Internet

The Demise of Social Science

Is rampant addiction to porn and video games really ruining a generation of men?

|

The Demise of Guys: Why Boys Are Struggling and What We Can Do About It, by Philip G. Zimbardo and Nikita Duncan, TED Books, $2.99.

The Demise of Guys is based on a talk that Stanford psychologist Philip Zimbardo gave at the 2011 TED (Technology, Education, Design) conference in Long Beach, California. The talk was tendentious and unpersuasive at four minutes, and it only suffers from being expanded into an ebook of 20,000 or so words, because you keep asking: Is this really all there is? A series of sweeping generalizations, backed up by little more than anecdotes and other people's sweeping generalizations, capped by suggested solutions to an undocumented problem that range from banal to silly? Yes, that is all you will get for your $2.99 (for the Kindle edition), along with a rising sense of irritation that culminates in a resolution never to waste your time on a TED book again.

Zimbardo's thesis is that "boys are struggling" in school and in love because they play video games too much and watch too much porn. But he and his co-author, a recent University of Colorado graduate named Nikita Duncan, never establish that boys are struggling any more nowadays than they were when porn was harder to find and video games were limited to variations on Pong. The data they cite mostly show that girls are doing better than boys, not that boys are doing worse than they did before xvideos.com and Grand Theft Auto. Such an association would by no means be conclusive, but it's the least you'd expect from a respected social scientist like Zimbardo, who oversaw the famous Stanford "prison experiment" that we all read about in Psych 101.

The fact that boys are more likely than girls to be diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, more likely to drop out of high school, and less likely to obtain a bachelor's degree does not mean their abilities are weaker than they used to be, let alone that too much Tour Call of Duty has rendered them unfit for academics. The closest Zimbardo comes to a prima facie case linking rising dysfunction among boys to excessive electronic stimulation is his own research on shyness, which finds that 60 percent of Americans (not just men) describe themselves as shy today, compared to 40 percent in the 1980s. "That rise," Zimbardo and Duncan write, "has been correlated with increased use of technology, which minimizes direct, face-to-face social interaction."

That rise has been correlated with many things, of course, but this is the best the authors can do by way of identifying Internet-assisted masturbation and the killing of virtual zombies as the culprits. A closer look at Zimbardo's data might have been helpful at this point. How do we know that an increase in self-reported shyness indicates an actual change in social aptitude, as opposed to a greater willingness to admit feelings that most humans experience? Did the increase in reported shyness occur disproportionately among men? Were heavy porn consumers and video game players especially likely to call themselves shy? If so, how do we know in which direction the causality runs?

Zimbardo and Duncan do not have time for such questions, because the shyness research is just a pretext for launching into a series of empirically untethered claims: "At least guys used to know how to dance. Now they don't even know where to look for common ground, and they wander about the social landscape like tourists in a foreign land unable to ask for directions. They don't know the language of face contact, the nonverbal and verbal set of rules that enable you to comfortably talk with and listen to somebody else and get them to respond back in kind. This lack of social interaction skills surfaces most especially with desirable girls and women. The absence of such critical social skills, essential to navigating intimate social situations, encourages a strategy of retreat, going fail-safe. Girls equal likely failure; safe equals the retreat into online and fantasy worlds that, with regular practice, become ever more familiar, predictable and, in the case of video gaming, more controllable."

You might question the relevance of lost waltzing and fox trotting abilities, although "learn how to dance" appears on Zimbardo and Duncan's list of suggested solutions. You might even wonder whether male awkwardness around pretty women is a newly discovered phenomenon. But as with most of the book's debatable assertions, no citation is given for the claim that guys' social skills have markedly deteriorated in the last couple of decades.

