Posted on 09/08/2006 12:52:18 PM PDT by andyk
Men may have developed a psychology that makes them particularly able to engage in wars, a scientist said on Friday.
New research has shown that men bond together and cooperate well in the face of adversity to protect their interests more than women, which could explain why war is almost exclusively a male business, according to Professor Mark van Vugt of the University of Kent in southern England.
"Men respond more strongly to outward threats, we've labelled that the 'man warrior effect'," he told the British Association for the Advancement of Science meeting.
"Men are more likely to support a country going to war. Men are more likely sign up for the military and men are more likely to lead groups in more autocratic, militaristic ways than women," he added.
Van Vugt said the finding is consistent with results from different behavioural science disciplines.
In experiments with 300 university men and women students, Van Vugt and his team gave the volunteers small sums of money which they could either keep or invest in a common fund that would be doubled and equally divided. None of the students knew what the others were doing.
Both sexes cooperated in investing in the fund. But when the groups were told they were competing against other universities, the males were more eager to invest rather than keep their money while the number of women contributing remained the same.
"We all know males are more aggressive than females," Van Vugt said, adding that co-operation is needed to establish institutions and governments and to wage wars.
"Male co-operation is a double-edged sword," he added.
THIS is news?
How much did this study cost?
Really? Surprise surprise. I thought it was just coincidence that, for thousands of years, men have fought in wars -- not women.
In other breaking news, it appears women are better suited to raising children.....
IDIOTS
"I thought it was just coincidence that, for thousands of years, men have fought in wars -- not women."
No! It's thousands of years of sexism, and men holding women back. /< sarcasm>
To most people, no, its not news. Its unneeded confirmation of the obvious. But for some on the far-left, it would be news, though they wouldn't believe it.
Where is the Obviousman graphic?
"A nurse returning from work discovered an intruder armed with a hammer in her home and strangled him with HER bare hands, police said".
I dispute the study conclusions based on this story......
Not to discredit any women or gays in the military, but IMO, they should not be on the battlefield.
Oh, and I believe Clinton is who we are to thank for that. Gutted the military spending and changed the roles/rules of who is allowed in, etc. What a dolt.
And the study only cost $21 million in tax money...
In other news, cats kill mice, dogs chase cars, and only women can still carry an embryo to full term.
This was also recently covered in the publication "Duh."
Exhibit number One: Army Reserve Brigadier-General Janis Karpinski.
"And yard work, don't forget the yard work!!"
I grew up in a rural, agricultural area, and the farmers there all regarded yard work as "women's work." They'd proudly purchase their wives the finest John Deere lawn tractor that money could buy, but their wives were the ones who used it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.