Study: Physically weak men more likely to be socialists

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Science.

Researchers question remaining is whether weak men turn to collectivism to protect themselves against physically stronger males, or whether capitalist beliefs drive men to the gym.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/weak-men-more-likely-to-be-socialists-study-claims-rsnc3l8mk


It's not the first study to find that physical weakness correlates to socialist attitudes: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/10061462/Stronger-men-are-more-right-wing.html

 

[Co-Co Zola]

Science is just confirming what everyone knows.

Liberal Males tend to be mentally and physically weaker. They're submissive, 'quirky', defective and whiny. They're a lot more likely to suffer from anxiety, depression and to have a defective sexuality.

No offense intended but every single Male I've ever known who is major into LGBT rights, pro immigration and all that nonsense is, without fail, an absolute fairy of the highest order. Just calling it how I see it.

 

[ehtheist]

"Science"

 

[ripskater]

It's not always the case, but it's probably true in general in the white population..

Pretty much 90% of blacks vote democrat (socialist) so it may not hold true for them.

 

[MardyBum]

Researchers found that men's opinions on redistribution of wealth could be predicted by their upper body strength, with powerful men more likely to take a conservative stance of protecting their own interests.

In contrast men who were just as wealthy but were of a flimsier build were less opposed to policies like those of Labour leader Ed Miliband, which would involve surrendering some of their wealth to society.

The scientists, from Aarhus University in Denmark, analysed the wealth, bicep size and views on economic redistribution of hundreds of men in America, Denmark and Argentina.

They found that wealthy men with strong arms were less likely to support economic redistribution, or the fairer sharing of wealth among society, and unsurprisingly strong men with less money supported the policy.

But among physically weaker men, the pattern was reversed. Those with plenty of money were less opposed to redistributing it, while those who were poorer were less supportive.

Huh, so Trump is a liberal cuck like I always thought, that laughable "conservative, capitalist" budget makes sense now.

Good to know Trudeau will be leading the capitalist charge in Canada as well.

 

[SensaiRambo]

Science is just confirming what everyone knows.

Liberal Males tend to be mentally and physically weaker. They're submissive, 'quirky', defective and whiny. They're a lot more likely to suffer from anxiety, depression and to have a defective sexuality.

No offense intended but every single Male I've ever known who is major into LGBT rights, pro immigration and all that nonsense is, without fail, an absolute fairy of the highest order. Just calling it how I see it.

They are weakling and want someone else to subsidize their health problems or they work in do nothing government jobs and dont care about draining the system..

 

[dontsnitch]

You could reword this to say people with more empathy have lower levels of testosterone. These studies are always so cheeky.

 

[SouthoftheAndes]

What about National Socialists? Hitler is not regarded as weak and is loved by many sickos in the War Room and he was a hardcore right winger, yet supported Government ran healthcare? What about the Right wingers that drool over Putin and Netanyahu's nuts? Both those guys are 'right wingers' and their countries have more 'socialism' than the USA and they both advocate for helping their fellow man only within the confines of a tiered system.

The notion of everyone for himself is just more Laissez Faire bs. I also have to totally disagree with this. Even great men like Plato advocated for a more 'socialistic' society the difference being that these societies would be hierarchical tiered. Pure equality is impossible. In any case though Plato wanting a eugenic/and engineered world via the Republic didn't mean the type of egalitarian equality/universalism that today's snowflake marxists on College campuses call for. What today's snowflakes often call for is impossible. A healthy 'socialistic' system will have hierarchy and be meritocratic but forget full out Laissez faire or the garbage that the GOP wants people to believe of 'trickle down' economics.

In any case i'd also argue that it is to the advantage of the 'strong men' if they set up a socialistic/central controlled system so long as they reside at the top. It is a great way to eliminate competition and to consolidate power and maintain further dominance. @IDL knows the game.

 

[surgeyou1]

You guys are so insecure lol. Consistently looking for validation from these bizarre articles.

 

[HomerThompson]

+++WOW+++Socialists BTFO!!!***INCREDIBLE***

 

[goldennirvana]

What about National Socialists? Hitler is not regarded as weak and is loved by many sickos in the War Room and he was a hardcore right winger, yet supported Government ran healthcare? What about the Right wingers that drool over Putin and Netanyahu's nuts? Both those guys are 'right wingers' and their countries have more 'socialism' than the USA.

