[Ice Constricter]

(Original post by coca)
I think it's because women have been oppressed for so long so we have lower self esteem than men do. Fortunately I grew up around women who aren't like this and I've always been "different" anyway so I'm not one of those women.

So low self esteem explains what I said in post #12?

[pellejema]

(Original post by ckingalt)
The media is like a whore. Whores don't create perversions, they cater to them. The media does not manipulate women, the media caters to the image our society projects on women.

Yeah, our society projected by the media. You analysis is incomplete... it's true that the media doesn't create the idea that women want to change, but the idea that they SHOULD change is certainly is reinforced by the media. If you want some hard evidence just browse the Mail Online for a couple of minutes and you'll gauge the subliminal messages projected towards women.

[Arekkusu]

(Original post by Ice Constricter)
But why are females obsessed with male celebrities compared with males.

This is evident when you compare teenage boys to teenage girls. All the girls are somehow infatuated with males celebrities like Justin Bieber, One direction, Zac Efron etc. These girls will beat each other up if they had a chance just to meet these 'super hot guys'.

Yet you don't see teenage guys becoming obsessed and falling head over heels for attractive celebrities like Megan Fox, Kate Moss or Beyonce. All guys say is that they'll smash "their back doors in" end of. Guys don't act like they suffer some form of obsessive compulsive disorder in regards to the celebs they admire.

Young teenage girls are aware that they can be attractive to any random snotty boy in their class. Boys learn early on that they aren't allowed to get whatever they want in terms of this, and so they lower their expectations - suddenly, any woman will do, and the gender divide is perpetuated.

The young girls, however, develop an inflated sense of worth, they only care about the few high-value "super hot guys" at the top. In this respect it resembles the retarded sexual politics of the local Oceana.

[Waterstorm]

(Original post by avupa(^.~))
I hope you don't think you're some expert in human behaviour because you read a couple of articles on the net, probably about some psuedoscience research about how science and statistical techniques have proven that humans like to eat yummy food because it tastes good.

Of course, they are generally more emotional then men.

But I just disliked how you're depicting men, or more probably, you, as being some great being above animals - one with the gift of reason and blah blah blah.

Doing a research project on female psychology is more than reading a couple of articles on the net.

Of course, they are generally more emotional then men.

That's pretty much all I said in my original post, glad you finally came to your senses.

But I just disliked how you're depicting men, or more probably, you, as being some great being above animals - one with the gift of reason and blah blah blah.

Men rationalise decisions logically, women (most of the time) rationalise things by their emotions. That's just how it is. Whether you dislike it or not, nobody really cares- no need to vent out about it on tsr.

To be honest, after some of your lashing out after all I did was state a well known fact, you seem to be quite emotional too - you sure you don't have abnormally high levels of estrogen?

[Bey Taco]

women are more insecure ?

[avupa(^.~)]

(Original post by Waterstorm)
That's pretty much all I said in my original post, glad you finally came to your senses.

There was an underlying tone to that post, that I've heard way too often for me to not notice it.

And great work ignoring the latter section of my post.

you sure you don't have abnormally high levels of estrogen?

I probably do tbh. I'm prettier than most girls I know.

edit. Doesn't help that I'm very narcissistic also. And I've also been told that I write like a posh fellow.

[Ice Constricter]

(Original post by Arekkusu)
Young teenage girls are aware that they can be attractive to any random snotty boy in their class. Boys learn early on that they aren't allowed to get whatever they want in terms of this, and so they lower their expectations - suddenly, any woman will do, and the gender divide is perpetuated.

The young girls, however, develop an inflated sense of worth, they only care about the few high-value "super hot guys" at the top. In this respect it resembles the retarded sexual politics of the local Oceana.

Good explanation there

I have another one, studies on female psychology show that the more females that fawn over one male figure the more attractive that male becomes in the eyes of other females. Before anyone bites my head off I'm not saying its true for all females but its what I've noticied myself. With guys, yeah they could be a ton of guys that fancy one female. But the difference is that those guys wouldn't be influenced by the fact that a lot of guys like her.

