Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

“Men who are physically strong are more likely to have right wing political views”

Interesting.  And without a doubt built upon racist, sexist, and homophobic hypotheses — nothing more than politicized assertions strung together and meant to frustrate the little bitchy metrosexuals who bang the gong for the welfare state, and whose virility cannot be questioned — trying to pass themselves off as “science.”

Having stipulated that:  where do the faux-conservatives and RINOs fall on this scale?  Physically speaking, I mean?

Because let me tell you:  I’ve met a bunch of ’em.  And while they are great at forming little backroom cabals and online cliques to create a degree of pain in their enemies,  I wouldn’t rely on most any of them to remain and fight once the shit really hit the fan.

— Though I do expect that they’d pen a rousing battle cry after the fact, if the political winds demanded it.

They’re very much like bitchy little metrosexuals who bang the gong for the welfare state in that way.

(h/t mondamay)

110 Replies to ““Men who are physically strong are more likely to have right wing political views””

  1. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Somebody find a link to that famous Dutch social scientist who was recently outted for having made up most of his data. Seem apropos.

  2. They’re very much like bitchy little metrosexuals who bang the gong for the welfare state in that way.

    You spelled ‘dong’ wrong.

  3. mondamay says:

    I don’t know if the study’s author intended it to be applied to politicians.

    Politicians are too damaged to be measured the same as normal people, anyway.

  4. leigh says:

    The author doesn’t specify what constitutes “right wing political views”. What do you want to bet she’s got it all wrong and wishes her Significant Other wasn’t such a poofter?

  5. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Maybe I need another pot of coffee, because this isn’t scanning for me:

    In the days of our early ancestors, decisions about the distribution of resources were not made in courthouses or legislative offices, but through shows of strength.

    With this in mind, Professor Petersen and Professor Sznycer hypothesised that upper-body strength – a proxy for the ability to physically defend or acquire resources – would predict men’s opinions about the redistribution of wealth.

    The researchers collected data on bicep size, socio-economic status, and support for economic redistribution from hundreds of people in the United States, Argentina and Denmark.

    In line with their hypotheses, the data revealed that wealthy men with high upper-body strength were less likely to support redistribution, while less wealthy men of the same strength were more likely to support it.

    [….]

    Men with low upper-body strength, on the other hand, were less likely to support their own self-interest.

    Wealthy men of this group [i.e. “weak”] showed less resistance to redistribution, while poor men showed less support [bold emphases added].

    At first glance, it seems to me that either they found what they were looking for, or the reporter here has misreported the research, because I’m not seeing the corrrelation.

    Like I said, maybe I need more coffee.

  6. Blake says:

    Let me see, is the Mail going for “strong body, weak mind?”

    Although, I suspect the Mail wouldn’t know a conservative from a hole in the ground. For exhibit A I give you: The photo of Arnold.

    Arnold is hardly representative of right wing views. Although, Arnold does have that whole “Austrian” accent down, so, I suppose, we can infer a parallel between “Right Wing” and “Nazi.”

  7. sdferr says:

    Since reason has been lost it isn’t surprising it doesn’t show up anywhere. Hadley Arkes though, as you can see for yourself, is quite the body-builder.

  8. Silver Whistle says:

    Is this a linear relationship? And, which is the dependent variable?

  9. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Seems more like they’re trying to correlate a strong body to a willingness to assert self-interest, the self-interest of the strong poor man being a right to other people’s money.

  10. Mike G. says:

    I mentioned this study to my wife and her response was…”So Liberal men are pussies.”

    And I did a study of my own that says that women with well developed upper bodies generally identify as conservative, with Ann Coulter being the exception to the rule.

  11. mondamay says:

    Ernst Schreiber says May 16, 2013 at 9:25 am

    I think it is just poorly written. It would be nice to see the actual study.

  12. Ernst Schreiber says:

    I think support for redistribution is supposed to the dependent variable.

  13. leigh says:

    Count Laura Ingraham and Michelle Malkin in there, too Mike G.

  14. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Agreed, mondamay. In particular, I’d like to see if they controlled for inherited versus self-made wealth.

    And Mike G., apparently poor conservatives are supposed to be pussies too. Only they’re too afraid of getting beat up by strong rich guys to dare say “you didn’t earn that.”

  15. Silver Whistle says:

    And I did a study of my own that says that women with well developed upper bodies generally identify as conservative, with Ann Coulter being the exception to the rule.

    Ann Coulter is a chick? Why does nobody ever tell me anything?

  16. geoffb says:

    So supporting redistribution are the wealthy-weakling and the poor-thugs.

    While not supporting redistribution are the wealthy strong bodied and the poor weak bodied that the thugs prey on.

