You can look at heavy metals in the environment, or we can look at the fact that our water is fluorinated which was a strategy first used in prisons to make the population more tranquil.
its the estrogen in the drinking water from all the birth control pills. water treatment plants do not remove much if any of it from typical municipal "recycled" water. yet another reason to get a good filter or stick to rain/well/distilled or ro water.
Bisphenol-A (or BPA for short) is one of the chemicals causing lower levels of testosterone as well as the high incidence of breast cancer in females. There's many, many articles on how BPA binds to the estrogen receptors and simulates higher estrogen levels effectively pussifying men (or making them more feminine).
I think it would be difficult to prove that with a scientific study, but... most likely, that is it. For males, it just feminizes them a bit (perhaps even turning them gay), but imagine the females' bodies on a continuous high of fake estrogen. Every trait that defines a female would be exaggerated. You'd have super-sensitive, highly emotional, scandalous women on the prowl everywhere.
"most-likely" the "gay epidemic" is caused by BPA in packaging? That sounds like a reasonable explanation for everything from the physical background of homosexual preference to the presumed socio-cultural "widespread" acceptance of homosexual lifestyles, BPA? Do you really think life and society are that simple? Don't vote. Don't have children. Don't teach. Your input is not needed.
I don't have anything against gays, but if it's true, then it's true. I understand this is a touchy subject, but thankfully I can allow myself to speak about it without using a filter like most people.
Anyways, you're using a strawman at the moment...Not just BPA packaging, but many many things out there can flood your body with estrogen mimickers. Take soy for instance. I had a best friend who was gay, and he was one of those really feminine ones. His diet? He ate a lot of soy. Soy bacon, soy this, soy that. He also used a lot of different things like makeup, and a shitload of chapstick, and all kinds of lotions and stuff. All of those things have ingredients within them that flood your body with estrogen mimickers.
I have had this thought before, it may not be far off. Seeing that there is a vast range of "acceptable" testosterone levels, even when a man is producing very little sperm. However, I don't know a whole lot about endocrineology.
witness the feral negro. negro's have naturally higher testosterone giving them larger sex organs, explosive athleticism, easier muscle gain and shorter tempers.
I'm sure it is. Though I was hoping that since you felt compelled to make your comment, you wouldn't mind explaining why you think those qualities make you harder to control.
Not that my annecdotal evidence is worth anything, but years ago I was an Oklahoma football All Star after being a first string guard during my sophmore, junior, and senior years. I am quite the hairy man. In my youth I had serious acne problems that required medication to alieviate, the cause of which was determined to be abnormaly high levels of testosterone. Today I am spearheading many innovations in my department at work and staying abreast of (or exceeding) my peers in technical skill.
Also, understanding a concept does not require first-hand experience of said concept. I'm sure you were aware of that which is why I was confused you would suggest such a notion.
Just to clarify; I do have first-hand experience with high levels of testosterone despite not needing it to maintain and understanding.
Because higher test levels lead to moreaggression, violence, restlessness and less tolerance for being obedient to others . Lowering test levels among a population would lead to less aggression, violence, restlessness and more tolerance for being obedient to others. Making it the population easier for authority figures to control.
We do tend to assume that testosterone can contribute to agression, but we can't accurately comment on the mechanics that may exist there. Indeed, we cannot relaibly say that increased testosterone leads to increased agression, and we certainly can't find a link between high testosterone and violence (a physical form of agression). I don't know where you came up with the idea that resistance to obediance is a quality of testosterone, but it sounds tacked on.
I am also going to argue that even if the qualities you set forth were true, people with high levels of testosterone would be no more difficult to control than people with low levels of testosterone. If you are interested in why I take this position I'd be glad to explain.
Roid rage being what exactly? An example of increased aggression and violence due to testosterone? An example of something that is difficult to control?
I'm going to clarify my previous position to avoid possible confusion. I think that people with higher aggression and violence are just as easy to control as people with lower aggression and violence. I'm going to amend this statement slightly and take an even more extreme position. I posit that people with higher aggression and violence are easier to control than people with lower aggression and violence.