[Waterstorm]

(Original post by avupa(^.~))
And great work ignoring the latter section of my post.

I ignored it because I don't see how that is related to females acting on emotions, which is what I'm talking about.

[avupa(^.~)]

(Original post by Waterstorm)
I ignored it because I don't see how that is related to females acting on emotions, which is what I'm talking about.

Have you never been in a fight situation? Or been in a 'gang warfare' situation?

Or rather, a much more simple example. There's a bunch of cute girls walking past the basketball court you're playing on with your friends, and you notice that one of them's the cutie who sits on the opposite side of the class that you can't help but just notice~.

So in a awkward moment you get the ball and try something you don't normally do to look cool and capable.

It's hormones that drives that action, emotions, not rational thought. A lot more of our behaviour is driven by our unconscious brain, than logically with conscious rational thought.

[Waterstorm]

(Original post by avupa(^.~))
Have you never been in a fight situation? Or been in a 'gang warfare' situation?

Or rather, a much more simple example. There's a bunch of cute girls walking past the basketball court you're playing on with your friends, and you notice that one of them's the cutie who sits on the opposite side of the class that you can't help but just notice~.

So in a awkward moment you get the ball and try something you don't normally do to look cool and capable.

It's hormones that drives that action, emotions, not rational thought. A lot more of our behaviour is driven by our unconscious brain, than logically with conscious rational thought.

I didn't say men only think logically, I said they do more than women- and that's why guys wonder why women do some of the things they do, when they would normally think would be silly.

And I know our unconscious pretty much, to an extent, controls us, but that's completely different. That's about all our past experiences being 'stored' and being reflected in our personality. That's nothing to do with male and female psychology, which could be said is more to do with evolution.

[avupa(^.~)]

(Original post by Waterstorm)
I didn't say men only think logically, I said they do more than women- and that's why guys wonder why women do some of the things they do, when they would normally think would be silly.

That, I'm more willing to agree with (and sorry for making mountains out of molehills thus far - if you had put it like that at the beginning, I'd never have started all this massdebating (though, the fault mainly lies with me still)) - though, it's still pretty meh for me - have you never encountered those sappy men who greatly lack intimacy and so when the first girl smiles at them, they go crazy for them? (Though that happens to girls as well)

Hormone imbalances like a lack of serotonin (at least I think it was serotonin) in the body does stuff like that apparently - I've had some pretty scary obsessive types come after me because of that - once a guy even, a friend actually (who does his best to get as much physical contact with anyone he can as possible).

I'd agree though, that there is a evolutionary basis for why women are all over the place when it comes to modern relationships though. But men imo aren't much better.

Only I am brilliant. Brb, suicide.

edit. That was my way of saying sorry for wasting your time btw.

Also, thanks for reminding me about hormone imbalances. Actually just went through a depressed period because I massively failed at something that I'd spent a lot of my time on, and just haven't managed to return to my 'normal state' since then. I wonder if that's got to do a little with hormone imbalances.

[Waterstorm]

(Original post by avupa(^.~))
have you never encountered those sappy men who greatly lack intimacy and so when the first girl smiles at them, they go crazy for them?

Yeah, I think (as long as there're normal) that's more to do with upbringing - which would affect their unconscious thought patterns, making them act that way. As in a big thing that people have is because they want what they can't have, because they have to invest time/effort to get it. It's like winning the lottery and making that same amount of money from hard work, you're more likely to appreciate the money you worked (invested) for and not just blow it like you would with winning the lottery.

I'm not sure if that example actually showed what I said well, but another one is flirting in general- all the teasing/playfullness is basically going to a point but not all the way, and the other person wants it- but can't get it, which builds attraction (as they need to invest further to get past that 'point'). This is all unconscious thoughts by the way, they won't actually be thinking that consciously.

[Waterstorm]

(Original post by avupa(^.~))
edit. That was my way of saying sorry for wasting your time btw.

Also, thanks for reminding me about hormone imbalances. Actually just went through a depressed period because I massively failed at something that I'd spent a lot of my time on, and just haven't managed to return to my 'normal state' since then. I wonder if that's got to do a little with hormone imbalances.