Perhaps that's just as well. One source of evidence that Zimbardo and Duncan rely on heavily, an eight-question survey of people who watched Zimbardo's TED talk online, is so dubious that anyone with a bachelor's degree in psychology (such as Duncan), let alone a Ph.D. (such as Zimbardo), should be embarrassed to cite it without a litany of caveats. The most important one: It seems probable that people who are attracted to Zimbardo's talk, watch it all the way through, and then take the time to fill out his online survey are especially likely to agree with his thesis and especially likely to report problems related to electronic diversions. This is not just a nonrepresentative sample; it's a sample bound to confirm what Zimbardo thinks he already knows. "We wanted our personal views to be challenged or validated by others interested in the topic," the authors claim. Mostly validated, to judge by their survey design.

I am more inclined to believe the results of another research project undertaken for the book, but only because its results are so unsurprising.  Duncan, who turned her senior thesis into the 2009 book Orgasms: Art & Psyche, shifted her attention to less elevated portrayals of fornication by "immersing herself in Internet porn for three days and nights." Among her findings: "In the most-viewed videos…it is an average of 33 percent of the way through the video before there is vaginal or anal penetration. In only a quarter of the videos is there a discernable [sic] female orgasm, whereas in 81 percent of the videos there is a discernable [sic] male orgasm—the male orgasm typically is the highlight of the final scene. Not once in any of the most-viewed videos is there a discussion of safer sex practices, or of physical or emotional expectations or boundaries." This research apparently formed the basis for Zimbardo and Duncan's recommendation that pornographers include an "education" category on their websites and incorporate safe-sex PSAs into their movies. (No, I'm not kidding.)

But at least surveying Zimbardo's fans and counting cum shots produce data, albeit data of limited usefulness. Other sources of evidence cited by Zimbardo and Duncan are so weak that they have the paradoxical effect of undermining their argument rather than reinforcing it. How do Zimbardo and Duncan know about "the sense of total entitlement that some middle-aged guys feel within their relationships"? Because "a highly educated female colleague alerted us" to this "new phenomenon." How do they know that "one consequence of teenage boys watching many hours of Internet pornography…is they are beginning to treat their girlfriends like sex objects"? Because of a theory propounded by Daily Mail columnist Penny Marshall. How do they know that "men are as good as their women require them to be"? Because that's what "one 27-year-old guy we interviewed" said.

Even when more rigorous research is available, Zimbardo and Duncan do not necessarily bother to look it up. How do they know that teenagers "who spend their nights playing video games or texting their friends instead of sleeping are putting themselves at greater risk for gaining unhealthy amounts of weight and becoming obese"? Because an NPR correspondent said so. Likewise, the authors get their information about the drawbacks of the No Child Left Behind Act from a gloss of a RAND Corporation study in a San Francisco Chronicle editorial. This is the level of documentation you'd expect from a mediocre high school student, not a college graduate, let alone a tenured social scientist at a leading university.

To their credit, Zimbardo and Duncan do not bash porn or video games indiscriminately, acknowledging life-enhancing functions for both. And no doubt they are right that too much of either is bad, which is true by definition. But as for the rest—that addiction to cinematic sex and virtual violence is rampant, that it is leaving large and growing numbers of young men mentally and emotionally crippled, and that the answer lies in better male role models, porn with a stronger educational component, and the teaching of "critical thinking" (!) as well as "nonspecific principals" (sic)—the book left me less convinced than I was when I started it.

NEXT: Brickbat: Broken Pump

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “In only a quarter of the videos is there a discernable [sic] female orgasm, whereas in 81 percent of the videos there is a discernable [sic] male orgasm?the male orgasm typically is the highlight of the final scene. Not once in any of the most-viewed videos is there a discussion of safer sex practices, or of physical or emotional expectations or boundaries.”

    Hmmm. Zimbardo and Duncan do not appear to understand what sex or porn are about. Ultimately sensual or sexual things are about procreation. For that, male orgasms are needed, female are not.

    1. I, err, I mean a friend of mine, has a ton of videos with no male participants that would seem to lead to a different conclusion.

      1. It may seem to…as do a thousand other porn theme variations. Still, lurking around at the foundation of it all is procreation. Of course, like with all aspects of human psychology, ‘normal’ can go awry and produce a plethora of different behaviors, making things so much more interesting.