Here's why: The more aggressive and violent a person becomes, the less calm rational contemplation they employ.
How do you manipulate a man calmly reading Sergei Lukyanenko's Night Watch? There may be a number of ways, many of which include shifting him from his calm and logical state to a more emotional state.
How do you manipulate a man looking for a fight? This is much easier. You give him one.
To put it in terms you may be more familiar with; How do you manipulate a calm and rational nation? That would be a very difficult feat to accomplish. On the other hand, how do you manipulate an angry and violent nation? Much easier. Give them something to direct that aggression and violence at. Whip them into a frenzie, and this becomes even easier. Get them to abandon all logic and empathy and you can get them to do whatever you want.
This is why phrases like blinded by rage exist. Raw aggression and violence is predictable. Because it is predictable, it is easily manipulated.
I see your point. But in my mind a nation of low T men wouldn't even care to "fight" for anything, whether the fight was mental or physical. Secondly lowering the testosterone of a population of men could be done not only for the purpose of preventing organized purposeful rebellion, but for rebellion in general which causes problems even if it's more chaotic and less purposeful. Testosterone has been correlated with rebellious behavior.
You are attributing the will to fight to testosterone. Would you say that a group of women, who typically have testosterone levels many times lower than the typical man, are nearly incapable of fighting for anything? Testosterone is a hormone that catalyzes the release of various chemicals in the body. These may contribute to the strength of an emotion or mental state but the hormone does not govern the emotions or mental state.
Secondly lowering the testosterone of a population of men could be done not only for the purpose of preventing organized purposeful rebellion, but for rebellion in general which causes problems even if it's more chaotic and less purposeful.
As I said before, a bunch of aggressive and violent people would be easily controlled and steered away from a rebellion of any kind. But since testosterone isn't linked to the will to fight, this point is moot. At best testosterone makes people more competative and aggressive and even these are not proven to be true. In fact, when looking at both sexes and aggression in general research has been largly inconclusive.
Testosterone has been correlated with rebellious behavior.
"In men, high levels of endogenous testosterone (T) seem to encourage behavior apparently intended to dominate -- to enhance one's status over -- other people. Sometimes dominant behavior is aggressive, its apparent intent being to inflict harm on another person, but often dominance is expressed nonaggressively. Sometimes dominant behavior takes the form of antisocial behavior, including rebellion against authority and law breaking. "
James Dabbs, Jr., studied 4,462 men in 1990 and found that "the overall picture among the high-testosterone men is one of delinquency, substance abuse and a tendency toward excess." These men, he added, "have more trouble with people like teachers while they are growing up, have more sexual partners, are more likely to have gone AWOL in the service and to have used hard drugs
Evidence that human behavior is partly governed by hormones is mainly restricted to correlations, which are not the same as causes. At least one experiment found that large doses of testosterone increased aggression but only for a small proportion of men. Young men who use anabolic steroids - a synthetic version of testosterone - are also more likely to be involved in violent crime. Taken together, such findings imply that high levels of testosterone can cause aggression in at least some men. Other evidence points in the same direction
"You are attributing the will to fight to testosterone. Would you say that a group of women, who typically have testosterone levels many times lower than the typical man, are nearly incapable of fighting for anything"
Most militaries are men, and nearly every revolution throughout history has been entirely lead by men. Yes women aren't nearly as capable as men for fighting for something/ But that being said men and women are different, and women have different ways of manipulating things and getting their way.
"In men, high levels of endogenous testosterone (T) seem to encourage behavior apparently intended to dominate -- to enhance one's status over -- other people. Sometimes dominant behavior is aggressive, its apparent intent being to inflict harm on another person, but often dominance is expressed nonaggressively. Sometimes dominant behavior takes the form of antisocial behavior, including rebellion against authority and law breaking. "
Seems to, sometimes, often expressed non-aggressively, etc. It is mostly agreed that testosterone contributes to the tendancy to dominate (though nobody says it is the sole or even major contributor). However, the tendancy to rebel is dictated by far more than just high levels of testosterone, as indicated by the rebelious acts of women and younge children not yet saturated with testosterone.
