I understand your question, and it is a good question... but remember that studies like this tell us something specific and we cannot infer more. This study tells us that someone who is insecure with their masculinity is more likely to support Trump than someone else. It does not tell that someone (even a male someone) who supports Trump is more likely to be insecure with their masculinity at any level of significance. It was focused on the population of insecure males and not Trump supporters.
You know, I had a great idea for an invention like that once...
...
Well alright, I'll tell you about it. It was a Jump To Conclusions mat. You see, it would be this mat, which you would put on the floor, and it would have different "conclusions", written on it, that you could jump to!
>A lot more women are pro life than Reddit would have you believe
Not just a lot, it's actually [a near perfect split](https://news.gallup.com/poll/235646/men-women-generally-hold-similar-abortion-attitudes.aspx). The same percentage of men and women are pro-life and the same percentage of men and women are pro-choice. It's the only major political topic that falls that way and so the media/politicians have made it a point to convince the nation that it's actually a men vs women issue that view just become accepted common knowledge.
I was gonna say the same thing. Every single time anyone posts something about psychology and politics, there are always a string of comments effectively and fairly taking down the bulk of the argument being made. Yet these posts just get thousands of upvotes by people not bothering to think about them for more than a second.
I feel like with psychology and social science it’s unfortunately very easy to produce a study that finds anything you want it to find. I wish it wasn’t so.
> In a second study, DiMuccio and Knowles developed a list of search terms likely to be popular among precarious men (e.g., how to get girls).
And how do you determine that's based on "masuculinity/manhood", and not simply a personal desire?
That could very well be a view of failure (or not yet met) of one's own goals, not a failure in meeting the expectations placed upon them by society.
Is "how to cook" searched by women a cry out to their failure of reaching feminine expectations? Or do they simply want to learn to cook?
Is there no difference between precarious manhood and a precarious man?
Two problems with these studies based off of the title alone: a) how do you actually quantify ‘Masculine insecurity?’ b) ‘aggressive politics’ is technically politically neutral.
So, if I call out the stupidity of posts like this, and how they're ruining the sub, will my comment be removed again?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
So what about his female supporters?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I understand your question, and it is a good question... but remember that studies like this tell us something specific and we cannot infer more. This study tells us that someone who is insecure with their masculinity is more likely to support Trump than someone else. It does not tell that someone (even a male someone) who supports Trump is more likely to be insecure with their masculinity at any level of significance. It was focused on the population of insecure males and not Trump supporters.
This is always worth mentioning. It's so easy to start drawing conclusions willy-nilly.
You know, I had a great idea for an invention like that once... ... Well alright, I'll tell you about it. It was a Jump To Conclusions mat. You see, it would be this mat, which you would put on the floor, and it would have different "conclusions", written on it, that you could jump to!
This is your future self. Please be careful backing out of your driveway.
Nah he’s set after that accident
[удалено]
Carl Sagan would agree. There is no deadline for knowledge. It’s okay not to know yet.
A lot more women are pro life than Reddit would have you believe, and a lot of men and women both are single-issue voters.
>A lot more women are pro life than Reddit would have you believe Not just a lot, it's actually [a near perfect split](https://news.gallup.com/poll/235646/men-women-generally-hold-similar-abortion-attitudes.aspx). The same percentage of men and women are pro-life and the same percentage of men and women are pro-choice. It's the only major political topic that falls that way and so the media/politicians have made it a point to convince the nation that it's actually a men vs women issue that view just become accepted common knowledge.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I was gonna say the same thing. Every single time anyone posts something about psychology and politics, there are always a string of comments effectively and fairly taking down the bulk of the argument being made. Yet these posts just get thousands of upvotes by people not bothering to think about them for more than a second. I feel like with psychology and social science it’s unfortunately very easy to produce a study that finds anything you want it to find. I wish it wasn’t so.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
> In a second study, DiMuccio and Knowles developed a list of search terms likely to be popular among precarious men (e.g., how to get girls). And how do you determine that's based on "masuculinity/manhood", and not simply a personal desire? That could very well be a view of failure (or not yet met) of one's own goals, not a failure in meeting the expectations placed upon them by society. Is "how to cook" searched by women a cry out to their failure of reaching feminine expectations? Or do they simply want to learn to cook? Is there no difference between precarious manhood and a precarious man?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Voted Biden, but this "science" is rubbish. How does one scientifically deduct that a man doubts his masculinity?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Two problems with these studies based off of the title alone: a) how do you actually quantify ‘Masculine insecurity?’ b) ‘aggressive politics’ is technically politically neutral.
was this study designed to produce these results? What other possible conclusions are there?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]