    The wealthy-weak support redistribution so as to keep the strong thugs from preying on them. They support gun control too so that the strong thugs can easily prey on the poor-weak.

    The wealthy-strong are not intimidated by the strong thugs so they see no need to have government redistribute their wealth. The poor-weak want to become stronger and wealthy or at least be armed to save themselves from the strong thugs.

  17. cranky-d says:

    It sounds to me like the data really didn’t show much of anything, so they had to re-categorize a lot of people to come to any conclusions at all. I have the strong suspicion that’s it’s complete BS.

  18. cranky-d says:

    that’s it’s -> that it’s

  19. mojo says:

    “You know what Libs are like – bunch of bitchy little girls.”
    — Sam Axe

  20. Ernst Schreiber says:

    I have the strong suspicion that’s it’s complete BS.

    It’s turtles bullshit all the way down, as Darcentraleen might say.

    Bullshit headline above a bullshit lede about a bullshit study.

  21. happyfeet says:

    this just applies to white people, no? or is it everybody?

    The researchers collected data on bicep size, socio-economic status, and support for economic redistribution from hundreds of people in the United States, Argentina and Denmark.

    I don’t get it this is the epitome of correlation is not causation

  22. Scott Hinckley says:

    Ann Coulter is a chick? Why does nobody ever tell me anything?

    We forget that you are from a foreign country and might not pick up on the subtle cultural signifiers.

  23. Abe Froman says:

    I have no doubt at all that men who played sports are more likely to be conservative than pussies who are preoccupied with fairness and cupcakes. But most of the muscle heads in my neck of the woods also have a fondness for show tunes, Judy Garland and poodles, so I smell bullshit.

  24. happyfeet says:

    cupcakes help you grow big n strong especially if you use them for to supplement a healthy protein-rich diet and a regimen of resistance exercises

    jeez everyone knows that

  25. Abe Froman says:

    Cupcakes are on their way out, ya know? I’d have thought that you’d be aware of this and be focusing your attention on the next big thing for vain and shallow people by now.

  26. Abe Froman says:

    Get yourself a nice big box of pink macarons and start feeling feel whole again.

  27. happyfeet says:

    right now I’m mostly eschewing sweets but i have a place what makes teacakes and those are being well received at client meetings

    also the trader joe’s lemon tart has been a hit at the office – it has a really fun texture to it and a genuine butteryness you wouldn’t expect for the price

    but cupcakes are still in in in – you just more and more have to deliver up the “mini-cupcakes” is all – they’re beautiful and tasty but people don’t perceive them as being a serious indulgence

    the full-size ones are now more for sharing after a special dinner at home –

    things evolve – you have to roll with it Mr. F

  28. palaeomerus says:

    I’ve never actually met a bitchy metrosexual. The ones I’ve met have all been very friendly, open, and “understanding”. They remind me a lot of salesmen or really good waiters. Most of them don’t like discussing politics or making enemies of anyone. I’m not saying that they struck me as loyal or passionate but bitchy they were not.

    And of course the radical grievance prigs are effeminate in their own way but metrosexuals they ain’t. Metros are party people and socialites.

  29. palaeomerus says:

    BTW there are people who try to seem metro that clearly are not, much like goths, or cybers, around 25% of them are joiners trying to pose their way in.

  30. Abe Froman says:

    Sociological observations from Texans tend to be sociological observations about Texas that mean nothing elsewhere.

  31. newrouter says:

    same could be said of nyc

  32. Abe Froman says:

    Not really. The defining characteristic of NYC is that everyone is from somewhere else. People may generally share the same idiotic politics, but you won’t meet any born and raised New Yorkers unless you’re really slumming.

  33. newrouter says:

    “People may generally share the same idiotic politics”

    nyc: we import proggtards

  34. sdferr says:

    we import proggtards

    If you’re willing to say the lamp imports the moth, then maybe.

  35. newrouter says:

    you said it better

  36. Abe Froman says:

    When I first started working in the city, I’d say that close to half of my friends there were Republicans – or Democrats who were defensive about it. But they move out when they get married, whereas the liberals don’t any more. They just gentrify more and more poor neighborhoods.

  37. LBascom says:

    I think the point here is that New Yorkers are sophisticated, hip, and worldly, and non-New York people are not.

    According to New Yorkers…

  38. newrouter says:

    “According to New Yorkers”

    and once upon a time the nyc media could control the “narrative”

  39. leigh says:

    But they move out when they get married

    I’ve found this to be the case in every city I’ve lived in. Everyone I knew who lived in NYC that wasn’t gay or uber-liberal, became part of the B&T crowd as soon as they tied the knot.