James Dabbs, Jr., studied 4,462 men in 1990 and found that "the overall picture among the high-testosterone men is one of delinquency, substance abuse and a tendency toward excess." These men, he added, "have more trouble with people like teachers while they are growing up, have more sexual partners, are more likely to have gone AWOL in the service and to have used hard drugs.
Cool. I have some stuff that references Dabbs from Scientific American. Check this out.
What Dabbs didn't address was whether this correlation was the cause or an effect of the environment these men found themselves in. Which is to say, are high-testosterone males more likely to become violent criminals, or does being a violent criminal raise a man's level of testosterone?
No one really knows the answer, but a growing body of evidence suggests that testosterone is as much the result of violence as its cause. Indeed, both winning a sporting match and beating an opponent at chess can boost testosterone levels. (On the other hand, losing a sporting match, growing old and becoming obese all reduce levels of testosterone.)
"The causal arrow goes both ways," says Peter Gray of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, whose own work shows that marriage and fatherhood lower testosterone levels. "There's evidence in humans that, just as in animals, testosterone is responsive to male-male competition."
Evidence that human behavior is partly governed by hormones is mainly restricted to correlations, which are not the same as causes.
The whole rest of this paragraph just reiterates what I have been saying. It seems to correlate with increased aggression but we have not determined that it is the cause.
Most militaries are men, and nearly every revolution throughout history has been entirely lead by men. Yes women aren't nearly as capable as men for fighting for something/ But that being said men and women are different, and women have different ways of manipulating things and getting their way.
Last time I checked, women make up around 20% of the US military. Sure its a minority, but 20% is still a significant percentage. There are also women like Gina Carano who could like put the hurt on nearly any violently aggressive, testosterone leaden inmate you put in the ring with her, based only on physicality and the will to fight (as opposed to whatever manipulation you were inferring).
Testosterone is there. We know it probably contributes to an increased desire to dominate. Higher levels of testosterone don't make you any less susceptible to control or manipulation, and testosterone is not nearly as closely linked to a rebelious attitude as you suggest.
I said there was a correlation, not a causation. Crime rate among small children and women? Yeah there are other factors leading to criminality but crime rates for small children and women are MUCH lower than adult males.
Women make up 20% of the military, out of a population of over 50% of the country. And how many of them are in active combat? Very few. Keep in mind the U.S. military is a volunteer military and anyone who gets through boot camp is a member. DK who Gina Carano is but i'll assume she's a cage fighter and tell you that women like her are what you call rare exceptions to the rule.
"Higher levels of testosterone don't make you any less susceptible to control or manipulation, and testosterone is not nearly as closely linked to a rebelious attitude as you suggest"
Well i said there was a correlation, which there is. That's about all i suggested. My overall post is not about high test persay, but increased test in general which all males would have if it wasn't for the recent environmental factors that have led men to have decreased test.
Men naturaly gain and lose testosterone throughout there lives. In fact, men experience lower levels of testosterone from very basic lifetime landmarks. Having children, settling down, aging, etc. So really, not all men would have high testosterone.
As to the criminality of women and children, I don't know how you made that connection. I never said women and kids are just as criminal as men. I said they are no less rebellious then men.
With the military thing; its true that men typically occupy the more combat oriented roles more than women. That doesn't mean the women are unwilling to fight. Interestingly, both the men and women in the military probably have higher than their baseline testosterone levels, probably as a result of rigorous physical conditioning and these levels don't necessarily reflect the levels they had before enlisting.
You may have only suggested a correlation between testosterone and certain aggressive qualities, but you did suggest a conspiracy to reduce the general testosterone levels of the population in order to make them more easily controlled. Which is to say you implied a causation between testosterone levels and susceptibility to manipulation. I refuted both the notion that testosterone is certain to increase aggressive qualities as well as the notion that the qualities you presented (aggression, violence, etc.) are qualities that make a person difficult to manipulate.