        Take the motive to procreate out of the picture entirely and all sexual behavior would disappear. Yikes, that would not be a world worth living in.

        Interestingly, the female orgasm does enhance the chances of conception for initial matings, and reduce it for subsequent ones.

        I have never been a fan of porn per se. It is all so fakey. Well, you know, except the amateur stuff…or anything produced at Suthenboy Studios where the female orgasm is featured prominently and repeatedly; the male one being a mere afterthought.

        1. Take the motive to procreate out of the picture entirely and all sexual behavior would disappear.

          So one guy fisting another is a manifestation of the urge to procreate? Uh-huh.

          BTW, how can we support the fine work of Suthenboy Studios?

          1. “..one guy fisting another…”

            Goddamit furry.

            First Dagny has me picturing female TSA agents. If there was any morning wood left this is definitely the coup de grace.

              1. Is it a bad thing that I think I know what that is without clicking on it?

                1. Probably.

                2. It is a Nutra Sweet link. You know it is bad, even if you don’t know what it is.

              2. Damn, I thought it was a Hot Chick with Douchebags link. Like “floatation device pear“.

              3. They make beautiful–and very functional– reproductions of those.

            1. hey you opened the door. Well, you opened something.

    2. Look, if you are watching pornography and amassing this kind of statistics, you are missing the point. OK?

    3. Yet they exist. It is incomplete to say sex is only about procreation. Humans like several other species use sex as a means of bonding; all sorts of social and psychological purposes are built in beyond mere procreation. It seems to be the case that the Abrahamic religions and their patriarchal strictures are not, in fact, reflective of humans’ natural tendencies.

      1. I think procreation as the sum purpose of existence hearkens more to Chuck Darwin than Abraham and Moses. The biological imperative to procreate is a pretty fundamental aspect of the evolution of every living organism on this planet. Just sayin’.

    4. In related news, I watched the 25 most popular Looney Tunes cartoons, and not once was there a discussion of first aid practices, or of gun safety.

  2. “nonspecific principals”

    That’s their problem, right there. In the best school-themed porn the Principals are highly specific indeed.

    1. First laugh of the day. Thank you Dagny!

    2. Also, from the Amazon description:

      risk-adverse young men

      Yikes. The authors might want to acquire a working knowledge of the English language before venturing into even murkier waters. Are all the TED talks this useless? From the little I’ve seen they seem to be by douchebags, for douchebags.

      1. They don’t have time to proofread! This information must get out or society is doomed!!!

      2. They few I’ve but myself through have been about half the average utility of an episode of Nova.

        1. And to add insult to injury, their poor typing skills seem to have rubbed off (hurr: this is a porn thread, after all) on you.

        2. Wow. The typing skills have driven right over a cliff today.

          *The few I’ve put myself*

          1. Oh Randian. You are so polite. The rest of us would have barked “English, motherfucker, do you speak it?”

            1. I do try to retain a sense of dignity, but it leads to accusations of foppishness.

        3. SF, you will be forced to attend the same Engrish class as the authors.

          For all intensive, mamboo dogffffce to the banana patch.

          1. I find it hard to believe you are all being so insensitive.

        4. The impression I get is it’s a bunch of folks with 115 IQs taping themselves for a bunch of 100 IQ people who think they’re watching geniuses and fawn on the former group “appropriately.”

          1. People with 115s are the worst, aren’t they? There is no convincing them that is not the highest number there is.

            1. Some people are just smart enough to be an idiot about it.

              1. My problem is less that I’m a jerk about being so smart, and more that I can’t stop telling people about my enormous dong.

          2. Wait, people with 115 IQs think that’s high? I lol’d.

      3. Some of the talks are pretty damn good. Lots of them are exercises in pop-whatever-field and fairly worthless.

        Then there was the J.J. Abrams talk, which was mostly him spastically emoting about a “mystery box” he acquired as a boy and never opened. Then he showed the scene from Lost where a dude gets sucked through the engine of the plane.

