Teeqoz said:
Uhm... okay, they cut their hair? You're gonna have to come up with better examples than that, people can do whatever they want with their hair as far as I'm concerned... There is far too little evidence to say it's "mainly biological and not social". Does biology play an important role? Sure, but society sure does its very best to influence and increase this difference in interests even more. Biological biases are exacerbated by society's influence. Social pressure arises because of consequences. You can't have social pressure, unless there are larger consequences behind it. To use an informal example, the reason you'd rather not openly fart in a large group of people is because it could result in an awkward situation and possibly affect your social status - generally make you feel uncomfortable. That's because farting in a large group of people has over time become behaviour that is generally looked down upon. So what are the consequences that forced the F1 owners' hands? I don't doubt that there were consequences. Specifically, financial ones, because a large enough group of people don't really want to mix models together with formula 1 racing, that the owners probably fear it could alienate some viewers. AKA the owners are adapting to what they think their audience wants. So what do you suggest? Should we force the owners of the tournament to reinstate the practice against their will, even though they've made a judgement call against it? |
You didn't look at that link. It's an article about a study on toys and monkeys. It's more proof than you're saying on the toys. It's mainly biological. As for the rest, I'm not gonna bother to address any of it. We both said our points.
