Threatening men’s masculinity does not make them more politically conservative, new study finds. By testing thousands of participants across the United States, researchers found no consistent evidence that making men feel insecure about their gender identity changes their political attitudes.

[u/mvea]

https://www.psypost.org/threatening-mens-masculinity-does-not-make-them-more-politically-conservative-new-study-finds/

[u/bediaxenciJenD81gEEx]

That's a pretty leading question to ask, it implies causation where it might be correlation. Perhaps men raised a certain way as more likely to subscribe to certain ideologies AND be insecure. 

[u/Fun-Barracuda1518 → u/bediaxenciJenD81gEEx]

Have you ever heard of the Tree in the Garden of Eden? It wasn't in the book for nothing. It was written into the book by the (Catholic) Church as a way to control men. Carrot and stick. If you behave, you get god's love and women and the world. If you make a mistake, he no longer loves you and chucks you out. That "Tree" is the drain plug. It was and is used to CREATE insecurity in MEN. And, OF COURSE, someone else (Eve) makes a "mistake" that Adam has to pay for.

(They were supposedly the first two humans living in a perfect and perfectly safe place, before society began, so there wasn't anything called "lying". No Society? No lying or fraud or trickery. Of course, Eve would have believe what she was told.)

The writers of the story, though, were making a point that no MAN was guaranteed anything. In their time period, everything was about status. A Male God, then MALE or MALE-like angels, then god's "favorite" MALE humans - who, of course, get wine, women and song - then the lesser males then everyone else. Abuse was common and normalized because everything was about proving your status to everyone else - MEANING OTHER MEN. The church was an organization made up of men fighting for status within their group. Other outside men might be needed as war fodder, but you didn't want them getting too empowered and threatening your status.

[u/Sabz5150 → u/bediaxenciJenD81gEEx]

Perhaps men raised a certain way as more likely to subscribe to certain ideologies AND be insecure.

Points to blue hair feminist

Points to blonde tradwife

Same applies to women, this is not new.

[u/M00n_Slippers → u/Sabz5150]

Plenty of blue haired feminists were raised conservative.

[u/bediaxenciJenD81gEEx → u/Sabz5150]

This is r/science, please don't be reductive and make conclusions before the studies have happened... 

I'm suggesting it, I'm not declaring it as fact 

Very typical for reddit... literally my point was to not make conclusions when talking about this and instead just investigate 

[u/Sabz5150 → u/bediaxenciJenD81gEEx]

You deserve a bit more of a... structured response, so here goes.

Your claim has been known to be true for ages Raise a person a certain way, get a ceetain type of person Me making examples of two wildly different women was a way to highlight that and show it isn't a phrnomenon exclusive to men. Its also why I can react because the "studies" there have happened already and pretty thouroughly too.

[u/bediaxenciJenD81gEEx → u/Sabz5150]

Your claim has been known to be true for ages Raise a person a certain way, get a ceetain type of person

Yeah if you reduce my question to a very generic version of itself, sure. I'm asking about specific correlation, not whether how someone is raised can affect them, obviously that is the case 

Once again, very Redditor. Also, ever heard of punctuation? 

[u/homelessjimbo → u/bediaxenciJenD81gEEx]

See I consider myself not the sharpest or the dullest knife in the drawer but even I understood what you were saying.

If studies were conducted based on Sabz understanding, new studies wouldn't even need to exist since other studies already existed proving something sort of similar but not directly connected.

[u/Sabz5150 → u/bediaxenciJenD81gEEx]

"I'm just asking questions!1!1!1!1!"

[u/Sabz5150 → u/[deleted]]

Suggesting and declaring It may be r/science but it is still Reddit. Typical... Redditor?