        It was pretty bewildering.

        But I have seen some that border on excellent, if not entertaining.

      4. The Drew Curtis (of fark.com) TED talk on how he defeated a patent troll was pretty good.

      5. Are all the TED talks this useless?

        I’ve seen some pretty nice ones on Netflix streaming.

  3. This seems appropriate:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..ure=fvwrel

    1. It’s a bold (and probably not at work) person who clicks an unmarked YouTube link declared as germane to a post about porn.

      1. and that person is me, only to be rewarded with a “This video is not available” message.

        1. Try living in a real country next time.

        2. That’ll learn ya

        3. i do live in a real country! Sure, our banknotes are plastic and colourful, our nation’s capital is a good sheep run ruined, and everyone thinks we’re uncultured yobs, but at least we’re not New Zealand!

          1. Sounds like a nice country. Are there beaches?

            1. yes – beautiful broad sweeping sun-drenched beaches, and sparkling blue water tempting you to enter, get caught in a vicious rip, and drown. Or be mauled by a shark.

              We also have lush, dense bushland, full of magnificently-plumed birds, the sharp tang of eucalyptus, and nine of the ten most poisonous snakes in the world.

              I believe our coffee is far superior to yours. None of that drip shit

              1. I love how you have all the dangerous animals and all of the good guns are impossible to get.

              2. yes – beautiful broad sweeping sun-drenched beaches, and sparkling blue water tempting you to enter,

                Yeah, but it’s cold in the summer and hot in the winter so the beaches are useless.

                1. I love how you have all the dangerous animals and all of the good guns are impossible to get.

                  It’s Australia’s attempt at population control.

              3. Sorry, the coffee is, for the most part, horrible in Oz. On the other hand, a nice winery tour of the Hunter Valley is a pretty good time. Then again, the freaking kookaburras on the golf course that inevitably call during your backswing are rather annoying. I do have to grant that Sydney is the cleanest city I’ve ever been to, so at least you have that going for you.

          2. Funny, I thought you were talking about New Zealand.

            BTW, I vote all libertarian-minded people emmigrate to New Zealand and we make it over into our own Paradise. Any takers?

            1. When do we pack?

              1. Have a bug-out bag ready to go at all times.

            2. BTW, I vote all libertarian-minded people emmigrate to New Zealand and we make it over into our own Paradise. Any takers?

              Depends on how much you like sheep or Orcs.

              1. Why can’t it be sheep and Orcs?

                1. When we run New Zealand you can have sheep and orcs to your heart’s content.

                2. When we run New Zealand you can have sheep and orcs to your heart’s content.

  4. The closest Zimbardo comes to a prima facie case linking rising dysfunction among boys to excessive electronic stimulation is his own research on shyness, which finds that 60 percent of Americans (not just men) describe themselves as shy today, compared to 40 percent in the 1980s. “That rise,” Zimbardo and Duncan write, “has been correlated with increased use of technology, which minimizes direct, face-to-face social interaction.”

    They must be using a different internet than me, because on my internet shyness doesn’t stop people from talking to each other, precisely because it is the internet.

    Facebook can’t simultaneously be a Roman orgy where young people lose their virtue and married people go to cheat on their spouses with long-lost college ex’s, and be the reason nobody is interacting.

    1. Zombie Jimbo considers joining Facebook and giving up his privacy to find his unspeakably hot ex-girlfriend from college…

      Nah, I guess I must just be too shy. Oops, the real world is calling, in a shrill unpleasant voice

      1. She’s fat now.

        There, I just saved you the detective work it would take to figure out her last name.

        1. My brother’s (formerly SMOKIN’ hot) ex-girlfriend who found me on FB. Took me minutes – I figured out who it was by the eyes and the smile…had to search through the 50 pounds of lard that now surrounded them.