I know, it's fine.

And it probably is, might not be sex hormones, but we have a defence mechanism where our brain prevents us from doing things, in case we fail it - cause failure hurts, especially after investment like I was talking about (and like you did). There's a book somebody told me to read on that actually, called feel the fear and do it anyway, I might have a read of it during the summer - I know you actually did do it though, just sayin'. But a lot of stuff that actually goes on isn't very well understood, as the brain is too complex - beyond our imagination, especially how our state changes.

But take it as feedback, take everything you do - whether you succeed or fail, as feedback.

[Arekkusu]

(Original post by Ice Constricter)
Good explanation there

I have another one, studies on female psychology show that the more females that fawn over one male figure the more attractive that male becomes in the eyes of other females. Before anyone bites my head off I'm not saying its true for all females but its what I've noticied myself. With guys, yeah they could be a ton of guys that fancy one female. But the difference is that those guys wouldn't be influenced by the fact that a lot of guys like her.

Yes that's also definitely a factor, probably more so than what I said actually. It makes sense when you think how heavily women are invested in their babies, gene-wise. Men can chuck their seed anywhere and wait for some to stick, women have to make sure they get the right sperm inside them.

Evolutionary theory suggests then that any husband will suffice to bring up the kids.

[medbh4805]

(Original post by forgetamine)
I just think it looks like ****. That's all.

Whatever. Find something better to do with your time than complain about how other people dress.

[Bimbleby]

(Original post by Waterstorm)
its because of hormones, go read anything on psychology and you'll see what I mean.

Ok, I can see why you think this because this kind of 'oxytocin makes women enjoy washing up' b******s is spouted all over the place, but reading a couple of brief articles on this doesn't make you an expert. I've been researching this for a couple of years, actually, and if you really look at the science behind these sort of 'hormones make women irrational' things, it's incredibly shoddy. The main people doing that kind of work are at Cambridge, Hines and Baron-Cohen do a lot of it. They're probably the most accurate scientists writing this kind of thing and even their work on this is shoddy in a lot of cases. You can't just accept a study because it sounds 'scientific' you have to look at their methods, take account of factors which are influencing the results etc. If you look at the way things like 'women are more emotional' have been 'scientifically' tested, it's c***. They do it on self-report questionnaires. In studies which actually tested the emotional perceptiveness of men and women with more objective criteria, the difference disappeared. Read 'Delusions of Gender' by Cordelia Fine, she'll sort you out with some critical assessments of the kind of studies which have 'proven' that women are all crying hyperchodriacal emotional wrecks illogically falling about all over the place.

[Waterstorm]

(Original post by Bimbleby)
Ok, I can see why you think this because this kind of 'oxytocin makes women enjoy washing up' b******s is spouted all over the place, but reading a couple of brief articles on this doesn't make you an expert. I've been researching this for a couple of years, actually, and if you really look at the science behind these sort of 'hormones make women irrational' things, it's incredibly shoddy. The main people doing that kind of work are at Cambridge, Hines and Baron-Cohen do a lot of it. They're probably the most accurate scientists writing this kind of thing and even their work on this is shoddy in a lot of cases. You can't just accept a study because it sounds 'scientific' you have to look at their methods, take account of factors which are influencing the results etc. If you look at the way things like 'women are more emotional' have been 'scientifically' tested, it's c***. They do it on self-report questionnaires. In studies which actually tested the emotional perceptiveness of men and women with more objective criteria, the difference disappeared. Read 'Delusions of Gender' by Cordelia Fine, she'll sort you out with some critical assessments of the kind of studies which have 'proven' that women are all crying hyperchodriacal emotional wrecks illogically falling about all over the place.

If you had read any of my further posts, you'll see I did a project of female psychology (mainly based on attraction), and it wasn't just a case of reading a few articles. It was actually more based on primary research I did myself from talking to a lot of people themselves (people I know, and approaching a lot of people in the street/bars/clubs etc) a lot of observing in all kinds of environments - for me to actually do the observations well I had to study up on body language, and all kinds of non verbal communication - you can learn a lot about what somebody is thinking/how there're feeling by facial microexpressions and eye movements (and I personally think I'm actually pretty good at that now).

