"Trolling"

[tar]

CharonY,

 

I don't think I am being ignorant about women, nor do I think I am blatently wrong about women in a correctable fashion.

 

My comment was that Alpha Males know more about being Alpha Males than females do. I would imagine Alpha females know more about being Alpha females than males do.

 

My commment has to do with an observation about testosterone that seems in my experience to lead males to be more independantly bullheaded than females. While certainly there are animals where the female plays a lead role, I was thinking about lions and stags and walrus where the males will combat for breeding rights, and young males are not welcome in the harem, unless they defeat the king.

 

This difference between the "make up" of men and women, has some real hormonal and child rearing reasons, and is actual, and not an "ignorant" opinion on my part.

 

I was using it as the basis for a theory concerning why it might be more likely that a male is a troll, than a female. Basically because a male does not mind being a loner, as much as a female might.

 

And the school yard thing was a study I heard about, it is not something I made up.

 

I have two daughters and a wife and do not consider myself ignorant of women, or unfriendly to any cause or societal movement that would be beneficial to women.

 

I was living with my Aunt, a very strong and brilliant feminist in the 60s, and my cousin was probably one of the first young women in the country to wear jeans to school. My Aunt actually helped cause a change in the dress code at my High School that allowed females to wear slacks. I do not think I am the least bit ignorant of women's issues, nor blatently wrong about there being a hormonal difference between men and women. And in the context of the topic of trolls, believe I still may have a valid point about club membership, and a male's proclivity to make mischief for his own pleasure, being stronger than that of a woman, who has a more cooperative, non-competitive nature.

 

Regards, TAR

[Acme]

CharonY,

 

I don't think I am being ignorant about women, nor do I think I am blatently wrong about women in a correctable fashion.

snip ...

Regards, TAR

Accepting your above assertion, you might consider anyway that your writing bears self-critical examination. Whether you mean it or not, you communicate a bias that is objectionable in this venue. Blaming your error on your age or culture may be a reason, but it's no excuse. As my mother used to say, if you don't have anything decent to say, keep your mouth shut.

[CharonY]

 

My commment has to do with an observation about testosterone that seems in my experience to lead males to be more independantly bullheaded than females. While certainly there are animals where the female plays a lead role, I was thinking about lions and stags and walrus where the males will combat for breeding rights, and young males are not welcome in the harem, unless they defeat the king.

 

Extrapolation of few examples again. First of all if it was something general, it would apply to all social animals. Here, you only manage to pick a handful to support your assertions. It is not better than using anecdotes to translate that to other species. And even in that limited sample male lions are known to form cooperative alliance and are not follow a strictly hierarchical alpha male model (though of course there are also many cases without co-ops). Again, this is based on limited knowledge of diversity of hierarchical behavior in nature that you try to apply to a other species (i.e. humans). The point is that social behavior in many animals are highly complex and obviously, I would expect it also to be the case in humans (unless you think the social behavior of humans is much simpler than in other primates).

You have to understand that hierarchies are often less stringent than in many animals as folklore will tell you. And sometimes even researchers get it wrong (wolves being prominent examples). Using that shaky knowledge to extrapolate it to other situations and species is really not appropriate.

 

Another example of extrapolation used here is that of hormones. Do they influence behavior? Almost certainly. But blanket statement that there is a difference because hormones is an intellectual shortcut that does not try to understand whether and what differences they may actually result in. For example, does the actual level of any hormone influence behavior in a given way, or does the change from the baseline play a role. Finally, linking a complex behavior to a single source is tricky even for simple organisms (usually there is quite an interplay of factors). Trying that to rather complex animals is also rather bold.

[tar]

CharonY,

 

But consider the study that showed males tended to play team sports with winners and losers. This is social, certainly, this is cooperative, within the team, and even social between the teams as rules are followed, and is similar to male lions banding together to reach a certain goal. Its a social dynamic, complex and observable in natural social groups from lion to human. It has something to do with sexism, but not in a completely negative way. I can offer examples of differences between males and females from studies and experiences and personal introspection and from the difference, form an understanding of the situation of men and women living together and working together in the home, the family, the workplace and government. I can entertain thoughts of whether things would be better or worse if women ran this or that team, and what the internal dynamics would be, and what changes women would institute in an organisation, because there is a difference, and women understand T ball and men do not.