          Sad – she was just STEAMIN’ hot – still pretty, but hidden under too big a layer of, “Oh, HELL no…”

          1. the bigger the cushion, the sweeter the pushin
            that’s what I said
            The looser the waistband, the deeper the quicksand
            Or so I have read

            My baby fits me like a flesh tuxedo
            I’d like to sink her with my pink torpedo

            Big bottom, big bottom
            Talk about bum cakes, my girl’s got ’em
            Big bottom drive me out of my mind
            How could I leave this behind?

            1. This comment goes to eleven.

              1. “Such an association would by no means be conclusive, but it’s the least you’d expect from a respected social scientist like Zimbardo, who oversaw the famous Stanford “prison experiment” that we all read about in Psych 101.”

                Hehe, ‘respected social scientist’? He’s not scientist, ill tell you that much, and the only thing he could be respected for his ability to turn bullshit into money.

        2. ^^ this ^^

          However, I did find one ex-college girlfriend (the completely psycho goth one) and she’s still skinny, still good-looking, but yes, still crazy.

          1. but you’ve remained a golden prince, a prize for all womankind?

            1. I look better now than on my first day in college. A lot better.

              I was very, very scrawny. The body fat the rest of you gained that made you look horrible? On me it looks awesome.

              Unfortunately, I’m married. Damn you, social norms!

              But at least I get to judge the aging of others from a position of strength.

              1. Me too. Plus I have all my hair and it hasn’t greyed a bit. 25th college reunion was quite entertaining.

                1. I’m also in the non-balding category with no gray hair. I blame all the food preservatives.

              2. I had ridiculous hair when I started college and I weight 125 pounds. I look way, way better today.

                Also married.

    2. Sure it can. Same way Bush2 was a complete and utter idiot who also masterminded the most intricate deception of the American public in the history of everything ever.

      1. The key to Evil Genius is the “Evil” part, I think.

    3. Plus, sexting.

      “I’m so shy that I’m going to send you pictures of myself naked, and then talk to you about it at school tomorrow [probably by texting while we’re in close physical proximity to each other].”

      And how to explain the high participation (in our and our kids’ collective experience) with group activities like choir/band, sports, church, etc? HUGE amount of social interaction, in person…which then leads to the sexting and intercourse…

      Weak sauce, TED.

  5. “At least guys used to know how to dance. Now they don’t even know where to look for common ground, and they wander about the social landscape like tourists in a foreign land unable to ask for directions. They don’t know the language of face contact, the nonverbal and verbal set of rules that enable you to comfortably talk with and listen to somebody else and get them to respond back in kind. This lack of social interaction skills surfaces most especially with desirable girls and women. The absence of such critical social skills, essential to navigating intimate social situations, encourages a strategy of retreat, going fail-safe. Girls equal likely failure; safe equals the retreat into online and fantasy worlds that, with regular practice, become ever more familiar, predictable and, in the case of video gaming, more controllable.”

    Okham’s Razor says it’s more likely that bitches be crazy.

    1. The insertion (hurr) of the word “desirable” in the above seems a bit telling. They are just capitalizing on the genDURR wars crap that is so popular right now. “Men have it worse because hot ladies won’t always sleep with them!” “No, women have it worse because blargle patriarchy!” It plays well to a certain audience of both men and women that could probably be having plenty of sex and be much more relaxed if they stopped acting like such assholes.

      1. genDURR wars = lulz!

    2. What the fuck is an Okham?

      1. I always wondered why they called it Occam’s Razor when the guy’s name was Ockham.

  6. One additional problem I see with this entire analysis is that before you can purport to deal with the resolution of dysfunction, you’d have to demonstrate that you’ve identified a dysfunction.

    “Guys like porn and video games!” doesn’t sound like an actual dysfunction to me. That sounds more like customer satisfaction.

    Perhaps it’s “I don’t like the fact that guys like porn and video games!” that is evidence of dysfunction. After all, the complainer is the one with the emotional distress.