So if an authority figure were trying to enslave a population would it be easier to enslave a population of men with test levels like yours or a population of men with much lower test levels?
Anyone has access to testosterone, or HGH. If they were going to try and control steroids they would shut down anti-aging clinics which prescribe them to anyone over the age of 25ish. I just don't see the correlation, coming from personal experience and the experience of people I know.
Don't get me wrong, I do get get irritated with people. However, that has to do with my diet depending on if its more geared towards cutting or bulking. When I'm eating chicken, rice, fish, beans, peanut butter every.single.day, and I have to force that down I don't want to hear your sob story about anything. On or off cycle, it just comes with the lifestyle and knowing in the back of your mind that you're in the best shape and healthier than 95% of the population.
True, but when EVERY SINGLE males T levels in the nation have been lowered, most aren't aware of it and taking medication to increase it takes time, money and effort, the overall effect is still a population with lower than natural T levels. Besides, closing clinics would be much more obvious.
I'm really just speculating, you're right, i don't know much about endocrinology. But i've read quite a bit about testosterone (trying to raise it naturally myself) and i understand that it not only has physical effects on a person, but mental effects as well. And i would imagine that if one was trying to control or sedate a population, it would be easier to do so with men with lowered t.
I mean, I wouldn't really see the logic behind the whole thing. It doesn't make people violent, I mean don't get me wrong I do feel more confident and a sense of well being on it. Also, it doesn't really take much time or money. Straight test, 500mg a week for 15 weeks (average cycle) I could get for 70 bucks of UG grade. Pharmacy grade being sold on the street is actually cheaper then that. If we're talking about straight test I could take one with no ester attached and it'll immediately increase my test levels after I inject it so it doesn't really slowly increase unless you want it to be.
Where have you heard or saw that test levels are lower? In relation to what? I mean, it's natural for test levels to decrease with age that's why people jump on TRT or HRT. I could get into details on how clinics work but it's really long write out. I've personally never used one but they artificially create their own standards for what a normal test level is, so when you write them that check and send in that blood sample (via mail) and give them your scouts honor that it's your blood, they will send you back your results. Would you look at that, you qualified because you have low test levels. And you will have yourself a script for some test.
And if you want to raise your test levels naturally, workout your legs. Squats are your friend, don't believe those supplements you see at GNC that claim to raise your test levels 10000x or whatever bullshit it says. Most supplements that claim to raise your test are expensive placebos. Actually, most of the supplements you see in magazines are garbage. Or goto your doctor, he will prescribe you AndroGel, I can't think of it now but you rub the gel on, I think your thigh? And it slowly raises your levels. Insurance I think should pay for it also. It's safe.
Interesting. They give a list of plausible reasons why this slight decline have occurred and would love to see what other countries or areas of the US compare instead of just Boston.
They said that people are healthier now a days then they use to be, test levels are not an indicator if your healthy or not which I don't really know why they brought that up. Because they also said smokers have higher levels of test which contradicts that if we propose that smokers are 'unhealthy'. I'm on my phone but I'll look it up later and I don't feel like typing this again just to go back to check the article but that's what I'm pretty sure it said. I still stand by by original statement though that AAS don't cause violence, and roid-rage is a huge myth.
I'd bet a lot of the people who are paranoid of chemtrails and GMO's lather their bodies in these xenoestrogens every day before work. The stuff goes through your skin. This is a real conspiracy.
Consider BPA. Some companies market their plastic as "BPA free," and simply replace BPA with BPS in the formula. BPS is hardly less toxic, and they dont tell you they replaced the xenoestrogen with a similar one.
