Is the male aggressor romantic-style outdated?

[nanashi]

Aggressor as applied in Socionics is a dubious term. The animalistic prime directive of most normal, heterosexual males is to impregnate females in a possessive, controlling/manipulative fashion. Type may, to a limited extent, determine how this urge is likely masked and visible aggressiveness indicates less capability to mask true intentions, which isn't limited to specific types. Now attractive men usually have bigger herds from which to choose but those aggressive urges are still ever present; if they aren't then males should have their testosterone levels checked. Being socially inept is a much broader problem that could also lead to them not chasing women; one should not confuse clumsiness with aggression. Most normal, heterosexual females are sexually 'thirsty' but cognition, in a similar fashion, masks their urges too.

a.k.a. I/O

"New scientific evidence refutes the preconception that testosterone causes aggressive, egocentric, and risky behavior."https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091208132241.htm

incel or PUA ideology and myth but not science

[Rebelondeck]

"New scientific evidence refutes the preconception that testosterone causes aggressive, egocentric, and risky behavior."https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091208132241.htm

incel or PUA ideology and myth but not science

A male seems to need a modicum of testosterone to have any kind of sexual drive. Male drive (not testosterone) seems to linked to possessive, controlling/manipulative behaviour - like animals. This may not translate to observable aggression so I'll wait for a study involving orders of magnitude more than 120 people. In order to get laid one has to push into a crowd or schmooze a straggler; it's certainly not lay on one's back passive action.

a.k.a. I/O

[nanashi]

A male seems to need a modicum of testosterone to have any kind of sexual drive. Male drive (not testosterone) seems to linked to possessive, controlling/manipulative behaviour - like animals. This may not translate to observable aggression so I'll wait for a study involving orders of magnitude more than 120 people. In order to get laid one has to push into a crowd or schmooze a straggler; it's certainly not lay on one's back passive action.

a.k.a. I/O

Sex drive does not equal aggression nor manipulation nor controlling behavior.

[Rebelondeck]

Sex drive does not equal aggression nor manipulation nor controlling behavior.

Correct. Behaviour does depend on how the urge is managed but barring self-preservation, the animal instinct does tend to tempt males to get it done by any means necessary. Because most males don't act upon it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

a.k.a. I/O

[nanashi]

Correct. Behaviour does depend on how the urge is managed but barring self-preservation, the animal instinct does tend to tempt males to get it done by any means necessary. Because most males don't act upon it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

a.k.a. I/O

no, what I mean is LITERALLY testosterone does not appear to be linked to aggression. read the studies on it.

[Northstar]

no, what I mean is LITERALLY testosterone does not appear to be linked to aggression. read the studies on it.

It is linked to confidence and social dominance. Aggression depends on other genes that can be activated with high T levels.

[nanashi]

Correct. Behaviour does depend on how the urge is managed but barring self-preservation, the animal instinct does tend to tempt males to get it done by any means necessary. Because most males don't act upon it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

a.k.a. I/O

bullshit. rape apologetics. lmao.

[nanashi]

A male seems to need a modicum of testosterone to have any kind of sexual drive. Male drive (not testosterone) seems to linked to possessive, controlling/manipulative behaviour - like animals. This may not translate to observable aggression so I'll wait for a study involving orders of magnitude more than 120 people. In order to get laid one has to push into a crowd or schmooze a straggler; it's certainly not lay on one's back passive action.

a.k.a. I/O

Males depend on their estrogen in order to have erections.

[inaLim]

"New scientific evidence refutes the preconception that testosterone causes aggressive, egocentric, and risky behavior."https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091208132241.htm

incel or PUA ideology and myth but not science

That study is problematic and they overreached with that conclusion. It was a zero stakes analytical activity (negotiating for free money). They should have stopped at "testosterone doesn't make you an unreasonable negotiator." It's reaching too far to say it has no link with aggressive behavior.

There was no provocation (no threat)
There were no women (no sex)
The situation of free money was "win/win" unless you're a total jackass (no competition)
The stakes were none, unless they were recruiting desperately poor people (no risk)
There was no audience of women or peers watching (no social status)

You would have to be some kind of sociopath to fuck up a situation where researchers present you with free money and all you have to do is negotiate for it. That's an analytical activity, not an aggression trigger.

