• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Study: tRump appeals to men who suffer from fragile masculinity

Phys251

Phys251

Purge evil with Justice
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
56,429
Reaction score
45,562
Location
Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/11/trump-appeals-men-suffer-fragile-masculinity-psychologists/

(note: there is a link in there to the story in the Washington Post, but it is behind a paywall.)

New York University psychology professor Eric Knowles and NYU psychology doctoral student Sarah DiMuccio claim that many male Trump supporters feel far more insecure in their own masculinity than they’d have you believe — and they are drawn to Trump’s authoritarian rhetoric because it makes them feel more powerful.
Click to expand...

In particular, the researchers found that there was a strong correlation between counties that voted overwhelmingly for Trump and internet searches for topics related to masculine insecurity, including “erectile dysfunction,” “hair loss,” “how to get girls,” “penis enlargement,” “penis size,” “steroids,” “testosterone” and “Viagra.”
Click to expand...

Also important to note is that the research found less of a correlation between fragile masculinity and support for McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012.
 
I wonder if they looked to see if men supporting Hillary had similar internet searches
 
Phys251 said:
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/11/trump-appeals-men-suffer-fragile-masculinity-psychologists/

(note: there is a link in there to the story in the Washington Post, but it is behind a paywall.)





Also important to note is that the research found less of a correlation between fragile masculinity and support for McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012.
Click to expand...

Well, that study will certainly make the leftwing snowflakes feel better when they are screaming at the night sky or coloring in their safe rooms.
 
Mycroft said:
Well, that study will certainly make the leftwing snowflakes feel better when they are screaming at the night sky or coloring in their safe rooms.
Click to expand...

Already spewing juvenile insults is a sure sign you have no way to refute the article!
 
Phys251 said:
Already spewing juvenile insults is a sure sign you have no way to refute the article!
Click to expand...


Juvenile insults? Like spelling the presidents name tRump instead of Trump. Is that the kind of juvenile insults your against?
 
Phys251 said:
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/11/trump-appeals-men-suffer-fragile-masculinity-psychologists/

(note: there is a link in there to the story in the Washington Post, but it is behind a paywall.)





Also important to note is that the research found less of a correlation between fragile masculinity and support for McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012.
Click to expand...

And the women who support Trump suffer from what?

What is their psychological defect, because it has to be something.....














barf
 
Chillfolks said:
Juvenile insults? Like spelling the presidents name tRump instead of Trump. Is that the kind of juvenile insults your against?
Click to expand...
Good. Gooooood. Keep 'em coming. Keep making my point for me. :thumbs:

You have yet to even attempt to refute the article, let alone actually refute it. Come on. Stop firing blanks and actually give the study a shot.

P.S. It's "you're," not "your."
 
High Class name calling is what this is, being fancy about being dicks.
 
I actually had to see if the article was really as stupid as it sounded, so I read it. Yup. Internet searches county-wide vs. heavy Trump support? Really? The man doesn't give you enough material to attack while still being in the realm of reason and reality?

I think that you will find if you twist the logic just a little bit more that those searches were really done by women trying to figure out why their husbands won't screw them anymore and got too busy to vote for Hillary. Maybe we could look and see if "I heart uggos" was searched more in areas where men voted for Hillary?

I got no love for Trump, but this has to be one of the biggest stretches I've seen given voice yet. And that's in a world of crazy articles.
 
Keridan said:
I actually had to see if the article was really as stupid as it sounded, so I read it. Yup. Internet searches county-wide vs. heavy Trump support? Really? The man doesn't give you enough material to attack while still being in the realm of reason and reality?
Click to expand...

It isn't as if this is the first study of its sort, with similar results. https://www.vox.com/2016/11/1/13480416/trump-supporters-sexism (again, for those who would blindly disagree with that article simply because it's Vox, they have a link to the WaPo article)

I think that you will find if you twist the logic just a little bit more that those searches were really done by women trying to figure out why their husbands won't screw them anymore and got too busy to vote for Hillary. Maybe we could look and see if "I heart uggos" was searched more in areas where men voted for Hillary?
Click to expand...

Hey maybe that's a thing. Feel free to check it out!
 
.....just like trump.
 
Phys251 said:
Already spewing juvenile insults is a sure sign you have no way to refute the article!
Click to expand...

you are arguing by proxy. You find some silly hack article and then demand others prove it wrong when you are unable to prove it is correct. Wanna bet who the two people who wrote that swill voted for?
 
Phys251 said:
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/11/trump-appeals-men-suffer-fragile-masculinity-psychologists/

(note: there is a link in there to the story in the Washington Post, but it is behind a paywall.)





Also important to note is that the research found less of a correlation between fragile masculinity and support for McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012.
Click to expand...

that's really funny because its such BS. I wonder how the military vote lined up in those elections vs say that of men saving up to become women through surgery?
 
Phys251 said:
It isn't as if this is the first study of its sort, with similar results. https://www.vox.com/2016/11/1/13480416/trump-supporters-sexism (again, for those who would blindly disagree with that article simply because it's Vox, they have a link to the WaPo article)



Hey maybe that's a thing. Feel free to check it out!
Click to expand...

