Project Reason is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundation devoted to spreading scientific knowledge and secular values in society. The foundation draws on the talents of prominent and creative thinkers in a wide range of disciplines to encourage critical thinking and erode the influence of dogmatism, superstition, and bigotry in our world.
In modern context, “What’s up?” or “How’s it going?” has no interrogative meaning. It’s like the old-fashioned “How do you do?” upon meeting someone. A correct response could range from “Good, and you?” to a nod or a “Hi.” As you said, nobody really expects back a revealing answer. It’s no more an abuse of language than saying “Good morning” on a day when you feel bad or it’s freezing cold. It’s just a reflex greeting. Again, I think this over-analysis shows you’re a bit over-sensitive.
Actually it does have interrogative meaning, which is why a person would say “good, and you.” or “Fine, thanks for asking, and you?” (which is a response I’ve noticed that people only give when they talk (babble) excessively about themselves, babblers thank people for asking the question.). When this question is asked upon a formal meeting it always has interrogative meaning, say you shaking someones hand and exchange names, men are more likely to say “How’s it going” than women are on these encounters and they’re also more likely to say it to passing strangers on the street than women are. The most appropriate way to treat assholes who talk like this is to just say “Hi” back, which was one of the responses you gave.
I don’t consider people who say, “How’s it going?” to be assholes. You can just nod or say hi or answer. Your choice. It’s not meant as an invasion of privacy.
Again, I see it akin to the old-fashioned, “How do you do?” which of course needed no answer at all.
I say you are sensitive because this discussion reminds me of something my sister said when she was having cancer treatment. She didn’t look sick outwardly, but was still healing from surgery, recovering emotionally, and having chemo. When someone, like a store check-out clerk, would innocently say, “Hello, how’s it going?” my sister had to expend great effort not to launch into her woes. A few times she did unload on someone inappropriately. I told her, look in the mirror and practice saying, “Fine.” It’s just a greeting. But she was especially on edge.
The way everyone is treating me here has it such that they NEED me to be stupid, even if they have to read me wrong to do so. They need me to be wrong too. The truth is Martin, you needed me to be stupid. I’m sick of people telling me there’s no evidence in support of my theory, or scoffing at the evidence I provide. I’m doing this survey. And you know what will happen. I’ll probably find out that statistically more aggressive behaviors on the males side are invoved in the sexual selection process. And you know what will happen, you’ll all deny it to get laid.
OO,
At best you’re a horny, socially inept, poorly educated, quite bright person who well deserves the “Ignore” status. Most of us here have been “laid” quite sufficiently, (1) that does not drive our lives, as it does your life, and (2) suggest you get some education beyond your fantasies and sexual frustration. You are not stupid, but you’re sure blind and self-centered. Most horny adolescents are as well.
My whole theory is that getting laid is actually driving the cognitions of people in this species. I know what to do to get laid, it doesn’t make me socially inept because I’m not getting laid, my theory is that the sexual selection process is sick. How people perceive truth and reality itself, how they behave.
The problem with my theory is that if I’m right, there will be a higher sexual selection value for denying it than accepting it, even if the data speaks for itself.
That’s the part that pisses me off. Sorry I got mad at you Martin, but I knew exactly what it meant in terms of your cognition and how you perceived me when you read me wrong.
In modern context, “What’s up?” or “How’s it going?” has no interrogative meaning. It’s like the old-fashioned “How do you do?” upon meeting someone. A correct response could range from “Good, and you?” to a nod or a “Hi.” As you said, nobody really expects back a revealing answer. It’s no more an abuse of language than saying “Good morning” on a day when you feel bad or it’s freezing cold. It’s just a reflex greeting. Again, I think this over-analysis shows you’re a bit over-sensitive.
Actually it does have interrogative meaning, which is why a person would say “good, and you.” or “Fine, thanks for asking, and you?” (which is a response I’ve noticed that people only give when they talk (babble) excessively about themselves, babblers thank people for asking the question.). When this question is asked upon a formal meeting it always has interrogative meaning, say you shaking someones hand and exchange names, men are more likely to say “How’s it going” than women are on these encounters and they’re also more likely to say it to passing strangers on the street than women are. The most appropriate way to treat assholes who talk like this is to just say “Hi” back, which was one of the responses you gave.
I don’t consider people who say, “How’s it going?” to be assholes. You can just nod or say hi or answer. Your choice. It’s not meant as an invasion of privacy.
Again, I see it akin to the old-fashioned, “How do you do?” which of course needed no answer at all.
I say you are sensitive because this discussion reminds me of something my sister said when she was having cancer treatment. She didn’t look sick outwardly, but was still healing from surgery, recovering emotionally, and having chemo. When someone, like a store check-out clerk, would innocently say, “Hello, how’s it going?” my sister had to expend great effort not to launch into her woes. A few times she did unload on someone inappropriately. I told her, look in the mirror and practice saying, “Fine.” It’s just a greeting. But she was especially on edge.
People like your sister are very common which is why it’s less sensitive to ask that question. It’s not a greeting for most people it is a question, and a lot of assholes actually like the question so they can brag on themselves. “How do you do” is in that same category.
