| o_O.Q said:
you already stated that you understand the effect of testosterone meaning that you understand that it is responsible for the increased aggression in men men... how do you account for this if men and women are the same? do you not consider increased aggression to be a behavioral trait?
and besides that if men and women are pretty much the same why is this ad directed towards men specifically as if men are in fact different? as if it takes into account that men are more sexually predatory?
what i should probably ask you first of all though is if you even understand what the psychological aspects of a person are because i'm starting to believe that you can't, not with the contradictory things you are posting
Testosterone is linked to aggression but testosterone levels actually raise with aggression, not necessarily because of it. Just because one is an aggressor and one is more dormant does not imply that we know who is producing more testosterone. There's more than just one single compound linked to why we would be more aggressive. I can assume we agree on the fact it is most likely the aggressor who will have a higher testosterone level during the period of aggression. Just so we are clear.
Question: You say men and women are psychologically different than one another. To illustrate this claim you stated that men produce on average more testosterone than women and that in turn affects the aggression level. If men and women aren't the same because one sex produces different levels of testosterone on average than the other, then are men who produce less testerone than other men no longer biologically men?
It's not the amount that matters, it's the production, and in men and women the production exists in both, not the same amount like you say but the wheels turn in the same direction. You are not male because you produce a certain amount of testosterone, that's not how biology works.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
here's a thought experiment for you i want you to go outside and light a fire and when you have done so toss a small scrap of paper on it, then take a large heap of paper and toss those on.... notice a difference?
Yep, the fire's bigger. What you fail to understand is that just because the fire is bigger does not change what you used to make it bigger, you simply used more of it. The exact same chemical reactions are taking place and the exact same ingredients are being used in the exact same manner, just more of them. A fire is a fire my friend, how the fire acts does not change that it is a fire. Thank you for that thought experiment.
|