I could barely get through the blatant partisanship in the link you gave and WaPo actually wants me to pay money to read the further link. This feels like I'm reading a Fox article with genders switched.

Look, I certainly have no love for Trump and regularly whine that we were given a choice between buffoonery and hidden corruption last election. At least Trump has never had a hidden thought in his life and all his idiocies are out there to be picked apart. Honestly, I'm amazed we haven't had a major security link from his Twitter account.

This is just too partisan and too much of a stretch and if it's actually true in anyway, counterproductive. If insecurity is really an issue on some level, mocking them sure isn't bringing them around.

No one is convinced by such stretches of logic and so many of them being plastered all over the place actually gets people wondering if there really is some conspiracy against Trump to make him seem dumb. It actually hurts the movement to use such silliness.
 
TurtleDude said:
you are arguing by proxy. You find some silly hack article and then demand others prove it wrong when you are unable to prove it is correct. Wanna bet who the two people who wrote that swill voted for?
Click to expand...

Sorry, Turtle: Attorney's games are not going to work for you here. The study is in the linked article, and if there is any reasonable flaw with it, you or anyone else is free to point it out. The correlation is real.

TurtleDude said:
that's really funny because its such BS. I wonder how the military vote lined up in those elections vs say that of men saving up to become women through surgery?
Click to expand...

Now I thought you were pro-LGBT. Didn't think you had backtracked/
 
Phys251 said:
Good. Gooooood. Keep 'em coming. Keep making my point for me. :thumbs:

You have yet to even attempt to refute the article, let alone actually refute it. Come on. Stop firing blanks and actually give the study a shot.

P.S. It's "you're," not "your."
Click to expand...

Here's a few after looking over their "research" aka a Washington Post article.

To validate this list of topics, we asked a sample of 300 men on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk platform whether they ever had or ever would search for them online. We found that scoring high on a questionnaire measuring “masculine gender-role discrepancy stress” — concern that they aren’t as manly as their male friends — was strongly associated with interest in these search topics. Although these men were not a representative sample of American men, their responses suggest that these search terms are a valid way to capture fragile masculinity.

Read the last sentence.

First, the research reported here is correlational. We can’t be entirely sure that fragile masculinity is causing people to vote in a certain way. However, given that experimental work has identified a causal connection between masculinity concerns and political beliefs, we think the correlations we’ve identified are important.

Another good one.

Second, it remains to be seen whether any link between fragile masculinity and voting will persist after Trump exits the national stage. We suspect, however, that Trump’s re-engineering of the GOP as a party inextricably tied to many Americans’ identity concerns — whether based on race, religion or gender — will ensure that fragile masculinity remains a force in politics.

Another great piece.


So basically, you have two "researchers" who wrote a Washington Post article. They leave out entirely if they searched for other terms, or how often these terms came up compared to other searches. They admit entirely that half of their guess work when interviewing random men was not an accurate sample of males. It would be interesting to see what kind of searches were made by people in areas that voted for Clinton. I am sure there are plenty of embarrassing things in those lists as well.
 
Keridan said:
I could barely get through the blatant partisanship in the link you gave and WaPo actually wants me to pay money to read the further link. This feels like I'm reading a Fox article with genders switched.

Look, I certainly have no love for Trump and regularly whine that we were given a choice between buffoonery and hidden corruption last election. At least Trump has never had a hidden thought in his life and all his idiocies are out there to be picked apart. Honestly, I'm amazed we haven't had a major security link from his Twitter account.

This is just too partisan and too much of a stretch and if it's actually true in anyway, counterproductive. If insecurity is really an issue on some level, mocking them sure isn't bringing them around.

No one is convinced by such stretches of logic and so many of them being plastered all over the place actually gets people wondering if there really is some conspiracy against Trump to make him seem dumb. It actually hurts the movement to use such silliness.
Click to expand...

OK kids, let's recap. We have:

1. An OP that talks about fragile masculinity.
2. A bunch of males posting defensive reactions instead of actually addressing the study in a rational manner.

:shrug:
 
Phys251 said:
Sorry, Turtle: Attorney's games are not going to work for you here. The study is in the linked article, and if there is any reasonable flaw with it, you or anyone else is free to point it out. The correlation is real.



Now I thought you were pro-LGBT. Didn't think you had backtracked/
Click to expand...

I think LGBT citizens should not lose their constitutional rights. I don't think someone should be fired for being gay or bi. However, I find it funny that two partisan hacks think searching things like 'hair loss' means fragile masculinity but someone who wants to cut off their penis and wear miniskirts is not someone with "fragile masculinity". These stupid articles are just cases of partisan hacks trying to insult the other side. Both sides do it but the research "techniques" are dubious at best, and most likely bogus.

I get the fact that men who lionized Hillary want to pretend they are more masculine then men who voted for Trump. But articles like this don't help your cause or attempts to pretend superior masculinity over Trump supporters.
 
Filed under "Seek and you shall find".

If you need the other to suck you will always figure out exactly how they suck...you will think of something.
 
Phys251 said:
OK kids, let's recap. We have:

1. An OP that talks about fragile masculinity.
2. A bunch of males posting defensive reactions instead of actually addressing the study in a rational manner.

:shrug:
Click to expand...

Read post #21. Or you can just continue to ignore it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom