Boys: Naturally Aggressive?

wolf pictures

It's 2014 now, and this topic is still on the table, nearly everyone still refusing to study it objectively SANS personal ego and conditioning. So why is that? What's up with the obsessive and blatant lack of objectivity? Well, same as it ever was, and the whole reason scientific method exists in the first place:
Humans can't be fully objective. Humans insert their own "story" into whatever their looking at. And that means they'll DEFEND whatever their own story happens to be, instead of DETACHING themselves from their story in order to study objectively, without bias.Some do it more and some do it less, bless their hearts.

Girly Wolf

Humans will even do this while studying other animals in "scientific settings". They will anthromorphize the animals they're studying according the the animal's sex. They'll try to attribute their OWN feelings and conditioned perceptions about "masculinity" or "femininity" on random animals species that they're studying, often onto insects or crustaceans, even invertebrates. Amazing is the human brain's capacity to FAIL in objectivity, no matter how "scientific" the "study" or "experiment" is supposed to be.

Feminizing and masculinizing is even seen in math, physics, and engineering,
(Professor Manly, physicist~ was named New York Professor of the Year.
His name and this pic were a convenient coincidence but I don't know him
personally, or whether or not he practices the commonly found ridiculous
male-bias that is pervasive in math and science related academics and work fields,
and that of course gets adamantly denied.
Just like Rock and Roll.
He might not, I hope he doesn't.)

and when the subject is an INANIMATE OBJECT.

This is from "Tomboy Tools". A company who is trying to bridge the silly gap that people have in their heads by marketing "female tools", (i.e. painted pink) which I applaud, since it seems to be the only way to get people to venture out of their obsession with tools, repair, and building being "male". I don't know how it would go over in my contracting/remodeling business, but I bet a lot of my tools would stay where I put them more often.
And maybe the little insecure jackasses who keep sniffing at my shoes would stop calling me a "dyke".
But then again, who cares... I kind of like kicking them when they sniff at my shoes or call me elementary school names, it's cathartic.

In light of all this, it's not much of a surprise that if humans fail regularly in removing their anthromorphic, gender-obsessed filters when viewing even inanimate objects, that they might not be able to do that when viewing or studying actual HUMAN BEINGS. 

Effectively studying the differences between boys and girls, men and women is nearly impossible for most humans, because of the conditioning they (we) were exposed to right from birth. In other words, we are TOLD what we should believe and think about "males" and "females", including ourselves and our parents, from the day we're BORN.

We aren't just learning what we "see", we're TOLD what we see, and why.
(Which is not the same as learning what we actually SEE, or learning about what's actually THERE.)

We're literally TOLD, SHOWN, and DISCIPLINED into how WE ARE "supposed to be": What we're "supposed to be good at" or NOT good at, what the OTHER sex is "supposed to be good at" or NOT good at, what each person is "SUPPOSED TO LIKE", how STRONG they're "SUPPOSED TO BE" or NOT, all according to someone ELSE'S ideas and fictional stories about "male" and "female", NOT according to reality.

If it was according to reality or nature, no one would NEED TO TELL ANYONE "how girls are supposed to be", or "how boys are supposed to be". They would just BE however they ARE. We don't try to TEACH caterpillars how to be caterpillars, or cats to be cats, they just ARE. We watch them and FIND OUT what they do, we don't TELL THEM how caterpillars or cats are "supposed to be". 

Without understanding and comprehending THAT, there's no way to even BEGIN to study in any kind of "objective" manner.

There are some obvious things that we can observe about male humans in general:

In humans, the ovum (egg) from the mother has two X chromosomes. The sperm from the father will donate EITHER an X or a Y chromosome. If the sperm donates an X, the father's sperm determined that the baby is a girl. If the sperm donates a Y chromosome, the father's sperm determined that the baby is a boy.
(In birds, it's the opposite; the mother bird carries two different sex chromosomes, and the father bird carries two of the same. In turtles, it's the egg temperature that determines the sex of the baby.)

SOME male humans seem to be born with compulsion problems and apparent A.D.D.

Many of them do NOT have compulsion problems, A.D.D., or a tendency toward aggression.

Many male babies don't care about whether a toy is "supposed to be" male or female, they like what they like, regardless of what the adults try to MAKE them like.

Many males who DO have a compulsion problem and/or a tendency toward aggression and obnoxious behavior habitually poke at, mess with, and bully other males in their group, trying to get them to react.
The reactions of the non-bullying males can range from:
physically removing themselves from the individuals or the group,
to becoming anxious or depressed,
to developing lowered self-esteem and confidence,
to becoming aggressive themselves to dominate the bullies BACK, but often losing their original real "self" in the process (and often developing confusion or depression because of it, not knowing why they're not the same person they used to be)
OR adapting the bully's behaviors, and skewing their own preferences and perceptions to match the bullies'; in essence copying the bully and morphing themselves to fit in, thereby avoiding the bullying to some degree.

SOME males seem to be born with higher muscle strength, pound for pound, than other males, but it's more likely due to their skeletal structure that carries the amount of muscle, and also the amount that they literally work their muscles out in playing and squirming, which automatically builds it. Other factors would of course be nutrition and blood/oxygen delivery to their muscles.

SOME males upper body strength seems to be stronger than nearly ALL female humans, pound for pound; that's SOME, NOT ALL males. "ALL" males are not stronger than "ALL" females.

MOST males are NOT stronger in lower body strength than females in general, and are often faster due to longer leg bones and narrower hips, which is skeletal, not muscular.

SOME males are stronger than most other MALES, regardless of their HEIGHT, pound for pound.

Many males are told and taught to stand up for themselves against bullying.
Most females are told and taught NOT TO stand up for themselves against bullying, including against the same bullies that are bullying the males in the group.

Males are generally given REWARDS for standing up against bullies, more often than not, either from peers or from adults, or both.
Females are generally given CONSEQUENCES for standing up against bullies, even those same bullies, both from peers and adults.
All of THIS (reward vs. consequences for standing up against bullies) is DESIGNED BY ADULTS, and is obviously the opposite of "fair", and definitely the opposite of "logical".

Males are NOT, generally, "raised" with the same guidance, integrity, or moral instruction as females are, even in the same family, by the same parents.
Everything from subtle approval, encouragement, praise, happy attention and even PHYSICAL CARE from adults is CHANGED by adults according to the sex of the infant, and especially according to the biases and prejudices adults harbor.

Adults will do things like REDIRECT a child to play with only certain toys, and HUMILIATE or SHAME them for playing or even looking at other toys, and then say that a toy was the CHILD'S CHOICE.
"He chose that blue truck because he's all boy!" "She loves that pink princess pony because she's girly!" When the fact is, neither of them had a REAL choice, they were DIRECTED by the adults to choose the one that PLEASED THE ADULTS. 

By the time a child is two or three, he or she has seen the adults around them make MILLIONS of facial expressions, vocal noises, and body movements that show either APPROVAL or
DISAPPROVAL, associated with whatever the child is doing. So when little Johnny goes for the blue truck, no one stops him, he sees no disapproval, no one is moving to take it away or pick him up, and he sees pleased expressions on the faces of the adults.
When he goes to reach for the doll in the pink dress, he sees VERY CLEARLY that the adults are not giving signals and signs of approval or pleasure, and he sees that one of them is moving toward him in a big-person-scary kind of way;
either to pick him up or to move the doll away.

Little Johnny has learned one thing:
The adults LIKE IT when he plays with the truck, and he will get rewards of approval and a comfortable atmosphere, but they DON'T LIKE IT when he goes to play with the doll, and he will get consequences of disapproval, uncomfortable feelings, and an uncomfortable atmosphere.

Little Johnny is NOT choosing the truck over the doll, he is choosing the approval of the adults and the pleasant atmosphere they create when they're pleased, over their disapproval and the unpleasantness they create when they're not pleased.

Sure, some little boys would naturally want to play with the truck and not the doll, and so would some little girls. But ALL boys would not naturally choose the truck over the doll, nor would all girls naturally choose the doll over the truck, and it means very little about their "character" or their "sexual preference".
Additionally, it's a natural tendency for human babies and children, both males and females, to be interested in dolls because they have faces and look like people. To discourage this is frankly kind of creepy on the part of an adult... what exactly are they trying to accomplish with it?
Why would they want to train a child to reject a toy that resembles a human being, especially a baby?!

Adults do this "training" on children from the day a child is born, and seem completely, utterly oblivious to it, but.... they are at least somewhat aware of what they're doing. MOST adults kind of like it when their little boys act out and behave inappropriately, and don't mind it when their boys behave discourteously, disruptively, and like entitled, uncontrolled animals, for one main reason:
The adults think that other people see them through their sons.
If their son is acting like a "STRONG AGGRESSIVE MALE", then they think other people will associate that onto THEM as the son's parents, or as the boy's teachers, coach, or other family members and associates. It's not about the son, the boy, the man, or his well-being, it's about THEM.

So adults have a completely different REASON for allowing and encouraging so many boys to misbehave and act like entitled, self-centered, discourteous thug brats than the REASON they raise girls so differently.

The reason they BROW BEAT GIRLS for all kinds of normal human behaviors, and also brow beat girls for most of the behaviors that they encourage and allow boys to do is all about THEM as well, not about the girls themselves, and definitely NOT about the girls' WELL BEING.

"What will people think of ME or US if she doesn't sit still and quietly, keep her hair and clothing perfect, doesn't stay inside and serve food and drinks and clean up like a maid instead of going outside and playing with the boys? If her voice and speech and manners aren't sweet and sweeter, even though everyone giggles when the boys display terrible manners? If she tries to "help" by doing things that BOYS are "supposed to do" like fixing things or moving heavy furniture... 
What will people think of US, and will we have to actually HELP HER like we would a boy~
if she wants to be a firefighter, an automechanic, an engineer, a carpenter, a stunt person, physicist, rock musician or an astronaut instead of being a wife of someone ELSE who is a firefighter, automechanic, engineer, carpenter, stunt person, or rock musician?
I know one thing... I'm sure not going to ENCOURAGE HER or HELP HER in any way!
And I'm sure the teachers at her school will be in complete agreement with us!
How embarrassing, a GIRL who thinks she can do what BOYS can do... I NEVER!

not just going to shame her for not having ANY job, we're going to shame her for not having the RIGHT JOB! THAT WE APPROVE OF!
Otherwise we'll all treat her like an outcast, come on, it'll be fun!

It's not any different from the way boys are trained to be a certain way, and shamed for just being who they really are, without the MANLY MAN SUPERIORITY-act, which is the dance partner of the GIRLY GIRL SUBSERVIENT,  SUBMISSIVE, DEFERRING, AND INCAPABLE OF MOST SKILLS BUT FEIGNING CONFIDENCE IN MY FEMININITY-act.

Most people know they're playing a part, in their hearts and in the back of their minds.
But the fear of humiliation if they broke character is too strong, they won't chance it.

Boys and MEN in general are encouraged to DO but girls and WOMEN are discouraged FROM certain same behaviors, such as displaying physical strength and ability, displaying confidence, intelligence, knowledge, skill, or pride, pursuing random interests instead of only CERTAIN interests that are pre-determined for them by others "according to their gender" (according to the fictional fantasy world of others, that is)...  Or behaviors that boys are allowed and encouraged unfortunately to do all the time like showing aggression, condescending to others, behaving arrogantly, lewdly, rudely, coldly, snottily, and inappropriately, trying to dominate others with bullying, threats, or verbal abuse and humiliation, showing a LACK of consideration, empathy, common civility and manners toward other people. Of course girls should be guided not to do those things, but there is absolutely ZERO legitimate reason for adults NOT to guide and discipline boys and girls in exactly the same way. None, zero, nada. People will argue all day long about it, but the bottom line is, the ridiculous gigantical fantastical differences in the way people raise and treat boys and girls is simply a crock of shite.

WHY do people seem to think it's a FUNNY THING, or even a NORMAL THING, to set boys up for confusion, social problems, relationship problems, civil problems, legal problems, health problems and career problems down the road by refusing to guide him, and encouraging him to behave like a "rogue"?!?
If he CHOOSES to behave that way on his own later, then that's his choice, but if no one taught him any different, then he doesn't HAVE A CHOICE, because he doesn't KNOW any better. If we want your sons to have success in life in general, WHY wouldn't we TEACH HIM what he actually needs to know and understand? Like social grace and relationship interaction skill, managing and recognizing his own emotions and the emotions of others? Respect for himself (which REQUIRES respect for others and knowing what that really means, including toward the opposite sex, other ages, and other ancestries)? Civility, manners, straightforwardness, self-protection, awareness of others for good and for ill, genuine integrity, serenity, fairness, and consideration for others, all of which one NEEDS in all areas of life, including BUSINESS, and in order to keep their own life on a relatively even keel, so that they can achieve their goals, have less crises, have much less drama, and take life in much greater STRIDE, instead of being consumed and buried by pitfall after pitfall. 

Critical thinking, self-awareness, healthy boundaries, respect for the boundaries of others, genuineness!

