Ten Politically Incorrect Truths About Human Nature

Gray Fox

Gray Fox

Newbie
Joined
Aug 22, 2004
Messages
6,568
Reaction score
1
Just saw this in the haus, here is the original thread:
http://www.flamehaus.com/bbs/ten-politically-incorrect-truths-about-human-natur-vt126372.html

I suggest you read the whole article, even if some things like number 4 seem utterly stupid. I don't know if any of it is true, but it's still an interesting read.


1.Men like blond bombshells (and women want to look like them)
2.Humans are naturally polygamous
3.Most women benefit from polygamy, while most men benefit from monogamy
4.Most suicide bombers are Muslim
5.Having sons reduces the likelihood of divorce
6.Beautiful people have more daughters
7.What Bill Gates and Paul McCartney have in common with criminals
8.The midlife crisis is a myth__sort of
9.It's natural for politicians to risk everything for an affair (but only if they're male)
10.Men sexually harass women because they are not sexist.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20070622-000002.xml
 
2,4 and 10 are utter bullsh*t.

Some guy's opinion != truth :|
 
none of those are facts/truths, and these are bullshit in my opinion: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
 
The reverse of 2 is actually true. Humans are one of the only species on the planet that're monogamous. We're an anomaly.
 
Well... that was interesting.

Something seems wrong with no. 10. It says that men abuse women sometimes because they want quick sex and sometimes for the same reason they abuse men, (power, I suppose). It then draws the conclusion that men harass women because they are not sexist. That might apply to the second case, but surely not the first one. Men don't abuse other men for quick sex in the same way they do to women. They could even repeat the experiment it mentioned - see how many men agree to have sex with an attractive male stranger.
And I do agree that most harassment is in the name of power - effectively a form of bullying. Espescially with men raping other men, hard to see what else it could be.

The rest however, seem pretty much sound to me.
 
Darkside55 said:
The reverse of 2 is actually true. Humans are one of the only species on the planet that're monogamous. We're an anomaly.
Click to expand...

Uhh.. humans aren't monogamous. Whether we were or not depended on culture. There were plenty of polygamous societies.
 
While there were polygamous societies, humans are inclined toward being socially monogamous. Read this, it's very interesting.
 
10 seemed just poorly written, not actually false.

What it's saying is that sexual harassment is a tool of competition to get an edge. Is it really any different than harassing a guy because he's weaker, short, unsuccessful with women etc?
 
Add some more important ones to that list..

The Bank of England practically control critical British government policy through its largest shareholders.

The Federal Reserve practically controls critical US government policy through its largest shareholders, most of which are also shareholders in the Bank of England and other world banks aswell.

I mean who actually thinks that government is a seperate entity when money always does the talking.. almost every western government is funded by these private banking organisations.
 
wtf clarky

the Bank of England isn't human nature
 
lol, ok a bit off topic, possibly a mini rant, but it's connected with money doing the talking.
 
B.Calhoun said:
4 seems about right
Click to expand...

4.Most suicide bombers are Muslim.

The article argues that these young muslim men are sexually frustrated. They're still muslims, sexually frustrated or not doesn't matter.
 
Having actually read the site, which some of you should before posting, 10 seams to be very true. Harassment was around long before women entered the workplace, men harassing them is a continuation of this because they treat women the same as men.

However this can not stop the human nature which makes people post PC bullshit without doing some research.
99.vikram said:
2,4 and 10 are utter bullsh*t.

Some guy's opinion != truth :|
Click to expand...

READ IT ---> http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20070622-000002.xml
 
Robbo said:
However this can not stop the human nature which makes people post PC bullshit without doing some research.
Click to expand...
Careful, don't get cut by that sharp wit of yours :hmph:

The justification given for 2, 4 and 10 are (again) utter bullsh*t.

2. Men being taller than females and polyginy are not interdependent. Or if it is, they haven't cited any hard proof of it. Correlation != causation.

4. Again, correlation != causation. Bullsh*t theory, bullsh*t evidence.
(If you were so spleen-wrenchingly stupid as to buy this sh*t, then you also have to agree that global warming is because of declining pirate populations.)

10. If you bought the last one, then I'm not surprised you bought this piece of wild baseless speculation:

"Browne contends it is both?men using power to get sex. "To say that it is only about power makes no more sense than saying that bank robbery is only about guns, not about money."

So that's why women are ignored and dominated. The entire f*cking office wants to have sex with them! D'oh!!
 
2. = Natural Selection
4. This one is hard to prove or disprove, let's ignore it.
5. When you put is as crudely as "So that's why women are ignored and dominated. The entire f*cking office wants to have sex with them! D'oh!!" it sounds far fetched, however most men feel superior to women so why seek power for powers sake?? Even if sex isn't the reason something is and that something is not men trying to prove that they are better than women.

I can agree that some of these arguments that try to justify that our entire social structure is based around 'natural urges' are a bit iffy, but to call them "wild baseless speculation" is just silly.
Remember don't get cut by those quick reply's of yours
 
I'm about half way through the article and all of these principles sound fundamentally sound to me, although the justification is sometimes inelegantly stated. For example, for number 2 where it makes a link to height-difference between the genders, it sounds like a stretch because the phrasing and layout of the point is clumsy. But then, when you realise that the height point is actually stating that in a species where there is a big size differences in genders, females tend to flock towards the larger males for physical security, it all becomes a slightly more logical point. The rest of that point is argued out on the basis of genetic competition between males - men like to monopolise lots of females because it means greater propagation of our genetic material.

Then in Number 3 it ALSO acknowledges Darkside's point about monogamy - monogamy actually benefits more men on the whole, which is perhaps why as a social animal we tend to create monogamous societies.

I also don't see people's problem with Number 4. Who else are you claiming makes up for most suicide bombings? It's a logical, well backed-up point, which is also completely inoffensive to anyone that has the good sense to understand that 'most suicide bombers are muslim' != 'most muslims are suicide bombers'
 
I like dominant women Robbo.
The article seems pretty un thought out to me, as most of the points are, y'know, bullshit.
 
Number one is lies, for me at least.
Redhaired wumenz r teh hawt. :naughty:
 
Blondes suck. You interpret that as you wish.

btw, #11: MY PENIS IS ENORMOUS.
 
spookymooky said:
I'm not sure why, but this actually made me lol.
Click to expand...
:D

Furthermore, blonds are awesome. As are brunettes. And redheads.

Come to think of it, I like 'em all equally, but for some reason, which hair color I prefer depends on the facial structure and body type of the girl. *shrugs*
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top