 

It is not me making some blind assertion, and extrapolating. It is me making observations and seeing how they fit together, what they mean, and what adjustments one sex should make to understand the "ways" of the other. And I do not "see" what assertions I am forwarding that are "distasteful" to this venue, or unscientific or based on inappropriate or wrong generalisations.

 

There was a deer standing in front of my dad's car a couple years ago, pawing the ground and snorting, challenging my dad's car.

 

I am not going to tell you the sex of the animal. You already know. In addition you already know it was rutting season as well. Its the only time of the year, and the only sex that would make sense to explain the situation and the behavior.

 

It is this "extrapolation" that I use, to suggest that a troll is probably a male.

 

Regards, TAR

[davidivad]

as long as a woman doesn't fart in bed and scratch like a gorilla i am fine with her being dominant.

i must say that woman are of high emotional intelligence and will pin you like a wrestler if you don't watch out.

My sister is a real shark in the business world. she is smart, domineering, and an overall butt hole. i still love her though.

to think that troll cannot be female is a mistake as they must breed somehow.

in another light, you would be amazed at how many powerful men like to submit at times.

for each his or her own...

[tar]

Acme,

 

So if we agree that one should keep their mouth shut, unless they have something decent to say, and this is the ethical thing to do, then saying indecent things, that offend the assembled, is unethical, inappropriate, indecent, wrong behavior. Since the definition of troll includes the intention of offending the assembled, then trolling is unethical behavior

 

Regards, TAR

davidivad,

 

Have you known your sister to troll internet sites?

 

Regards, TAR

[davidivad]

well, she will pull your cord to get her way.

whether or not she could be considered a troll at times is somewhat of a subjective question.

we all have different notions as to the way that others are, but this is a subjective area too.

I have found that dominant women like to submit as well as dominant men.

from reading these posts it seems that trolling here is like everyone's alter ego.

trolling reminds me of Schrodinger's cat.

by isolating the troll, we find that we have opened the box upon ourselves and are left to shrug our shoulders in the end.

the measurement disturbs the result.

we are left at the bottom of the foundation upon which everything is built.
i must be the troll...

[Acme]

Acme,

 

So if we agree that one should keep their mouth shut, unless they have something decent to say, and this is the ethical thing to do, then saying indecent things, that offend the assembled, is unethical, inappropriate, indecent, wrong behavior. Since the definition of troll includes the intention of offending the assembled, then trolling is unethical behavior

 

Regards, TAR

...

I don't understand what that means in the context of this thread. While public free speech is codified in some places, this forum is a private enterprise and no such protection granted. While Swan argues that stirring up trouble isn't trolling if the stirrer believes what they say, I argue that trouble makers are as trouble makers do. If folks don't make trouble [here] then no one has to spend time trying to figure out the intent, which frees people to spend that time in decent discussion.

[swansont]

Seems relevant

 

Online trolls are just “everyday sadists,” according to new paper

[Phi for All]

Seems relevant

 

Online trolls are just “everyday sadists,” according to new paper

 

I remember commenting years ago that some trolls probably grew up pulling the wings off flies.

 

Kids love when they can see the direct effects of their actions, like tossing rocks in the lake to watch the ripples they create. Trolling seems like most attention-getting ploys, where the cause is not as important as the effect. If you won't pay attention when I'm being good, maybe you will when I'm bad.

 

And then they find out that bad is often easier, and it gets MUCH more attention than good.

[swansont]

 

I remember commenting years ago that some trolls probably grew up pulling the wings off flies.

 

Kids love when they can see the direct effects of their actions, like tossing rocks in the lake to watch the ripples they create. Trolling seems like most attention-getting ploys, where the cause is not as important as the effect. If you won't pay attention when I'm being good, maybe you will when I'm bad.

 

And then they find out that bad is often easier, and it gets MUCH more attention than good.

 

Right. Which is why trolls are not simply clueless people professing what they think is true, it's someone deliberately stirring the pot, for the sake of stirring the pot.