As far as biological differences between males and females, they are quite obviously due to reproductive  processes so we can have more baby humans. But that's the ONLY thing that can be called into fact that's NOT screwed around with by human social training, brainwashing, crazy superstitions, made-up rationalizations, stereotypes, cultural biases, bigotry, fantastical stories, and PURE FICTION.

Not even the differences in physical strength that everyone seems to believe these days is true.
"Though hormones may influence strength development potential among women, they most likely do not account for significant male-female differences in absolute strength."
"Based on a strength-to-lean-body-mass ratio, women are about equal in strength to men, and when strength is calculated per cross-sectional area of muscle, no significant gender difference exists. For example, a 15 cm2 cross-sectional area of an arm flexor has about 19 kg of force for both women and men." 
William P. Ebben, MS, MSSW, CSCS; Randall L. Jensen, PhD)

The difference in skeletal size, height and width actually make the difference in "body strength" generally between INDIVIDUAL HUMANS. Males tend to have wider and taller skeletal frames, so literally a larger amount of muscle can grow on the frame and stretch across the frame. It's like how one male is physically smaller and therefore "weaker" than another male; if their skeleton supports less muscle, then they have less muscle than the guy who's skeleton supports more muscle.

If my arm bones have more muscle on them than your arm bones, then my arms are stronger than yours. If your wrist bones are bigger and thicker than mine, they have more surface for more muscle, so your wrists are probably stronger than mine, even if my arms are stronger than yours. (I can lift twice my own weight, but my 82 year old Mom opens jars that I can't open.)
Your muscle is not simply stronger than my muscle, and my muscle is not simply stronger than yours, unless one of us has specific issues with our muscle growth and function (like poor circulation that blocks oxygen delivery, for example).

                                             We're the same species.

One of us is not a CHIMPANZEE or THE HULK, and the other a frail little waify invertebrate creature. If your skeleton is bigger than that guy in the corner, then there are parts of your skeleton that will probably have more muscle on it than his. If the woman in the other corner's skeleton is bigger than that guy's, then she'll probably have more muscle on parts of her skeleton than he does. But he could have more muscle on another part than either one of you, so he'd be stronger than either one of you THERE.

And whichever one of the three of you has been STIMULATING YOUR MUSCLE GROWTH, either with working out in some way or physical labor, then THAT PERSON would probably be the strongest generally if you were all the same height and weight, and your skeletons were of similar gauge.
Thicker bones means more muscle on the bone, generally, so even if all three of you did the same work and were exactly the same size except for your skeletons, then whoever had the thickest skeleton would probably be the strongest, just because their bones have more muscle on them.

It's a lot less complicated, a lot less about "masculinity" and "femininity" than most people are DYING TO BELIEVE so they can keep their stories intact.

"Male physiology, more than hormones, explains men's 'superior absolute strength'. When other measures of strength are used, such as strength relative to cross-sectional area of muscle, the strength of men and women is nearly equal."
~William P. Ebben, MS, MSSW, CSCS; Randall L. Jensen, PhD

That means it's not really "superior absolute strength", it's relative to the skeleton of the individual person AND the amount of working-out each muscle gets.
PLUS, each person does not have uniform muscle strength, my wrists are probably weaker than yours, but I could twist you into a pretzel with my legs without even trying very hard, and then carry you to the hospital on my back. 

AND so it goes with INDIVIDUAL MALES, as well. 

Boys are NOT CLONES of one another, they're PEOPLE, individual human beings, each as unique as their fingerprints.

When adults group boys together and try to make "herds" out of them, of course they're going to try to homogenize themselves into being "more alike", just to survive and be accepted and comfortable in the group. And when a couple of the boys in that group are bullies, then the rest of the boys move around IN REACTION to those bullies, and change themselves in order to deal with those bullies. Or, they leave the group altogether, but can end up feeling like a "weirdo" because they're not in the group. And many adults who lack maturity will go right along with treating this boy like a "weirdo" because he left the group rather than be the target of continuous haranguing.

A boy is a human being, first and foremost. After "Human Being", THEN he's a human being who happens to be male, who happens to be short, tall, or average height, who happens to be from an ancestry. But first and foremost, he's a HUMAN BEING.
Just like his sisters, his parents, his cousins, his neighbors, his teachers, his elected or appointed government office holders, all of his classmates, the clergy people in his religion, the people in the civic organizations, all the people who work and run businesses big and small, and all of the people, female and male, on TV and on the radio.