I am sorry but lols. I am not saying I disagree but consider this. Testosterone is formed from cholesterol. You cannot get cholesterol from any plant based food. Now your body builds Cholesterol in the liver daily but you have to have enough fat in your diet or else it is gonna drain your body just to make it. Soo It is not as cut and dry as veganism or vegetarianism.
haha man it gets worse, Dr. Greger has lectured at the Conference on World Affairs, the National Institutes of Health, and the International Bird Flu Summit, testified before Congress, appeared on The Dr. Oz Show and The Colbert Report, and was invited as an expert witness in defense of Oprah Winfrey at the infamous "meat defamation" trial. Tell me what you see here.
Oh and he responded to a comment about how to raise tesosterone and was recommending Flax seed's...
"Although flax does deserve all the accolades it gets, there is one problem with flax seed consumption and T production- the lignans contained in flax have a weak estrogenic effect."
This is most definitely the case. If men had high testosterone they would be more able to fight back if ever the government tried to take over. Also lowering men's test kills them early.
I've also noticed that many male-feminists look rather feminine themselves (how ironic). This could be attributed to them collectively having low T-levels.
Is feminism a sinister plot to make us feel more and more different from one another, and even harvest resent in some cases? Or is this a legitimate civil rights movement?
60 comments
6 [deleted] 2014-02-12
[deleted]
3 [deleted] 2014-02-12
You can look at heavy metals in the environment, or we can look at the fact that our water is fluorinated which was a strategy first used in prisons to make the population more tranquil.
9 [deleted] 2014-02-12
[deleted]
4 [deleted] 2014-02-12
its the estrogen in the drinking water from all the birth control pills. water treatment plants do not remove much if any of it from typical municipal "recycled" water. yet another reason to get a good filter or stick to rain/well/distilled or ro water.
3 [deleted] 2014-02-12
[deleted]
3 nordite 2014-02-12
they don't filter much of anything out in tap water
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/14/your_tap_water_is_probably_laced_with_anti_depressants_partner/
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3810324.htm
http://www.offthegridnews.com/2013/12/20/25-plus-drugs-in-more-than-half-of-americas-drinking-water/
1 [deleted] 2014-02-12
True. I was actually just posing this question to see if others had more info on it.
1 Propagandude 2014-02-12
Sounds like crotchety-old-guy syndrome.
2 ZapPowerz 2014-02-12
Git off MUH LAWN!
5 Schuyler_Colfax 2014-02-12
Bisphenol-A (or BPA for short) is one of the chemicals causing lower levels of testosterone as well as the high incidence of breast cancer in females. There's many, many articles on how BPA binds to the estrogen receptors and simulates higher estrogen levels effectively pussifying men (or making them more feminine).
Google search: bisphenol a estrogen receptor binding
This chemical is used in the food industry to line packaging, including soda cans, water bottles, and many other things.
3 [deleted] 2014-02-12
You think this is why there's a gay epidemic and an epidemic of those girls who have really high, annoying voices and can't shut the fuck up?
5 Schuyler_Colfax 2014-02-12
I think it would be difficult to prove that with a scientific study, but... most likely, that is it. For males, it just feminizes them a bit (perhaps even turning them gay), but imagine the females' bodies on a continuous high of fake estrogen. Every trait that defines a female would be exaggerated. You'd have super-sensitive, highly emotional, scandalous women on the prowl everywhere.
1 brizzadizza 2014-02-12
"most-likely" the "gay epidemic" is caused by BPA in packaging? That sounds like a reasonable explanation for everything from the physical background of homosexual preference to the presumed socio-cultural "widespread" acceptance of homosexual lifestyles, BPA? Do you really think life and society are that simple? Don't vote. Don't have children. Don't teach. Your input is not needed.
5 [deleted] 2014-02-12
I don't have anything against gays, but if it's true, then it's true. I understand this is a touchy subject, but thankfully I can allow myself to speak about it without using a filter like most people.
Anyways, you're using a strawman at the moment...Not just BPA packaging, but many many things out there can flood your body with estrogen mimickers. Take soy for instance. I had a best friend who was gay, and he was one of those really feminine ones. His diet? He ate a lot of soy. Soy bacon, soy this, soy that. He also used a lot of different things like makeup, and a shitload of chapstick, and all kinds of lotions and stuff. All of those things have ingredients within them that flood your body with estrogen mimickers.