That's not the biggest problem, which is they didn't take personality into account. Testosterone doesn't turn mousy men aggro, it primes men who are already aggro for more aggression.


The design of this study is more relevant to what that other study attempts to claim.

Exogenous Testosterone Rapidly Increases Aggressive Behavior in Dominant and Impulsive Men
https://www.researchgate.net/publica..._Impulsive_Men

Direct link:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile...f9d8f4c9ab.pdf

Methods: The present experiment extends this work by examining whether acutely increasing T potentiates aggressive behavior in men. In a double-blind, placebo-controlled, between-subject design, healthy adult men (n = 121) were administered either T or placebo, and subsequently engaged in a well-validated decision-making game that measures aggressive behavior in response to social provocation. In light of prior correlational research, we also assessed the extent to which T's effects on aggressive behavior would depend on variability in trait dominance and/or trait self-control.

Results: Exogenous T on its own did not modulate aggressive behavior. However, T's effects on aggression were strongly influenced by variation in trait dominance and trait self-control. Specifically, T caused an increase in aggressive behavior, but only among men scoring relatively high in trait dominance or low in trait self-control.

Conclusions: These findings are the first to demonstrate that T can rapidly (within 60 minutes) potentiate aggressive behavior, but only among men with dominant or impulsive personality styles.

Note I said design. Don't mistake me for taking testosterone as the end-all-be-all of aggression, I have issues with this study too. It's just that other study's methodology was socially retarded. While the data is factually correct, they fundamentally misinterpret the nature of aggression when they strip away risk, provocation, sex, competition, social status and personality. Only an economist would have the tunnel vision to think money is a comprehensive testing ground for aggression or that man is motivated by money to the exclusion of all else.

[nanashi]

That study is problematic and they overreached with that conclusion. It was a zero stakes analytical activity (negotiating for free money). They should have stopped at "testosterone doesn't make you an unreasonable negotiator." It's reaching too far to say it has no link with aggressive behavior.

There was no provocation (no threat)
There were no women (no sex)
The situation of free money was "win/win" unless you're a total jackass (no competition)
The stakes were none, unless they were recruiting desperately poor people (no risk)
There was no audience of women or peers watching (no social status)

You would have to be some kind of sociopath to fuck up a situation where researchers present you with free money and all you have to do is negotiate for it. That's an analytical activity, not an aggression trigger.

That's not the biggest problem, which is they didn't take personality into account. Testosterone doesn't turn mousy men aggro, it primes men who are already aggro for more aggression.


The design of this study is more relevant to what that other study attempts to claim.

Exogenous Testosterone Rapidly Increases Aggressive Behavior in Dominant and Impulsive Men
https://www.researchgate.net/publica..._Impulsive_Men

Direct link:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile...f9d8f4c9ab.pdf

Note I said design. Don't mistake me for taking testosterone as the end-all-be-all of aggression, I have issues with this study too. It's just that other study's methodology was socially retarded. While the data is factually correct, they fundamentally misinterpret the nature of aggression when they strip away risk, provocation, sex, competition, social status and personality. Only an economist would have the tunnel vision to think money is a comprehensive testing ground for aggression or that man is motivated by money to the exclusion of all else.

The problem with the idea you're trying to support is that testosterone can help people get interested in who's socially acting out what role. THAT alone could be the reason SOME already aggressive people exhibited aggression. It doesn't mean that testosterone CAUSES aggression. being aggressive and getting a greater interest in who's doing what social role can be like getting sunglasses when you're Riddick...now you can see better, etc. Testosterone seems to be related to tring to figure out how to behave. It's not even about dominance. It can help with figuring out how the dynamic is right now with someone else coming up with ideas and organizing and inspiring and directing and all that. (although flat hierarchies do exist, too)

[oath of solitude]

"New scientific evidence refutes the preconception that testosterone causes aggressive, egocentric, and risky behavior."https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091208132241.htm

incel or PUA ideology and myth but not science

Good shit. I'm tired of "PUA" (incel) spreading their ideology everywhere online, these days.