    1. Fundamentally, this IS the issue – they don’t propose to demonstrate ANY “issue”.

      This is a retarded treatise from the get go. Book length? This isn’t take-home-assignment-essay-length material.

      BAD psychologist! BAD psychologist!

    2. I think you’re confusing complete and utter intellectual objectivity with emotional distress. I mean it’s social SCIENCE, after all.

    3. I liked porn and video games back in the early 80s. I still like ’em now. But somehow a shy bastard such a myself still managed to date wimmin’, get laid, and get married…

      1. Did you get help from Loomis Simmons?

  7. The problem, as we all know is the golden girls turned our sons gay – Gillespie Says No

    (which makes more sense, ChristWire or Zimbardo?

    1. I thought any mention of the GGs was a banning offense.

    2. God Bless You for the GG reset, Johnny L. A grateful nation thanks you.

        1. RIP

  8. identifying Internet-assisted masturbation and over the killing of virtual zombies

    FIFY

  9. The other thing social “scientists” don’t seem to understand is that while dumb people may like video games, that does not mean that video games have the power to make smart people dumb.

    Smart people just play video games like…smart people.

    I played an online game a few years ago whose name I can’t even remember now. Just a stupid space conquest game where you colonized planets around stars and built ships (fighters, carriers, frigates, Death Stars – you know the drill) and then tried to attack other people and steal their derbs and credits, and/or join alliances to do the same in packs.

    Sure, a stupid person could enjoy that game. But smart people were playing it, too. And smart people did things like analyze the combat simulator math to come up with the best attack fleets and the best attack sequences. They built, shared, and tweaked Greasemonkey scripts to scrape all the star and planet information from the thousands of pages on the server(s), and then came up with ways for alliance members to pool scraped data to create workable strategic maps. They put together larger and larger teams across time-zones worldwide, so they could have players online at all times, and so they could launch sneak attacks once they figured out when their enemies were sleeping.

    Playing that game was like going to Ender’s battle school for $9.95 a month.

    The problem isn’t our entertainments. It’s just that a certain % of people are stupid.

    1. It’s just that a certain % of people are stupid.

      I don’t view that as a “problem”, either. Who else is gonna wash my car and go to THE Ohio State University?

      *waits expectantly*

      1. Florida schools gotta eat

      2. One wonders where a Michigan guy gets the money to have someone wash his rusty Pinto.

        1. IS that something you ask for at the Mustang Ranch? “I want a “wash my rusty pinto”? Does it cost extra?

      3. Fuck Michigan!
        Fuck Alma!
        Fuck you!

        /still friendly

    2. Fluffy,

      You headlining the next TED talks?

  10. OK, let’s take the premise at face value… are girls missing out on these boys that would rather play video games than their games, that would rather jack it to a video than ask them out, take them out, and then grovel for a quick touch while parked in the cul-de-sac of an abandoned sub-division?

    Wait… Who’s missing out on what?

    1. Social conventions drove men to it. Gone are the good old days, when you could raid local fishing villages and carry the local women off back to your stronghold.

      Now men have to be polite and charming, even in WOW.

    2. parked in the cul-de-sac of an abandoned sub-division

      Ah, high school. I’ll have you know I have very fond memories of that cul-de-sac.

      The girls in question are probably perfectly happy to bang older dudes. That way everyone’s a winner!

      1. It’s the circle of life.

        1. What does Elton John have to do with it?

          1. Maybe you should have paid attention in Health class.

        2. I mean, when you put it that way, it’s downright fucking moving. *stares into majestic sunrise, wipes single tear*

    3. If it helps any, I am a very cheep and easy date.

  11. Like this is anything new. When I was in high school a hundred years ago 75% of honor roll students were girls and I was one of the few boys in class who could read from a book aloud without dribbling all over myself like a total retard.

  12. Ignoring the debate whether these guys are right or not, what exactly do they propose to do about it ? Banning porn and computer games will bring out the libertarian in even the most hardened utilitarian that believes everything is justified for the greater good.