The truth is the truth.
2 [deleted] 2014-02-12
well yeah this is the other side of the coin, look how many hot chics are around with great feminine bodies and pretty faces
hey, didnt the anunaki fancy our wimmin?....
1 [deleted] 2014-02-12
high voices are hot though.
4 TheStrangeChild 2014-02-12
I have had this thought before, it may not be far off. Seeing that there is a vast range of "acceptable" testosterone levels, even when a man is producing very little sperm. However, I don't know a whole lot about endocrineology.
3 Propagandude 2014-02-12
Are you saying that normal levels of testosterone make you harder to control?
5 [deleted] 2014-02-12
Normal or high levels.
4 [deleted] 2014-02-12
witness the feral negro. negro's have naturally higher testosterone giving them larger sex organs, explosive athleticism, easier muscle gain and shorter tempers.
1 Propagandude 2014-02-12
Care to expand on this? I'm not sure I follow.
3 [deleted] 2014-02-12
google is that way ^
0 Propagandude 2014-02-12
I'm sure it is. Though I was hoping that since you felt compelled to make your comment, you wouldn't mind explaining why you think those qualities make you harder to control.
1 [deleted] 2014-02-12
if you've ever had high testosterone you would understand
0 Propagandude 2014-02-12
Not that my annecdotal evidence is worth anything, but years ago I was an Oklahoma football All Star after being a first string guard during my sophmore, junior, and senior years. I am quite the hairy man. In my youth I had serious acne problems that required medication to alieviate, the cause of which was determined to be abnormaly high levels of testosterone. Today I am spearheading many innovations in my department at work and staying abreast of (or exceeding) my peers in technical skill.
Also, understanding a concept does not require first-hand experience of said concept. I'm sure you were aware of that which is why I was confused you would suggest such a notion.
Just to clarify; I do have first-hand experience with high levels of testosterone despite not needing it to maintain and understanding.
1 [deleted] 2014-02-12
wow that's a lot of typing
1 Propagandude 2014-02-12
Yup. Its fueled by testosterone. Maybe if you ever had some you would type more.
1 [deleted] 2014-02-12
ahh conspiratard
3 [deleted] 2014-02-12
Of course.
0 Propagandude 2014-02-12
And why would you say this is so?
7 [deleted] 2014-02-12
Because higher test levels lead to moreaggression, violence, restlessness and less tolerance for being obedient to others . Lowering test levels among a population would lead to less aggression, violence, restlessness and more tolerance for being obedient to others. Making it the population easier for authority figures to control.
0 Propagandude 2014-02-12
Let me stop you right there.
We do tend to assume that testosterone can contribute to agression, but we can't accurately comment on the mechanics that may exist there. Indeed, we cannot relaibly say that increased testosterone leads to increased agression, and we certainly can't find a link between high testosterone and violence (a physical form of agression). I don't know where you came up with the idea that resistance to obediance is a quality of testosterone, but it sounds tacked on.
I am also going to argue that even if the qualities you set forth were true, people with high levels of testosterone would be no more difficult to control than people with low levels of testosterone. If you are interested in why I take this position I'd be glad to explain.
2 Scoled321 2014-02-12
I'm also interested in an explanation. The first thing that comes to my mind is "roid rage".
1 Propagandude 2014-02-12
Roid rage being what exactly? An example of increased aggression and violence due to testosterone? An example of something that is difficult to control?
2 Scoled321 2014-02-12
Yes, those things.
1 [deleted] 2014-02-12
Explain then.
1 Propagandude 2014-02-12
Certainly.
I'm going to clarify my previous position to avoid possible confusion. I think that people with higher aggression and violence are just as easy to control as people with lower aggression and violence. I'm going to amend this statement slightly and take an even more extreme position. I posit that people with higher aggression and violence are easier to control than people with lower aggression and violence.
Here's why: The more aggressive and violent a person becomes, the less calm rational contemplation they employ.