  40. Abe Froman says:

    Those things are all pretty much facts, lee. The problem is that these people confuse those things with intelligence, and if an idiot like myself is made to feel brilliant by innumerable morons on a daily basis, you know it isn’t true.

  41. LBascom says:

    I hear ya Abe. It must be what it’s like to live in Paris.

  42. bh says:

    You notice things when you travel back and forth between city mice and country mice. When you’re first in a city you notice weird behavior but when you move back you notice other weird behavior that escaped your eye the first go around.

    Most everyone, it seems, has this drive to display these social markers.*

    At the place I’m renting up north (actual small town here, not another suburbia off of another large city) there are actual hipsters. I just wouldn’t have noticed that they were hipsters when I was younger. They’re fad-eating, ironic-neck-bearded hipsters though, I swear. There’re also conspicuous consumption dolts but instead of souped up rice burners with underlights and spinners they’re driving tricked out trucks with nothing — ever — in the bed of the truck. Shiny and new, not dirty and well-used.

    *I bet that I do this, too. Just have a hard time self-diagnosing it.

  43. bh says:

    By the way, an old stand-by in analysis is “Beware that which confirms/flatters/feels awesome”.

    That goes towards skepticism on studies like this one but also about the obvious superiority of one’s social/geographic/ideological clan.

  44. newrouter says:

    beware of + or – studies

  45. Abe Froman says:

    I never noticed it as a kid, but when I’m in the suburbs now, the excessive politeness bugs the shit out of me. I swear, the next time I’m standing on a sidewalk and a car stops to “let me” cross the street while completely oblivious to the fact that I haven’t crossed because there are a ton of cars going the other way, I’m gonna hurl a rock at them.

  46. leigh says:

    I learned today that Atlanta is the most redneck city in the country. We boast two redneck centrals here; Tulsa and OKC.

    And get this, the study was funded by a realty company. What the hell were they thinking?

  47. Abe Froman says:

    I’ve been to Atlanta a bunch of times and that characterization would never have crossed my mind.

  48. leigh says:

    Mine either. Buckhead is gorgeous and not rednecky at all. Of course, neither is much of Tulsa and OKC except the usual crappy spots.

  49. bh says:

    To be honest, I’m not exactly sure what a redneck even is.

    I grew up rural, poor, and white and so did most everyone I knew in my youth but it was in Wisconsin. Maybe we were rednecks. Don’t know. And all the southerners I’ve ever met haven’t fit my imagined definition either.

    (I’m not disputing their existence. Just haven’t ever met one as far as I know.)

  50. Abe Froman says:

    I haven’t seen a part of Atlanta that isn’t either black or preppy, and I’d imagine there’s even a preppy black part. Redneck is just a pejorative for country people anyway, so the very notion of a redneck city is kind of idiotic.

  51. newrouter says:

    blue necks know it is you red necks to “blame”. alinsky tatic

  52. Abe Froman says:

    I don’t think rednecks go to the University of Chicago. But maybe Wisconsin ones do, who knows?

  53. Abe Froman says:

    I watched an old Firing Line last night where his guest was Alinsky, nr. My two take-aways were that 1. political discussions used to be so much more civil and 2. Alinsky was a very smart, very deranged individual.

  54. bh says:

    Most of our attempts at broad categories are sorta useless.

    One of the coolest guys I knew in college came from the rural south (hick marker) before going to our school (evil elite marker), majoring in finance (Wall Street vampire marker) while playing lots of open bar gigs (dirty hippy marker) and then moving to New York (yes-clearly-a-devil marker).

    If you asked me to give him a marker I’d maybe go with music lover or mushroom procurer or funny friend who cracks wise when shit goes sideways or some other actually relevant thing.

    My markers would be far more salient.

  55. bh says:

    I don’t think rednecks go to the University of Chicago.

    I’m really not sure. I’d have fit the criteria, as best I can tell. Does an SAT score trump both nature and nurture or does the redneck category itself seem a bit loose and useless?

  56. Ernst Schreiber says:

    I don’t have anything to add other than I enjoyed Abe’s input. Hope to read more of it in the future.

  57. bh says:

    (By the way, I want to make it clear that I’m not taking offense here. We had a pejorative term for our own and it was “trash”. Even that greater pejorative doesn’t bug me and I use it myself from time to time. I’m just on a anti-macro-sociology kick here, I think.)

  58. leigh says:

    There is poor and then there is trash, bh. My mom grew up dirt poor and she could spot another imposter in our middle class life like a Catholic can spot a Protestant in Belfast.