Judging For Jobs

When we judge others on the (legal) job they have or don't have, we're turning something that's not a character trait into a character trait.

The job a person does is just something they DO, it has nothing to do with their character. There are doctors who are genuinely humble and caring people, and there are doctors who are complete jerks, who don't even care about their patients, which IS a big part of their job. And what happens on a day that a "good" doctor decides to quit? Does that mean she's not a good person now because she's not being a doctor? What if she decides she decides to quit, and do something else completely unrelated to the medical profession, that doesn't pay well? That's part time, maybe in a warehouse? Maybe as a greenhouse worker? And yes, this DOES happen, it's not "made up" or "far fetched".

There are doctors who got their medical license by cheating, and who don't actually know what they're doing. So how would you know that? You wouldn't. You would just see their degree on the wall and the stethoscope around their neck. Is this doctor a "fine upstanding citizen" now, because he has a medical degree on his wall and the title of MD?

There are nurses who are very good at their jobs, respecting each patient and double-checking themselves. And then there are nurses who are only in it for the paycheck and to look like a responsible person so everyone treats them good, but they don't care much about their patients or their jobs.

There are stockbrokers who are honest, caring, forthright people, and there are stockbrokers who lie and cheat and steal.

There are clergy people who genuinely care about their parishioners and about conveying their spirituality, and there are clergy who just want the reputation and the prestige they think comes with the collar, and the right they think they'll get to boss people around. There are even some who are complete cons who are only in it for money for themselves.

There are people who don't have jobs, who are content to live on what they already have, helping others when they can, or not, choosing to experience life. It's ACTUALLY no one else's business.

~ No, it's really not.

There are people who don't seem to have a regular job, who do a lot more than people who DO have "regular" jobs, they just don't have time, the desire, or the ego to boast about everything they do.

There are people who clean toilets for a living who are wiser and smarter than most of the people who make six figures.

There are people who make six figures who are the "salt of the earth", and they may work in the same office and have to deal with the meanest person they ever met, who make the same as they do, but do a terrible job.

There are even homeless people with IQs that are 50 points higher than most; we may not understand what they're doing, but that's just because we're not smart enough to comprehend it
It's none of our business what a person's job is, and it's none of our business to judge them for their job, for good or for ill.

What others do during their day is none of our business, unless it's something that's causing danger and damage to people. Is a person causing damage or harm to anyone? Honestly? Then who's business is it what they do with their time, or what job they have or don't have?
It's not anyone's, certainly not mine, certainly not yours, not their neighbor's, their cousin's, their nephew's, their former teacher's, the bank teller's, the local hardware store owner's, or their former classmates'.

The desire to judge people negatively or positively for their job, their clothes, their car and their income, and put their activities under a magnifying glass has become an epidemic in Western Society. The reason for it is, unfortunately, FEAR. People magnify and judge others negatively because they're AFRAID of being the next person under someone else's scrutiny, and they judge others positively because THEY want to be judged positively by others under that same magnifying glass.. It's as simple as that.
(Ironically, many of those doing the judging have not worked a truly hard day at a difficult job in their lives. That's projection and diversion; they don't want the magnifying glass to fall on them and see how easy they've had it, so they're pointing at someone else...'look at them, don't look at me!")

So the next time we look down on someone for their job, or their lack of a job, or put someone on a high pedestal for their job, we can look at ourselves next, and ask ourselves why WE feel like we're being judged. 

You Don't Know What You're Talking About

Trying to discredit a Target by questioning things they say or do (or write) in a critical way is a common Control -domination-bully behavior. A person needs to believe first that they are innately superior to the person they're targeting, and must also believe that they are more knowledgeable, experienced, smarter or wiser than the other person.
"Where did you hear that?!"
"I don't think that's true."
"Where are you getting your information from?!"
"What did you just make that up?"
"Who are you supposed to be, an expert?"
"What makes you think you know what you're talking about? You don't even have a degree!"

Because controllers and people with narcissism are often fixated on finding ways to "prove" that they're superior and that others are inferior, wrong, and don't know what they're talking about, they tend to "interrogate" other people about pretty much any subject, and imply or accuse them directly of "Not knowing what they're talking about" or "Not knowing what they're doing". They won't have a discussion or ask questions, they'll just do THAT.

It's like how some humans will just lumber in and attack a random animal with a stick without knowing anything about the animal, and without making contact with it first, just because it's "there".

There's no "reason" for this behavior except for the person's own behavioral and emotional issues.