  13. Well now that makes a lot of s ene dude.

    http://www.At-Anon.tk

  14. In only a quarter of the videos is there a discernable [sic] female orgasm, whereas in 81 percent of the videos there is a discernable [sic] male orgasm

    What porn movies was she watching where 19% of the time there was no “discernable [sic] male orgasm”? I think it’s more likely that 19% of porn videos online are edited to cut off prior to the “big finale”, so to speak.

    Not once in any of the most-viewed videos is there a discussion of safer sex practices, or of physical or emotional expectations or boundaries.

    Yeah, because people (male or female) really watch porn to be preached at about safe sex practices and really want to see a long conversation about expectations and boundaries prior to the freaky stuff. The industry just isn’t delivering it. MARKET FAILURE!!11!!! /sarc

  15. “Tour of Duty”

    HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAA!!

    1. Jacob lives in a house full of women. He probably isn’t current on any pop culture other than Twillight and 50 Shades of whatever.

      1. I’m sure he’s been told numerous horror stories of the devastation wrought by Xbox and PS3 on women’s lives.

    2. It’s “Call of Duty”, Jacob. FYI.

  16. Brilliant piece. Zimbardo and his ilk make me embarrassed by my PhD.

    1. If your PhD is in a social “science” then you should have been embarrassed long before now.

  17. “University of Colorado graduate named Nikita Duncan”

    Methinks that La Femme Nikita “convinced this retard that feministing and jezebel were totally right and that us men are still neanderthals who would rather beat it to Modern Warfare 50 then interact with them in a meaningful way.

    IF, and that’s a big if, their premise is correct, perhaps its because women have spent the last 30 years (at least) effectively castrating and domesticating men so that we would be more dependable cats.

    1. I used to have a boss who said that a woman will try and change you for 20 years and then say “you aren’t the man I married”.

  18. From my unscientific observation of straight males, playing video games and watching porn seem just to be the preferred alternative to dealing with some bitch all the time.

    1. Smartest thing you’ve ever said, Tony.

      1. What do we do? WHAT DO WE DO!?

  19. I think a detailed study of “Does TED lead to shoddy science?” is entirely in order.

  20. There’s a much more intuitively obvious inference than that drawn by Zimbardo and Duncan: that “the language of face contact, the nonverbal and verbal set of rules” have become incredibly less clear for young men in the last few decades and that young men are retreating into internet porn and video games as a reaction, rather than as cuase. That might involve questioning what has rendered that language and rule set muddled. The obvious suspect is the various politico-social movements supported by various “social scientists” like Zimbardo and Duncan.
    Of course, that might entail the notion that human interaction and human nature aren’t some mechanic construct to be re-engineered by social scientists to suit their moral, political or aesthetic preferences. It might even entail recognizing that an academia that celebrates sexuality with an “Orgasms: Art Psyche”, but treats porn aimed at a male audience as unacceptable because it pays insufficient attention to the woman’s needs just might be contributing to the problem.

  21. The so-called ‘social sciences’ have been trying to persuade the world that they are real sciences for over a century. They keep tripping over facts, though, and falling flat on their faces. A scientist’s response to finding a fact that doesn’t match accepted theory is “Cool. I wonder what that means”. Not all people who call themselves scientists manage this, but in the ‘social sciences’ the standard response is “That’s got to be wrong” followed by a serious effort to bury it. They seldom even bother to pretend.

  22. Me alegro de ver tu post, tee shirt pas cher gracias!

  23. The absence of such critical social skills, essential to navigating intimate social situations, encourages a strategy of retreat, going fail-safe. Girls equal likely failure; safe equals the retreat into online and fantasy worlds that, with regular practice, become ever more familiar, predictable and, in the case of video gaming, more controllable.”

  24. Right, like before porn and video games, shy people didn’t just disappear into books and comics.

  25. I was “amused” by the statement that boys are now treating their girlfriends as sex objects. What? They never treated their girlfriends as sex objects before?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.