My whole theory is that getting laid is actually driving the cognitions of people in this species. I know what to do to get laid, it doesn’t make me socially inept because I’m not getting laid, my theory is that the sexual selection process is sick. How people perceive truth and reality itself, how they behave.
The problem with my theory is that if I’m right, there will be a higher sexual selection value for denying it than accepting it, even if the data speaks for itself.
I can recommend a good therapist in your area, but you’d never consider that.
My whole theory is that getting laid is actually driving the cognitions of people in this species. I know what to do to get laid, it doesn’t make me socially inept because I’m not getting laid, my theory is that the sexual selection process is sick. How people perceive truth and reality itself, how they behave.
The problem with my theory is that if I’m right, there will be a higher sexual selection value for denying it than accepting it, even if the data speaks for itself.
I can recommend a good therapist in your area, but you’d never consider that.
I’ve known enough therapists to fill a large coffee house, the good ones say that most therapists are anti-social morons, which is true, inept, voyeuristic, and sound like a really bad psychology text book.
This is on the topic of women preferring bad boys. One study in particular found that when women were ovulating they preferred the bad boy as a future partner for themselves even though they pointed out their flaws if it was suggested that the bad boy had a relationship with women besides themselves.
Reform seemed to come up often in these searches, women looking to reform them as a project. Which if you know anything about the motivational system of sex is actually not going to work, it’s only going to put more pressure on acting out.
There is an additional study which showed that men find women smiling to be the most attractive and women find men smiling to be the least attractive performed at the university of british columbia with 1000 people using photos. They were not asked if they would like them as a future mate, simply who they found most attractive. Make of it what you will. My guess is that this is revealing the gender differences in attraction to maladaptive aggression aggression levels. The study postulated that it is about dominance / submission.
This is on the topic of women preferring bad boys. One study in particular found that when women were ovulating they preferred the bad boy as a future partner for themselves even though they pointed out their flaws if it was suggested that the bad boy had a relationship with women besides themselves.
Reform seemed to come up often in these searches, women looking to reform them as a project. Which if you know anything about the motivational system of sex is actually not going to work, it’s only going to put more pressure on acting out.
In my opinion, this is the first bit of information that you have posted that has even a shred of supporting data other than anecdotal, which may apply over a broader spectrum than chicks who like convicts.
The biggest flaw in this student’s essay (because it is not a scientific study but a university essay…alarm bells are starting to ring, even if it is a Harvard student!) is the definition of bad boy versus nice guy. Bad boy traits and behaviors were listed as economic capacity, social status, ambition, size, strength and good health. Attributes of the nice guy were dependability, stability, compatibility, and commitment. If this is the definition, no wonder the essay shows that women prefer “bad boys”...men with money, social status and are physically fit, over wimpy guys who are committed to them. No shit, Sherlock. In reality, nice guys can be attractive, physically fit and have resources (money). I don’t know why those attributes would be called exclusively “bad boy” characteristics. Sure, most actual bad boys aren’t sickly, ugly weaklings, but saying that nice guys do not have those qualities is really quite a stretch.
These definitions are considerably different than yours. Dominance and assertiveness are not the same as being a jerk and getting more sex by being an asshole (as many here have pointed out ad nauseum). The actual study cited in the essay shows that women would not pick the jerk in a dating situation ( even if the situation was contrived). The author says that what women say doesn’t match what they do, but he doesn’t provide much back up for this assertion.
I am more interested in some of the references provided, and may look them up using my literary resources.
I would say that this was a nice try, but really doesn’t back up your hypothesis at all, because your definition of bad boy (maladaptive aggression) is much different than the definition used in this essay.
There is an additional study which showed that men find women smiling to be the most attractive and women find men smiling to be the least attractive performed at the university of british columbia with 1000 people using photos. They were not asked if they would like them as a future mate, simply who they found most attractive. Make of it what you will. My guess is that this is revealing the gender differences in attraction to maladaptive aggression aggression levels. The study postulated that it is about dominance / submission.
My smile has been known to trigger spontaneous orgasms. I’ve been told it’s been the sole reason for many men discovering their homosexuality, and many women leaving their husbands on the spot. In fact, it once killed a woman. The epitaph read, “too much sexy.” I sent flowers.
This is on the topic of women preferring bad boys. One study in particular found that when women were ovulating they preferred the bad boy as a future partner for themselves even though they pointed out their flaws if it was suggested that the bad boy had a relationship with women besides themselves.
Reform seemed to come up often in these searches, women looking to reform them as a project. Which if you know anything about the motivational system of sex is actually not going to work, it’s only going to put more pressure on acting out.
In my opinion, this is the first bit of information that you have posted that has even a shred of supporting data other than anecdotal, which may apply over a broader spectrum than chicks who like convicts.