  59. sdferr says:

    The term redneck began with men who spent all day behind the wheel of a tractor didn’t it? Those farmer ones tend to be rootedly conservative too, don’t they, just because of the everlasting connection with land and sky? Like their lives depend on it, sort of.

    Oh, and Dick Trickle — a short-trackin’ Badger fella — died of suicide at 71 today.

  60. bh says:

    Ha!

    No, I haven’t, Abe. I’ve gone through the Klaus Kinski years and the later doc years but somehow I didn’t even know this existed.

    Good times.

  61. bh says:

    And, just that quickly, the good times are over.

    When I was seventeen we — half in the bag — were going into a Country Kitchen in the middle of the night and a grown man — fully in the bag — yelled out, “Could Dick Trickle do this?” He then proceeded to dive into the shrubbery out front. Probably around ’91.

    Dick Trickle has always been like Geronimo or some such to me ever since.

  62. newrouter says:

    “I don’t think rednecks go to the University of Chicago”

    they may be there but they wouldn’t tell. go ax the the green grocer

  63. bh says:

    they may be there but they wouldn’t tell

    When I was there the Objectivists (a libertarian, Randian society) was the largest student group. In the hall where you went to sign up for extra-curriculars the largest cluster was at the Tobacco Appreciation Society where we smoked unfiltered cigarettes indoors non-ironically and offensively.

    It’s apparently gone to shit now.

  64. sdferr says:

    Of Bruno S., the actor, his IMDb bio says: “He was very difficult to work with, though, sometimes needing several hours of screaming before he could do a scene.”

  65. Ernst Schreiber says:

    It’s [i.e. the University ofChicago] apparently gone to shit now.

    Is there any major American university that hasn’t?

  66. bh says:

    There’s a chance I should dutifully correct my plural verbs from time to time but I’m not sure I agree with common usage.

  67. newrouter says:

    “It’s apparently gone to shit now.”

    burn baby burn or sumthing

  68. sdferr says:

    Just toss in an apostrophe, thus: Objectivist’s

  69. bh says:

    Heh.

  70. bh says:

    Heh, as in: it’s funny because it’s true. I am thinking of it as the Objectivist’s Society. Very good.

  71. Ernst Schreiber says:

    The short answer is that Romney thought he could phone in it in, because Obama wasn’t working.

  72. sdferr says:

    We nearly all smoked in class — all classes — back in ’74-ish, with nary a mention of discontent. Ashtray was the most frequent object used as an exemplar of form when pondering the eide, if chair hadn’t been taken up first. Nowadays I think smoking has been banned altogether. Fuckin’ idiots: how can they think without smoking?

  73. sdferr says:

    Why didn’t Althouse root out Obazm’s loathsomeness before voting for him?

  74. Ernst Schreiber says:

    That’s a very good question sdferr. It wouldn’t be because he’s the first black president, would it?

  75. bh says:

    To ask it is to answer it.

  76. sdferr says:

    So long as it doesn”t preclude her weak political thinking as a primary driver, it could be at least one of the significant parts of her problem, I guess. Though I didn’t really keep tabs on the details.

  77. bh says:

    Well, we could preclude his various non-existent strengths that he’d have formed at that point through force of will and strength of character or the wisdom of age and see what was left.

    Leadership? Nope.

    Wisdom? Nope.

    A certain parliamentary charm? Nope.

    There was that one historic aspect that remained.

  78. bh says:

    Maybe she really, really loved the way he was Chicago-dirty from the start?

    Regardless of the whys and wherefores, the misjudgment is there. Set in amber, if you’ll allow such purple prose.

    So, I read her accordingly.

  79. bh says:

    (I probably just conflated two elections. I’m really speaking to 2008.)

  80. sdferr says:

    The blackyness of Obazm didn’t buy anyone surcease though, so far as we can tell, given the pointless din of charges of racism that still bullhorn from the political left. There’s no quit in the true racists. They mean to persist.

  81. happyfeet says:

    i wish i could smoke

    but i done already done all my smokings

    cigarettes and cupcakes

    done done done

    in the next chapter i buy a hoose somewheres in nether america and take up grilling

    (i can’t but notice that people have taken to neglecting the art of grilled bbq chicken)

    it’s all steak and brisket and pork loin and sausages and portobellos and fajitas anymore

    bur you know you wait long enough everything cycles back around

    herman miller eames chairs

    and ain’t that america

  82. happyfeet says:

    *but* you know you wait long enough I mean

  83. palaeomerus says:

    “Not really. The defining characteristic of NYC is that everyone is from somewhere else. People may generally share the same idiotic politics, but you won’t meet any born and raised New Yorkers unless you’re really slumming.”

