• These Ideas About Sexual Attraction May Be Based on Shoddy Science by M W Moyer

(Link): These Ideas About Sexual Attraction May Be Based on Shoddy Science

by M W Moyer

Snippets:

Last week, the technology magazine Ars Technica published a (Link): bombshell of a story questioning the integrity of the work of French psychologist Nicolas Guéguen.

You may not have heard of Guéguen, but you’ve almost certainly heard of his research. It’s even been covered by New York. “One French Scientist Found Five Research-Backed Ways to Get a Woman’s Number,” a helpful Science of Us (Link): piece touted in 2014.

Time covered one of his studies in a story titled “Science Proves It: Men Really Do Find High Heels Sexier.” The (Link): Atlantic and the (Link): New York Times have written about his work, too.

The Ars Technica story describes the dogged efforts of two scientists, Nick Brown and James Heathers, who started asking questions of Guéguen in 2015 after noticing weird things. It started with a study they laughed over one evening — one that reported that men are less likely to help women whose hair is tied up in a bun or ponytail.

When they carefully read the study, they noticed that many of Guéguen’s reported numbers didn’t make sense considering the calculations involved.

Things smelled fishier when they saw just how huge the differences were that he was reporting — differences that are, in social science research, highly improbable.

Continue reading

Advertisements

• Women (and the men) Who Argue Against Feminism, Who Claim Men and Masculinity Are Under Attack, Or Who Insist That There is Little, to No, Sexism In The U.S.A.

Women (and the men) Who Argue Against Feminism, Who Claim Men and Masculinity Are Under Attack, Or Who Insist That There is Little, to No, Sexism In The U.S.A.

I am in the process of writing two or three different posts for this blog, and they are in Draft status. This post is an off-shoot of one I’m working on right now.

I may go ahead and publish this post right away, but it’s one I may come back to in order to edit, to add more thoughts or more links.

Most of the content below was originally part of another, separate post I’m working on.

I discuss Sommers quite a bit below. She is an anti-feminist feminist.

Sommers is certainly not the only woman I’ve come across online I’ve seen who criticizes feminism, or who insists masculinity is under attack, or who thinks that boys are treated unfairly in schools, or, perhaps, my biggest pet peeve:

Sommers is not the only woman to make the argument that girls and women in the United States have life just great, sexism is a thing of the past, and…

Because, supposedly, the Sommers-types of the world think, American women generally don’t face as severe a level of sexism as often as their Muslim counterparts in the Middle East, that American women who bring up American sexism are either…

  • Whiny cry babies
  • Lying about sexism
  • Reveling in perpetual Victim-hood Status
  • or Manufacturing outrage

Most of the research I was doing in regards to sexism and so on, for another post I was working on, kept turning up results for Sommers, which is why a large portion of this post focuses on her.

At this stage, I don’t really have the energy or time to devote a more thorough investigation and report on this. I may at a later date edit this post to add more examples of women such as Sommers, or in regards to related subjects.

At any rate:

LIVED EXPERIENCE

I am right wing.

I have never been a liberal, nor do I use the label “feminist” to describe myself, because, far too often, the word “feminist” is associated with far left wing causes and views I don’t agree with or support.

I am a conservative. In the past, I’ve always voted Republican.

On these issues of sexism, marriage, sexual harassment, and so on, I take things on a “case by case” or “issue by issue” basis.

I believe both the left and right wings, both the pro and anti feminists, get a lot of things wrong, but both sides also get some issues correct.

I am not fully on one side or the other (depending on the particular topic).

One of the things I can say as a conservative woman, who was brought up in a traditional values, Christian household: sexism and sexual harassment are real, both do do exist, and I’ve been personally subjected to them from the time I was  girl and in my adulthood as well.

Continue reading

• It’s Time to Admit That Allowing Men Into the Workplace Was a Mistake by R. Graham

It’s Time to Admit That Allowing Men Into the Workplace Was a Mistake by R. Graham

I often feel the need to remind anyone who may visit this blog I’m actually a conservative. I do occasionally agree with liberal feminists at times, but not usually.