Basic conclusions were that what makes females acted more on how they felt and their emotional state at the time of action. While for men, it was more to do with logical thought and less on emotions. For example, on a one night stand a female would be in the zone of attraction and may end up going home with a guy who added a lot of positive emotion to her state, but later she may rationalise it logically and think how she might have been a slut/whatever for doing that. But in the moment, it's more on emotion (not the word more, not saying only). This does not mean women are stupid though. And obviously the extent to their logical/emotional thoughts controlling their actions varies between people, some females probably base more on logic. It's also to do with upbringing and life experiences stored in their unconscious - but that's another story.

And this is why females connect better with other females, and males with males. Emotional thoughts connected with emotional thoughts from other people. And again, this doesn't mean women are an emotional mess, it's how their brain works. And, as I said in another post - the actual true reasons for it (and many, many things) are not fully understood as we are nowhere near to fully understanding the brain, and I personally think that would actually be an impossible thing to do, as the brain is limitless in its capabilities.

[Bimbleby]

(Original post by Waterstorm)
If you had read any of my further posts, you'll see I did a project of female psychology (mainly based on attraction), and it wasn't just a case of reading a few articles. It was actually more based on primary research I did myself from talking to a lot of people themselves (people I know, and approaching a lot of people in the street/bars/clubs etc) a lot of observing in all kinds of environments - for me to actually do the observations well I had to study up on body language, and all kinds of non verbal communication (and I personally think I'm actually pretty good at that now).

Basic conclusions were that what makes females acted more on how they felt and their emotional state at the time of action. While for men, it was more to do with logical thought and less on emotions. For example, on a one night stand a female would be in the zone of attraction and may end up going home with a guy who added a lot of positive emotion to her state, but later she may rationalise it logically and think how she might have been a slut/whatever for doing that. But in the moment, it's more on emotion (not the word more, not saying only). This does not mean women are stupid though.

I did read your further posts, and this confirms my point completely. Asking people whether they acted based on emotion or logic is a completely unscientific way of testing whether people act based on emotion or logic. People will tend to confirm cultural stereotypes in self-report studies. If you ask women how aggressive they are or how emotive or how perceptive, their answers will generally confirm the stereotypes of women as less aggressive and more emotionally perceptive. If you ask people how good they are at maths, then compare their responses with objective tests of their mathematical ability, women will generally rate their abilities lower than men with equivalent abilities. When you actually test these things you get a completely different answer to that given in self-report studies, which is what yours is. Using people's opinions of one night stands is a particularly culturally loaded example: of course women are more likely to feel bad after one night stands and to say that they weren't acting logically, because we're culturally conditioned to think that women who do this are sluts and men who do this are just acting according to their natural biological urges and are doing something good when they bed a random woman. So for a man post one-night-stand his actions are going to seem more logical to him, to a woman maybe less so. Both of them will have been acting on attraction. Are you trying to say that men have one night stands based on logic?
Anyway, the specifics of your research aren't my point, and aren't my business, but my point is that those kind of methods are culturally loaded so it doesn't prove an awful lot when they confirm cultural stereotypes.

[Waterstorm]

(Original post by Bimbleby)
I did read your further posts, and this confirms my point completely. Asking people whether they acted based on emotion or logic is a completely unscientific way of testing whether people act based on emotion or logic. People will tend to confirm cultural stereotypes in self-report studies. If you ask women how aggressive they are or how emotive or how perceptive, their answers will generally confirm the stereotypes of women as less aggressive and more emotionally perceptive. If you ask people how good they are at maths, then compare their responses with objective tests of their mathematical ability, women will generally rate their abilities lower than men with equivalent abilities. When you actually test these things you get a completely different answer to that given in self-report studies, which is what yours is. Using people's opinions of one night stands is a particularly culturally loaded example: of course women are more likely to feel bad after one night stands and to say that they weren't acting logically, because we're culturally conditioned to think that women who do this are sluts and men who do this are just acting according to their natural biological urges and are doing something good when they bed a random woman. So for a man post one-night-stand his actions are going to seem more logical to him, to a woman maybe less so. Both of them will have been acting on attraction. Are you trying to say that men have one night stands based on logic?
Anyway, the specifics of your research aren't my point, and aren't my business, but my point is that those kind of methods are culturally loaded so it doesn't prove an awful lot when they confirm cultural stereotypes.