    The defining characteristic of NYC is that it’s importance, impressiveness, and relevance fade rapidly the further away from it you get. It’s a tamed, ragged, and squietly rinking little shithole full of vain yet compliant nobodies who used to be somebody, or so they claim loudly, whenever nobody asks them.

  84. palaeomerus says:

    it’s -> its

  85. happyfeet says:

    plus also new york city is fun

  86. palaeomerus says:

    practically cupcakeville

  87. happyfeet says:

    wif sprinkles!

  88. Abe Froman says:

    The defining characteristic of NYC is that it’s importance, impressiveness, and relevance fade rapidly the further away from it you get. It’s a tamed, ragged, and squietly rinking little shithole full of vain yet compliant nobodies who used to be somebody, or so they claim loudly, whenever nobody asks them.

    I don’t think I’ve ever seen someone attempt to put down New York and come across like a virgin describing sex before. Nice job!

  89. LBascom says:

    I don’t think I’ve ever seen someone attempt to put down New York and come across like a virgin describing sex before. Nice job!

    Then you aren’t paying attention. Did you not see my earlier comment comparing New Yorkers to Frenchmen?

  90. Abe Froman says:

    Then you aren’t paying attention. Did you not see my earlier comment comparing New Yorkers to Frenchmen?

    I was paying attention. Your comment was vague enough to sound sophisticated, though I have no idea what it meant One can almost imagine it being uttered by the most interesting man in the world whilst petting his cougar.

  91. happyfeet says:

    here is a handy list of fatal cougar attacks what have happened in these united states and also Candada

    here are some recent thinkings from the realm of Science about what to do if you encounter a menacing cougar (short answer: fuck if they know)

  92. sdferr says:

    Should You Run or Freeze When You See a Mountain Lion?

    You should unsheathe your katana and prepare to swiftly hack the thing in half.

  93. happyfeet says:

    they like to attack you from behind like fascist irs flunkies

    we need miniaturized personal hover drones for hikers what scan for mountain lions and bears and alert you to their presence

    this combined with the back to a tree trusty firearm drawn with air horn handy should pretty much do the trick I think

    I’ve thought about this a lot

    being eated is one of my biggest worries in life after the whole eating undercooked chicken thing

  94. sdferr says:

    they like to attack you from behind like fascist irs flunkies

    This would be an instance which wouldn’t happen to fit the question as posed, I guess. Best strategy in this case would be to smell bad or taste awful to a cougar and hope she chooses to move elsewhere for vittles.

  95. I avoid cougar attacks by hanging out with the debutantes instead.

  96. happyfeet says:

    yes that is true you can’t fight what you can’t see

    not unlike a shadowy cabal of fascist IRS piggies what have been community-organized to attack the enemies of the fatherland

  97. leigh says:

    Avoiding places trafficked by cougars wasn’t on the list?

  98. happyfeet says:

    they are wide-ranging lil critters and they hog all the best solitudes

  99. LBascom says:

    The problem with cougars is usually if they are going to attack someone, they are lunching on someone’s throat before someone even knows there is a cougar around.

    If you do see one, I think the best bet is to start hopping around like a retarded ape, ‘cuz no one wants to eat a retarded ape. Plus, if you saw him that means he’s not really hungry anyway, and running will just be like tossing a ball of yarn past a bored tabby cat. Stand still and he might mistake you for a scratching post.

    These are just my off the cuff thoughts…

  100. happyfeet says:

    hello cougar thank you for coming i would now like to perform an interpretive dance for you it is called please to not eat me

  101. cranky-d says:

    Shoot him if you see him. If you don’t have a gun, what the heck were you thinking?

  102. Abe Froman says:

    All things considered, cougars don’t seem to be all that killy. I wonder if it’s because they think humanoids taste like shit?

  103. Just how old would the Most Interesting Man in the World’s pets have to be to be considered couagrs?

  104. leigh says:

    Cougars like to act fierce (and they are) but if you make a lot of noise, they run off. Unless, they are guarding small cougars. In which case, why are you that close to Cougar Mom’s turf? And you deserved to get mauled.

    My advice? Stay in people safe places, like the gift shop at Yosemite.

  105. LBascom says:

    Shit, the freak’in rodents ,a href=”http://www.nbcnews.com/id/48694145/ns/health-health_care/t/man-dead-rodent-disease-yosemite/”>kill you at Yosemite

  106. LBascom says:

    Oops, stupid shift key.

    What happened to preview anyway?

  107. leigh says:

    That’s right, Lee. I forgot about the little bastards and the hanta virus they give as parting gifts.

  108. palaeomerus says:

    Cupcakes…all the way down.

Comments are closed.