How do you manipulate a man calmly reading Sergei Lukyanenko's Night Watch? There may be a number of ways, many of which include shifting him from his calm and logical state to a more emotional state.
How do you manipulate a man looking for a fight? This is much easier. You give him one.
To put it in terms you may be more familiar with; How do you manipulate a calm and rational nation? That would be a very difficult feat to accomplish. On the other hand, how do you manipulate an angry and violent nation? Much easier. Give them something to direct that aggression and violence at. Whip them into a frenzie, and this becomes even easier. Get them to abandon all logic and empathy and you can get them to do whatever you want.
This is why phrases like blinded by rage exist. Raw aggression and violence is predictable. Because it is predictable, it is easily manipulated.
1 [deleted] 2014-02-12
I see your point. But in my mind a nation of low T men wouldn't even care to "fight" for anything, whether the fight was mental or physical. Secondly lowering the testosterone of a population of men could be done not only for the purpose of preventing organized purposeful rebellion, but for rebellion in general which causes problems even if it's more chaotic and less purposeful. Testosterone has been correlated with rebellious behavior.
1 Propagandude 2014-02-12
You are attributing the will to fight to testosterone. Would you say that a group of women, who typically have testosterone levels many times lower than the typical man, are nearly incapable of fighting for anything? Testosterone is a hormone that catalyzes the release of various chemicals in the body. These may contribute to the strength of an emotion or mental state but the hormone does not govern the emotions or mental state.
As I said before, a bunch of aggressive and violent people would be easily controlled and steered away from a rebellion of any kind. But since testosterone isn't linked to the will to fight, this point is moot. At best testosterone makes people more competative and aggressive and even these are not proven to be true. In fact, when looking at both sexes and aggression in general research has been largly inconclusive.
No. It hasn't.
2 [deleted] 2014-02-12
http://cogprints.org/663/1/bbs_mazur.html
"In men, high levels of endogenous testosterone (T) seem to encourage behavior apparently intended to dominate -- to enhance one's status over -- other people. Sometimes dominant behavior is aggressive, its apparent intent being to inflict harm on another person, but often dominance is expressed nonaggressively. Sometimes dominant behavior takes the form of antisocial behavior, including rebellion against authority and law breaking. "
http://www.crimetimes.org/95c/w95cp4.htm
James Dabbs, Jr., studied 4,462 men in 1990 and found that "the overall picture among the high-testosterone men is one of delinquency, substance abuse and a tendency toward excess." These men, he added, "have more trouble with people like teachers while they are growing up, have more sexual partners, are more likely to have gone AWOL in the service and to have used hard drugs
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/200907/sex-violence-and-hormones
Evidence that human behavior is partly governed by hormones is mainly restricted to correlations, which are not the same as causes. At least one experiment found that large doses of testosterone increased aggression but only for a small proportion of men. Young men who use anabolic steroids - a synthetic version of testosterone - are also more likely to be involved in violent crime. Taken together, such findings imply that high levels of testosterone can cause aggression in at least some men. Other evidence points in the same direction
"You are attributing the will to fight to testosterone. Would you say that a group of women, who typically have testosterone levels many times lower than the typical man, are nearly incapable of fighting for anything"
Most militaries are men, and nearly every revolution throughout history has been entirely lead by men. Yes women aren't nearly as capable as men for fighting for something/ But that being said men and women are different, and women have different ways of manipulating things and getting their way.
0 Propagandude 2014-02-12
Seems to, sometimes, often expressed non-aggressively, etc. It is mostly agreed that testosterone contributes to the tendancy to dominate (though nobody says it is the sole or even major contributor). However, the tendancy to rebel is dictated by far more than just high levels of testosterone, as indicated by the rebelious acts of women and younge children not yet saturated with testosterone.
Cool. I have some stuff that references Dabbs from Scientific American. Check this out.
Read the rest here: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/strange-but-true-testosterone-alone-doesnt-cause-violence/
Now back to your post:
The whole rest of this paragraph just reiterates what I have been saying. It seems to correlate with increased aggression but we have not determined that it is the cause.
