Liberal men have less testosterone Studies suggests

[Dick]

"testosterone appears to decrease aspects of empathy"

http://www.smatthewliao.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/HEandClimateChange.pdf



those who were empathic and altruistic would also be liberal on social-welfare policies (Table 4I). In general these expectations were supported. Empathy was higher among those backing more government spending for health care, Blacks, children, social security, and welfare/the poor. It was also higher among those for more government efforts to help the elderly, the poor, and the sick, and for reducing inequality in wealth.

http://www-news.uchicago.edu/releases/03/altruism.pdf

[moonstarrrrr]

Probably because they have a less meat and more sugary based diet which allows their system to not transform as much lipides to testosterone
Also the left wing culture is based on less physicality and more on emotion and other traits that are not related to male hormones

[Phenix]

Probably because they have a less meat and more sugary based diet which allows their system to not transform as much lipides to testosterone
Also the left wing culture is based on less physicality and more on emotion and other traits that are not related to male hormones

+1
Just adding, left wing used to be the most violent and determine faction of the politics, neo-lefts on the contrary sweat submission and fleeing adversity.

[Erronkari]

Conservatives have more. It's a fact. ;)

[moonstarrrrr]

+1
Just adding, left wing used to be the most violent and determine faction of the politics, neo-lefts on the contrary sweat submission and fleeing adversity.
Thats because violence usually is related to emotion instead of testosteron, if you are emotionaly weak (you react heavily to certain emotions) you are more prone to being violent
Alot of people make the relation between testosteron and violence, which is bullsh*t

[lonewolfcypriot]

makes sense

[Myanthropologies]

So does this mean conservative women have more testosterone, too?

[Myanthropologies]

I'd believe that conservative women have more testosterone. Just look at the late Bre Payton, she has a very masculine facial structure....RIP

https://www.phc.edu/hs-fs/hub/1718959/file-4047497733-jpg/Campus_Documentation/blog-files/bre-payton-alumni.jpg?width=394&name=bre-payton-alumni.jpg
https://www.thewrap.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Screen-Shot-2018-12-28-at-11.00.59-AM.png

[Rgvgjhvv]

Can confirm, Dick

[Dick]

Thats because violence usually is related to emotion instead of testosteron, if you are emotionaly weak (you react heavily to certain emotions) you are more prone to being violent
Alot of people make the relation between testosteron and violence, which is bullsh*t

True. Synthetic versions of testosterone can cause that but in general Depression, irritability, grumpiness, anger etc are signs of low testosterone and not a chemical imbalance in the brain rather a hormonal imbalance which is why so many people are diagnosed wrongly by psychiatrists

[Not a Cop]

+1
Just adding, left wing used to be the most violent and determine faction of the politics, neo-lefts on the contrary sweat submission and fleeing adversity.

I believe it has to do with fact that T is linked with risk taking and competitevnece, while modern left-wing is basicly all against this things, giving out participation awards.

[Insuperable]

Can confirm, Dick

So you are low T?

[Voskos]

My grandma is right wing. She is a man probably.

[Rgvgjhvv]

So you are low T?

No I'm just trolling

[Sandy Vento]

Studies are meaningless without actually reading them and seeing all the data and where it was garnered from, also who funded the study.

In population genetics peer reviewed studies are often politicized garbage and highly skewed and manipulated by simple techniques like cherry picking what reference populations to use or withhold.
A good example of this would be saying that Ashkenazi Jews are more closely related to other Jewish populations than to the European populations they lived with.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3032072/
Ostrer and his gaggle of clowns didn't include Greeks or South/Central Italians as reference populations, despite the fact that the oldest Jewish communities in Europe are in Greece and Central/South Italy.

Population genetics has taught me to trust no studies and that most studies are just good for oversold headlines for trolls to use as a "source" link.

[Phenix]

Thats because violence usually is related to emotion instead of testosteron, if you are emotionaly weak (you react heavily to certain emotions) you are more prone to being violent
Alot of people make the relation between testosteron and violence, which is bullsh*t

Violence and testosterone are somewhat related, aggressiveness though, is what I think you are describing when pointing on emotional weakness.