I do think – regarding the subject of sexism – that other conservatives (or centrists) get quite a few things incorrect, or they misunderstand what left wing feminists are trying to say.

Below you will find a link to what is a parody piece by a person, Ruth Graham, who I take it is a liberal feminist – this editorial teed off a few other conservatives I saw on Twitter who were discussing it.

Personally, I’m board with it. I get what she’s trying to accomplish with it, and I think she succeeded.

Continue reading

• Complementarian Marketing To Men Doesn’t Work, but It Doesn’t Stop Comps From Blaming Women – Churches Are Not “Too Feminine”

Complementarian Marketing To Men Doesn’t Work, but It Doesn’t Stop Comps From Blaming Women – Churches Are Not ‘Too Feminine”

Gender complementarians have turned male leadership, masculinity, and the male biological sex into idols that they worship.

And this obsession and strategy has not worked to draw in men to churches or to keep them in church – and complementarians, most of them anyway, keep assuming it will work.

This fixation on masculinity and making churches more masculine in feel does not account for women who have begun dropping out of church in large numbers the last several years, either (The Resignation Of Eve).

Male hierarchy, and defending and promoting it, now takes precedence over about any thing else with complementarian Christians, and, at times, it causes them to do and say some very weird (and unbiblical) things.

Continue reading

• The Semantic Games of Gender Complementarians

The Semantic Games of Gender Complementarians

The following post relates with another topic that shows how flawed gender complementarianism is.

I may in the future do a separate post about that other, closely related topic, which is: complementarians cannot agree with each other on exactly what complementarianism is, or how it should be lived, so there ends up all sorts of inconsistencies and contradictions among complementarians.

Complementarianism exists on a scale or contiuum from “soft complementarianism” all the way to a more “hard core” version that borders on patriarchy, and there are stops between those two points.

I think what I write about in this post may be more common place among soft or moderate complementarians than among the patriarchal variety.

Continue reading

• Children Inherit Their Intelligence From Their Mother Not Their Father, Say Scientists 

Children Inherit Their Intelligence From Their Mother Not Their Father, Say Scientists 

This possibly has interesting implications for the sexist assumptions held by Christian gender complementarians:

Children Inherit Their Intelligence From Their Mother Not Their Father, Say Scientists 

Genes for cleverness are carried on the X chromosome and may be deactivated if they come from the father

by Charlotte England

A mother’s genetics determines how clever her children are, according to researchers, and the father makes no difference.

Women are more likely to transmit intelligence genes to their children because they are carried on the X chromosome and women have two of these, while men only have one.

But in addition to this, scientists now believe genes for advanced cognitive functions which are inherited from the father may be automatically deactivated.

Continue reading

• Complementarian Misrepresentations and Misunderstandings of Non-Comps and Feminism

Complementarian Misrepresentations and Misunderstandings of Non-Comps and of Feminism

I was a gender complementarian from the time I was a kid up until around my mid-30s.

As such, I understand exactly how complementarians think, and why they hold to complementarianism, because I was once one of them.

Comps (Complementarians) hold many inaccurate or untrue beliefs and assumptions about people who reject complementarianism, and they – like many right wing or Republican individuals – also have a lot of untrue or inaccurate ideas about feminism and feminists.

First of all, I should clarify from the start I myself am not a feminist. I have never been a feminist.

Secondly, I have never been a liberal or a Democrat. I am currently not a liberal, nor am I a Democrat.

From the time I was a teenager, I have been a conservative, and up until around the year 2015, I was a Republican (I am currently not affiliated with any political party or movement).

It’s quite important to mention both those points from the out-set because most complementarians (and secular conservatives) assume anyone who does not support traditional gender roles is of necessity a left winger, a feminist, or a SJW (social justice warrior).

Comps and secular right wingers further assume that any and all who do not embrace traditional gender roles must also hate the nuclear family, traditional marriage, children, parenting, or traditional values.

I’m going to clear up a few common misunderstandings or faulty assumptions complementarians (and secular conservatives) have of NCs (non-complementarians) and of feminists.

Not everyone who rejects gender complementarianism (traditional gender roles) is a liberal or a feminist.

Continue reading