The biggest flaw in this student’s essay (because it is not a scientific study but a university essay…alarm bells are starting to ring, even if it is a Harvard student!) is the definition of bad boy versus nice guy. Bad boy traits and behaviors were listed as economic capacity, social status, ambition, size, strength and good health. Attributes of the nice guy were dependability, stability, compatibility, and commitment. If this is the definition, no wonder the essay shows that women prefer “bad boys”...men with money, social status and are physically fit, over wimpy guys who are committed to them. No shit, Sherlock. In reality, nice guys can be attractive, physically fit and have resources (money). I don’t know why those attributes would be called exclusively “bad boy” characteristics. Sure, most actual bad boys aren’t sickly, ugly weaklings, but saying that nice guys do not have those qualities is really quite a stretch.
These definitions are considerably different than yours. Dominance and assertiveness are not the same as being a jerk and getting more sex by being an asshole (as many here have pointed out ad nauseum). The actual study cited in the essay shows that women would not pick the jerk in a dating situation ( even if the situation was contrived). The author says that what women say doesn’t match what they do, but he doesn’t provide much back up for this assertion.
I am more interested in some of the references provided, and may look them up using my literary resources.
I would say that this was a nice try, but really doesn’t back up your hypothesis at all, because your definition of bad boy (maladaptive aggression) is much different than the definition used in this essay.
Your point was taken. It was me who was the moron for linking to it. I’m trying to get funding to pay for the postage and for travel because I want to try to get over 10,000 males (which means over 10,000 paid postages) to participate in a survey which means big cities with a mailing flier that has paid postage and a return address to a PO box. I don’t live in a big city. I want to survey males first, to profile for maladaptive aggression and then ask questions of sex history and relational status. I actually want to do both genders to find out if kind women are being sexually selected more than kind males, but this might be harder to track, since “nice girls aren’t sluts”, what I need to figure out is how many people they reject.
Basically what I think is going on is that nice women are getting the most approaches and the more aggressive males are getting the most approaches. The males are accepting the approaches more than the women. And the women are accepting the more aggressive male approaches. I’m still trying to figure out if I can do a single survey that will find out everything I want to know about both men and women, and then try to get about 10,000 of each gender to respond.
My general theory about how to get the most accurate survey is to not put it online, I think anyone who would take the time to mail it back is probably going to answer it honestly, especially if it’s not obvious exactly what the survey is for and it’s anonymous. I need to make sure that couples don’t receive the survey together because it might inspire them to lie more. I’m still constructing the questionaire.
These definitions are considerably different than yours. Dominance and assertiveness are not the same as being a jerk and getting more sex by being an asshole (as many here have pointed out ad nauseum).
Well.. on this quote alone. Dominance would be something that helped you get your way, and it doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with kindness and as I was discussing earlier assertiveness is perceived as aggression anytime it’s something someone doesn’t want to have happen.
These definitions are considerably different than yours. Dominance and assertiveness are not the same as being a jerk and getting more sex by being an asshole (as many here have pointed out ad nauseum).
Well.. on this quote alone. Dominance would be something that helped you get your way, and it doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with kindness and as I was discussing earlier assertiveness is perceived as aggression anytime it’s something someone doesn’t want to have happen.
Ironic, because you’re quite ideologically and rhetorically aggressive.
These definitions are considerably different than yours. Dominance and assertiveness are not the same as being a jerk and getting more sex by being an asshole (as many here have pointed out ad nauseum).
Well.. on this quote alone. Dominance would be something that helped you get your way, and it doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with kindness and as I was discussing earlier assertiveness is perceived as aggression anytime it’s something someone doesn’t want to have happen.
Ironic, because you’re quite ideologically and rhetorically aggressive.
Interesting article in the Scientific American Mind this month: Nice Guys Finish First.
These definitions are considerably different than yours. Dominance and assertiveness are not the same as being a jerk and getting more sex by being an asshole (as many here have pointed out ad nauseum).
Well.. on this quote alone. Dominance would be something that helped you get your way, and it doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with kindness and as I was discussing earlier assertiveness is perceived as aggression anytime it’s something someone doesn’t want to have happen.
Ironic, because you’re quite ideologically and rhetorically aggressive.
Interesting article in the Scientific American Mind this month: Nice Guys Finish First.
These definitions are considerably different than yours. Dominance and assertiveness are not the same as being a jerk and getting more sex by being an asshole (as many here have pointed out ad nauseum).
Well.. on this quote alone. Dominance would be something that helped you get your way, and it doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with kindness and as I was discussing earlier assertiveness is perceived as aggression anytime it’s something someone doesn’t want to have happen.
Yes, I remember your rather broad interpretations of aggression, and I don’t agree with them. As I have stated before, I think what you are proposing may happen in isolated cases, and more prevalently in certain demographics (notice how many of these studies use unmarried university students when looking at number of sexual partners?). To say that this behaviour is common generally is quite a stretch (and just plain wrong, since the preponderance of available evidence would suggest otherwise).
I would suggest taking your pet theory and chewing on it in private instead of continually getting hammered here. If you are going ahead with a mail-in survey, good luck with it. If you didn’t get assistance from someone skilled in research methods, I wold suspect that your survey is not correctly designed (confirmation bias would probably creep into the design of your questions).