[The Lawspeaker]

Liberal "men".

[moonstarrrrr]

Violence and testosterone are somewhat related, aggressiveness though, is what I think you are describing when pointing on emotional weakness.
Testosteron is a steroid which' secondary endocrin influences are more aimed at libido, dominance and energy in males.
Dominance is a personality trait which is usually does not result in violence.
Violence is a reaction based on emotions or the fight/flight/freeze/faint response.

[Phenix]

Testosteron is a steroid which' secondary endocrin influences are more aimed at libido, dominance and energy in males.
Dominance is a personality trait which is usually does not result in violence.
Violence is a reaction based on emotions or the fight/flight/freeze/faint response.

It's not testosterone that I'm arguing about, violence is what interests me, I think you're wrong when defining violence as solely reactionary, it's an action, and utilization of resources, with no worriment of what cam before, aggressiveness on the other hand is a reaction.
Violence is related to testosterone because it emphasizes the secretion rate, and it's a consummation of material and psychic authority or power for achieving dominance.
Funny how you subtracted the violence thoroughfare from dominance like they were in opposition, I think you amalgamate violence and aggressivity.

[moonstarrrrr]

It's not testosterone that I'm arguing about, violence is what interests me, I think you're wrong when defining violence as solely reactionary, it's an action, and utilization of resources, with no worriment of what cam before, aggressiveness on the other hand is a reaction.
Violence is related to testosterone because it emphasizes the secretion rate, and it's a consummation of material and psychic authority or power for achieving dominance.
Funny how you subtracted the violence thoroughfare from dominance like they were in opposition, I think you amalgamate violence and aggressivity.
You are partially right in the sense that a way to achieve dominance is through violence, but you need to keep in mind that it the personality of the host and the exterior factors like the physical situation of the host decide how they will go about their way to achieve dominance. But I can also achieve dominance through speech, by for example being dominant in a debate, or having a dominant mindset in which you for example always aspire to be the best at everything you do.
It depends on the person itself on how they percieve the effects of an hormone.
It's like when you see people who use certain psychedelic substances react differently to it based on their personality. It's a substance percieved by your brain in a certain way, the reaction that they give it depends on the person itself (i.e violence or happiness)

[Phenix]

You are partially right in the sense that a way to achieve dominance is through violence, but you need to keep in mind that it the personality of the host and the exterior factors like the physical situation of the host decide how they will go about their way to achieve dominance. But I can also achieve dominance through speech, by for example being dominant in a debate, or having a dominant mindset in which you for example always aspire to be the best at everything you do.
It depends on the person itself on how they percieve the effects of an hormone.
It's like when you see people who use certain psychedelic substances react differently to it based on their personality. It's a substance percieved by your brain in a certain way, the reaction that they give it depends on the person itself (i.e violence or happiness)

This my dear interlocutor is charismatic authority, and it not less violent than others in any case, it just happened to be the least efficient and rational in the tripartite classification of authority according to Weber's works. If not being the most violent of them, because it lines on the singularity of the leader and his non-replaceability, it also ends quite tragically in what we call the redundance of charisma.
As most of my exchanges I want to end this with a concord, and say that words can be as violent as acts, and violence is a natural character of men, neither good or bad, it can be ruled over as long as the person his aggressive temperament.

[Bostonia]

Thats because violence usually is related to emotion instead of testosteron, if you are emotionaly weak (you react heavily to certain emotions) you are more prone to being violent
Alot of people make the relation between testosteron and violence, which is bullsh*t

Wouldn't that mean that women would statistically commit more violent crimes than men? (which they don't)

[Bostonia]

I don't know if I believe this. While "beta males" would be more likely to take liberal view points because of a preference for avoiding confrontation (therefore being more accepting of different people/pacifist), liberals have made up a lot of violent leftist groups in the past, especially against fascist and authoritarian regimes. Also, my husband is fairly moderate, leans left on most things and used to shoot people in the head for a living and has high T. So idk.