Read her book, and then we'll talk. You'll see the foundations of B-C's research methodology across various studies laid out in detail. If he's improved his methodologies and been more rigorous with his conclusions since then, good for him. But if you're unwilling to consider the possiblity that he may be, shall we say, overstating the facts or allowing the facts to be overstated on his behalf in order to sell his own book, then you better work on your own academic rigor.
Is Being a “Manly Man” a Bad Thing?
by minimus 194 Replies latest jw friends
-
em1913
-
LoveUniHateExams
if you're unwilling to consider the possiblity that he may be, shall we say, overstating the facts or allowing the facts to be overstated on his behalf - I'm more than willing for BC to be wrong.
I'm poor and can't afford to shell out cash on J-Y's book.
Please put Baron Cohen's conclusions into proper context.
And you could also sum up research that contradicts his findings.
-
em1913
You've got a library card, son. Use it.
-
LoveUniHateExams
Now this I find very strange.
I mentioned Baron Cohen's neonate study a few hours ago. Then you claim his methodology is suspect and his conclusions have been taken out of context.
When asked to clarify his conclusions or put them in proper context, you repeatedly refuse to do so.
I find your reticence odd.
-
unsure
@em1913 said,
The manliest man I ever heard of was Fred Rogers -- a man of absolute principle, of absolute kindness, and absolute confidence in his mission in life. If all men followed his example, the world would be a far better place.
Agreed. Well said.
-
em1913
Not at all odd. You're in "uni." You're a student. I've invited you to do your own research on a point. Do it. Research you do yourself will be much more convincing to you than anything some anonymous set of initials on the internet can provide.
But here's a starting point for you: in scientific research, what would you call a scientist whose preferred methodology is the use of data gathered through a process of self-selection? Would you consider it reliable? Or would you weigh self-selection bias in your conclusions? If not, justify your position.
-
breakfast of champions
As far as the Gillette commercial: publicity stunt.
Reminds me of when Target announced that they would allow transgender people to use whatever bathroom they identified with. "Look at us! Look how progressive we are!"
If Target really wanted to be progressive, they would pay their employees a living wage and provide heath insurance -- but that would affect their bottom line $$$$$. A bullshit bathroom rule is costs them nothing and gets them tons of free publicity.
-
LoveUniHateExams
@em1913 - no, I'm not in uni. I graduated in 2015.
I invited you repeatedly to put BC's conclusions in his neonate paper into proper context. Something which you wouldn't do.
Weird, because this is a discussion forum.
in scientific research, what would you call a scientist whose preferred methodology is the use of data gathered through a process of self-selection? - I would say that's unscientific, I think. Not much detail for me to go on, though.
Is that what BC did in his neonate paper? Would you care to put the conclusions in that paper in their proper context?
Was his neonate paper peer-reviewed?
AFAIK, it hasn't been debunked. He still works up at Cambridge.
-
em1913
You seem to think you're in the position to dictate the terms of the conversation here. You're not.
I've invited you to do the research, and I've shown you where to do it, and I've given you a nugget to start from. You're free to accept or reject that challenge if you want, but your rejection of that suggestion doesn't obligate me in any way to do the research for you. If you're sincerely interested in the points I've raised, you'll do the reading for yourself and satisfy yourself in your own mind. If not, then that's your choice. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him think.
Scientific papers don't get "debunked," by the way. They get challenged, they get questioned, they may be refuted or superseded or disproven by subsequent research, but "debunking" is something that only happens in the popular press and on the Internet -- and it usually happens to something that never should have been "bunked" in the first place.
Congratulations on your graduation -- but remember, every day you live is part of your continuing education.
-
LoveUniHateExams
As far as the Gillette commercial: publicity stunt -
Ding, ding, ding - I think we have a winner.
Yes, companies often do publicity stunts.
What sticks in the craw, though, is this particular stunt treats its core customers in a very unappreciative way.
Imagine a company that specialises in afro combs releasing an advert that implores its core customer base to do better:
"We know you can be better than this ... don't join gangs ... put that gun down ... don't sell drugs ... cooperate with police ... stay with your partner and children ..."
Some would laugh at it but others would be irritated by it. The MSM would be going ape, calling it racist.
Either way, it's a crap way for a company to sell its products