It is not. It's gaslighting. A narcissistic behavior.
Do women engage in narcissistic behavior more often? Maybe. I don't know. But just call a spade a spade and don't blame it on sex.

 

Edit.

 

Last edited: Sep 13, 2023

Tachymenoides Harrisonfordi




(PS: What's Mixbus doing if not Digitally Processing an Audio Signal? .. )

 

Clinical evidence?
In what way is a study that concludes "using humor may be detrimental for women's career advancement" clinical evidence for... uh... youtube videos of women screaming at Subway being a "reinforced social behaviour of survival" and that being a "feminine" character?

Every single sentence here applies to any aggressive men too. This proves nothing.

She's an evolutionary psychologist. In terms of scientific credibility they're right between phrenologists and astrologists.

Sure, and the phrase "A scapegoat for mentally weak people" is not loaded with animosity, it's just scientific statement backed up by clinical evidence, right?

 

Edit

 

Last edited: Sep 13, 2023

I never asked for scientific proof (not that you provided any), I asked what you meant by "feminine character" and apparently you were born ready to reveal your true self, so I got a really good bargain

Don't worry about my feminine side, embracing it made me happier than I've been my entire life

I salute your exquisite gentlemanly behavior. Fedora off to you, sir
However I see absolutely nothing to be gained from further engaging with this kind of idiocy. There's Reddit for that

 

You wouldn't be able to criticize the science, if she was a Scientologist. It's right there in the name.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_evolutionary_psychology

 

Edit.

 

Last edited: Sep 13, 2023

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the science, its just that you twist the context, misconstrue and misunderstand the information!
You sound like you like to read so you know what apophenia means? spell correct tries to tell me its not a word but it means "the tendency to perceive a connection or meaningful pattern between unrelated or random things (such as objects or ideas) What psychologists call apophenia—the human tendency to see connections and patterns that are not really there—gives rise to conspiracy theories."

"A Little Bit Of Knowledge Is a Dangerous Thing!" - are you familiar with that saying?
The idiom a little knowledge is a dangerous thing means that one can become falsely overconfident about his expertise in a certain subject if he possesses a small amount of knowledge about it.

So you read an individuals literature on female aggression in evolutionary psychology, which is interesting stuff but then you use that to say:
"All of that to say that In this day and age, people with strong feminine character get offended very quickly"
Which I presume is in response to people being offended by Harrison's shitty vsts? That would then be a straw man argument against people speaking up about industry scams, and on top of that you prove that you dont even understand the applicability and bearing of the science you quote & link
There is a reason why adult psychologists pursue valuable studies in an unbiased way, and dont cherry pick some random evolutionary theory to say "If you complain you are a girl or a fag"
Ive obviously joined in the battle here against bullshit

PS. why do you create single sentence paragraphs with frequent poor syntax? Is there an issue writing as well as reading & comprehending literature properly?

 

The lesson being : if a guy thinks there's something for the dog to be learned by looking at the moon, he's an idiot.

Or maybe he was just saying "go fetch, boy!"

 

Yes that's correct. Lonely Rocker removed the video from YouTube very recently. I re-uploaded it (for archival purposes) but he discovered it after a few weeks and got it removed.

 

Last edited: Sep 17, 2023

@triggerflipper , @Martel , and all involved in this off topic debate, please, get back to the topic.
You can create new thread in lounge about this "theory" if you wish.

 

hey genius, your sentence requires imbecile singular not imbeciles plural or change the determiner, it looks like a 10yr old wrote it.

who's the imbecile now eh?

 

It really look alike if you focus on the nose isnt it ?