience. It is a denigrating, soul crushing loss of control to a monster.

To talk about it being something that you'd say "Thank You" about is to completely yank the rug out from under the victims of these crimes and shows a complete and total disregard for the well-being of others. It's abominable that so many people think like you do. You should, quite honestly, be ashamed.

w

Given that the population is roughly 50% female and 50% male how about putting those numbers into perspective?

From the FBI's statistics on rape:

Total Male Female
7,065 6,966 99
100% 98.6% 1.4%

The males would need to under report at a ratio of 3500% to roughly equal the population and that would still require assuming that females don't similarly under-report.

But lets have this discussion on the basis of something where there is zero under-reporting and essentially zero possibility of mistaken gender identification. How about bank robbery?

You are absolutely correct Wayne when you say it is a crime of violence not sex. And so far women, for reasons both biological and cultural have not been the ones to pick up swords.

Speaking of the FBI statistics, and putting numbers in perspective, how about we take the number of violent crimes commited by men (say in 2005) and consider what percentage that is, of all males in the study ( I think the stats had the total population of the study around 130 mill, and DA wants us to divide male and female up 50/50). That leaves a percentage of men in the US who commit violent crimes at under one percent. To some this seems to be enough evidence to generalize that the whole gender is violent. They never ask the question of why these men might be more prone to violence, they simply draw the conclusion that all men are more prone to violence. Real enlightened.

To put it another way, if we had the gender breakdown regarding charitible contributions and found that men donated more, would we be right in saying that men were a more compassionate gender, or would there be other reasons why their statistics could be higher?

You're right, Dan: Since it doesn't happen as often, it's perfectly okay to act like it's no problem and that the victims should be thanking their attackers. After all, what kind of wuss could let a woman get away with that if they didn't really want it? They obviously don't count and should be laughed at and told that they should be thanking their aggressors.

Dan, you're a smart guy. But in this you have disgusted me. I think it's time for me to pick up my toys and go home. That a moderator of the board would be so callous and not even think to apologize when his rude attitude is called to the floor is very disappointing in what I had originally thought seemed to be a great discussion forum.

Bye.

Wayne

pathfinder wrote:
"To some this seems to be enough evidence to generalize that the whole gender is violent."

Not to me. In fact I think you will find the percentage far smaller than that when you consider that most crime is by repeat offenders.

My only point was that it is disingenuous to point to women as the issue when men are 90+% of it.

Pathfinder asks:
"To put it another way, if we had the gender breakdown regarding charitible contributions and found that men donated more, would we be right in saying that men were a more compassionate gender, or would there be other reasons why their statistics could be higher?"

An excellent question so let me give you my initial response with the understanding that I may come back and alter it upon reflection.

First I think we can safely assume that murder and rape are crimes of aggression and that we know the perpetrator's motivation. When it comes to charitable donations it is more confusing. I, for example, have contributed at times because of my social conscience, at times for my political views, and at times just to avoid the tax man. I would be a liar (consistent with the subject of this thread) if I claimed all of my donations were the result of compassion. Tax avoidance is hardly compassionate unless viewed through very selfish eyes.

Then, in the case of married couples, I would need to know further to what extent the donation was the man's idea or the woman's idea, or something they mutually worked on together.

But to end the waffling ... I might.

Wayne wrote:
"But in this you have disgusted me."

You've misread my intent because I wasn't clear.

I in no way consider the burden different by gender for attacks. I would as soon put a woman in prison for life for rape as a man.
My point, to go back to when this thread diverged, was related specifically to the claim that women are worse than men and/or that men are in some manner victims. Let me quote to refresh your memory:

The statement was:
"First of all I'm female. Second, men lost their rights to procreation with the advent of the pill and government as substitute fathers."

I'm not sure how we got to where we are currently. But I'm neither a misogynist nor a reverse misogynist and the day hasn't come when I've been drunk enough to believe I've lost my procreation rights or that the pill has been anything but a boon to my enjoyment of sex.

But I do have a good fallback position ... after all the subject of the thread is ... "Are All Male's Liars." A subject that I think makes a lot of people uncomfortable because we all understand the implications.

If this is what you got out of my post then you need to go back to school. I never made such a claim and the quote of me you used doesn't support the above. Try reading what I post instead of making assumptions. Your knee jerk reactions make you look bad.

I'm trying to be nice here but I don't like it when people twist what I say and then try and slap me down for it. Everyone else seemed to get it.

Ah. So, according to you, this isn't clear:


I think that makes it extremely clear, Dan. "Yeah. Sure." is a sarcastic phrase, in this case referring to the idea that man could be embarrassed by a sexual assualt. You go on to say that "We are biologically wired to say THANK YOU to any woman who so much as shows up." In other words, we should just be grateful we got lucky.

How much more clear could you have been?

I figured I'd check back to see if you at least had the decency to apologize the second time your attitude was called to the floor. I was surprised to find that not only did you not do that, but you even defended your remarks and pretended that you hadn't said what you did. It's pathetic, Dan.

Outta here.

Wayne