The notion of everyone for himself is just more Laissez Faire bs. I also have to totally disagree with this. Even great men like Plato advocated for a more 'socialistic' society the difference being that these societies would be hierarchical tiered. Pure equality is impossible. In any case though Plato wanting a eugenic/and engineered world via the Republic didn't mean the type of egalitarian equality/universalism that today's snowflake marxists on College campuses call for. Nor is it similar to even the early thoughts and desire for hierarchical systems with a degree of central authority.

In any case i'd also argue that it is to the advantage of the 'strong men' if they set up a socialistic/central controlled system so long as they reside at the top. It is a great way to eliminate competition and to consolidate power and maintain further dominance. @IDL knows the game.

NS were/are right-wing socialists. Go away.

 

[ehtheist]

What about National Socialists? Hitler is not regarded as weak and is loved by many sickos in the War Room.

Are there actually many here who honestly, genuinely like/love/whatever Hitler? I mean, it's one thing to appreciate certain policy choices he made while still recognizing he was a monster of a human being - I'm pretty sure his road building abilities are the envy of libertarians everywhere - but is there actually a sizeable chunk of this forum who outright like the guy? I can think of a few, but I find it hard to believe you'll find many here who actually like Hitler in any encompassing sense - but, I could be wrong on that.

 

[Bargey]

It's not always the case, but it's probably true in general in the white population..

Pretty much 90% of blacks vote democrat (socialist) so it may not hold true for them.

Didn't it drop to around about 70% for black males this last election?

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

"Science"

I'm skeptical myself. I didn't look deeply into the methodology of the study but it is interesting that more than one team of researchers reached similar conclusions. Can you show where they went wrong or point to a similar study with contradictory results? Or do define what constitutes science by your pre-conceived notions?

 

[snakedafunky]

What about National Socialists? Hitler is not regarded as weak and is loved by many sickos in the War Room and he was a hardcore right winger, yet supported Government ran healthcare?

Hitler was no coward but he definitely was a manlet he was like 70 kilos soaking wet.
I know he wouldn't have qualified for the Waffen SS due to high requirements so he must have been a bit short than Himmler like under 174 cm.

 

[KONE]

You guys are so insecure lol. Consistently looking for validation from these bizarre articles.

TS is a woman though

Thank you Inga for reinforcing what we already knew, you didn't have to do that for us!

 

[cincymma79]

Duh

End thread

For serial though going to read to see if bullshit but probably true

 

[Jim Bob]

This is another Liberal Progressive generated problem in America. There is no God in the home anymore. Moral decay has left 50% of homes without a mom or a dad. Schools have turned into a babysitter that are producing fragile little snowflakes who need group therapy every time they don't get their way.

 

[ehtheist]

I'm skeptical myself. I didn't look deeply into the methodology of the study but it is interesting that more than one team of researchers reached similar conclusions. Can you show where they went wrong or point to a similar study with contradictory results? Or do define what constitutes science by your pre-conceived notions?

To some degree I'm just being cheeky, but it's more of a general issue I have with science that delves into the more social side of things - but even moreso, any conclusions drawn from it, particularly with small sample sizes. Your second article cites "hundreds of men" across several different countries when, to get anything vaguely resembling a sound conclusion of any sort, you'd have to analyze thousands of men within a single city and within a single demographic to even reasonably be able to hint that it was true of men in that demographic within that one city. Hundreds of men across three countries is a pittance of a sample size for such a broad claim, and it really leads me to wonder if such a study shows anything that we should take remotely serious.

I look at a study like this and I see the study which will lead to a bigger study that *might* actually tell us something - and that will lead to a bigger study that will tell us more. I have trouble taking a study with such a tiny sample size as this that is spread over such a large area as anything more than a glorified poll that doesn't actually give strong evidence of much anything - just raises a point that is worth further analysis to be proven. What's worse about things like this is you'll get the internet crowd going nuts on the "See guys? SCIENCE says this!"

On a side note, this article touches upon some of my points which makes me roll my eyes at things "science" shows us in internet lingo.

http://www.slate.com/articles/healt...e_march_for_science_was_eerily_religious.html

 

[mb23100]

Anyone who didnt think this already has never been to Portland. The men are skinnier than the women there. (And less hairy)