Yeah, I forgot to actually mention that the actually asking people part proved not to be so reliable, that was just one thing I did as an example. And you sound just that the other dude I was talking to, I'm not saying women base every single action 100% on emotion, and have no logical thoughts- while every action men do is based 100% on logic. I'm saying women base action on emotional thoughts more than men do, and there's obviously an overlap. You can't disagree with that.

And regarding the one night stand, that's what I mean - when women are in the moment, they do things they might not do if they actually thought about doing it when they weren't in that moment (if that even makes sense). I they might be conditioned to think sleeping around is slutty etc, but I'm not questioning why they think that, I'm saying they don't actually think that when there're in the actual moment, they don't suddenly back off thinking "oh, I'd be a slut to do that", whereas if you asked a women randomly in a lecture for example(which I've done), they would think that - as the person didn't cause that rise in emotional state. And as I said, I don't mean every action has no logical thought at all behind it, as it obviously does.

Also, the asking random people straight up comes back to saying a different thing to what you'll actually do, like I just said, which is why it wasn't reliable.

And when I use the word emotion, I don't mean crying or anything. I mean feeling.

[Bimbleby]

(Original post by Waterstorm)
Yeah, I forgot to actually mention that the actually asking people part proved not to be so reliable, that was just one thing I did as an example. And you sound just that the other dude I was talking to, I'm not saying women base every single action 100% on emotion, and have no logical thoughts- while every action men do is based 100% on logic. I'm saying women base action on emotional thoughts more than men do, and there's obviously an overlap. You can't disagree with that.

And regarding the one night stand, that's what I mean - when women are in the moment, they do things they might not do if they actually thought about doing it when they weren't in that moment (if that even makes sense). I they might be conditioned to think sleeping around is slutty etc, but I'm not questioning why they think that, I'm saying they don't actually think that when there're in the actual moment, they don't suddenly back off thinking "oh, I'd be a slut to do that", whereas if you asked a women randomly in a lecture for example(which I've done), they would think that - as the person didn't cause that rise in emotional state. And as I said, I don't mean every action has no logical thought at all behind it, as it obviously does.

Also, the asking random people straight up comes back to saying a different thing to what you'll actually do, like I just said, which is why it wasn't reliable.

And when I use the word emotion, I don't mean crying or anything. I mean feeling.

I understand what you mean, but my point was that no-one thinks logically about a one-night stand. You can't conclude from this that women tend to act on emotion more than men, you can only conclude that sometimes women act illogically, which doesn't seem a very interesting conclusion, especially since you've not mentioned anything about the men's responses. And even if you had, my point is that a one night stand is probably based on attraction and feelings and usually a state of intoxication -no matter what your gender - which is why I asked why you presumed that men have one-night stands out of logic. This question is misleading because whilst a woman's reaction to her one-night stand is divergent from what she might have thought at the time and so she recognises her irrationality, a man's is not (as I've explained above), so he's more likely to say that what he did was logical, when really is was just as illogical as the woman's actions. I understand what you mean by emotion, I don't really know why you've made that point.

How do I sound like the other guy? I'm in no way saying that what you're saying is wrong because generalizations are wrong or that you're saying that women base every single action 100% on emotion... where did you get that from? I'm saying that the research methods you used were shoddy and hence that your conclusion is invalid, for that reason and for the reason I've explained above. It seems you've asked some women whether they regretted a one night stand and concluded from their positive response that women tend to act based on emotion and not logic. That seems like an obvious non-sequitur even without going into the specifics about why asking people to report on their feelings isn't the best way to do science.