Last time I checked, women make up around 20% of the US military. Sure its a minority, but 20% is still a significant percentage. There are also women like Gina Carano who could like put the hurt on nearly any violently aggressive, testosterone leaden inmate you put in the ring with her, based only on physicality and the will to fight (as opposed to whatever manipulation you were inferring).
Testosterone is there. We know it probably contributes to an increased desire to dominate. Higher levels of testosterone don't make you any less susceptible to control or manipulation, and testosterone is not nearly as closely linked to a rebelious attitude as you suggest.
2 [deleted] 2014-02-12
I said there was a correlation, not a causation. Crime rate among small children and women? Yeah there are other factors leading to criminality but crime rates for small children and women are MUCH lower than adult males.
Women make up 20% of the military, out of a population of over 50% of the country. And how many of them are in active combat? Very few. Keep in mind the U.S. military is a volunteer military and anyone who gets through boot camp is a member. DK who Gina Carano is but i'll assume she's a cage fighter and tell you that women like her are what you call rare exceptions to the rule.
"Higher levels of testosterone don't make you any less susceptible to control or manipulation, and testosterone is not nearly as closely linked to a rebelious attitude as you suggest"
Well i said there was a correlation, which there is. That's about all i suggested. My overall post is not about high test persay, but increased test in general which all males would have if it wasn't for the recent environmental factors that have led men to have decreased test.
0 Propagandude 2014-02-12
Men naturaly gain and lose testosterone throughout there lives. In fact, men experience lower levels of testosterone from very basic lifetime landmarks. Having children, settling down, aging, etc. So really, not all men would have high testosterone.
As to the criminality of women and children, I don't know how you made that connection. I never said women and kids are just as criminal as men. I said they are no less rebellious then men.
With the military thing; its true that men typically occupy the more combat oriented roles more than women. That doesn't mean the women are unwilling to fight. Interestingly, both the men and women in the military probably have higher than their baseline testosterone levels, probably as a result of rigorous physical conditioning and these levels don't necessarily reflect the levels they had before enlisting.
You may have only suggested a correlation between testosterone and certain aggressive qualities, but you did suggest a conspiracy to reduce the general testosterone levels of the population in order to make them more easily controlled. Which is to say you implied a causation between testosterone levels and susceptibility to manipulation. I refuted both the notion that testosterone is certain to increase aggressive qualities as well as the notion that the qualities you presented (aggression, violence, etc.) are qualities that make a person difficult to manipulate.
-2 [deleted] 2014-02-12
No it doesn't. Take a stroll over to /r/steroids and research steroids before you make some bogus claims.
4 [deleted] 2014-02-12
It does.
0 [deleted] 2014-02-12
It does not. I said, look into it, ask around, and ask people who actually used AAS before you make such an uniformed claim.
I've cycled about 6-7 times in my past, and currently cruising on a medium dose of Sustanon. No anger issues at all.
I linked you to /r/steroids, and instead of throwing out rumors about a subject that you know nothing about, take the time to educate yourself.
Here, watch this documentary. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApmX8Q0vqKI
3 [deleted] 2014-02-12
So if an authority figure were trying to enslave a population would it be easier to enslave a population of men with test levels like yours or a population of men with much lower test levels?
-3 [deleted] 2014-02-12
There would be no difference.
Anyone has access to testosterone, or HGH. If they were going to try and control steroids they would shut down anti-aging clinics which prescribe them to anyone over the age of 25ish. I just don't see the correlation, coming from personal experience and the experience of people I know.
Don't get me wrong, I do get get irritated with people. However, that has to do with my diet depending on if its more geared towards cutting or bulking. When I'm eating chicken, rice, fish, beans, peanut butter every.single.day, and I have to force that down I don't want to hear your sob story about anything. On or off cycle, it just comes with the lifestyle and knowing in the back of your mind that you're in the best shape and healthier than 95% of the population.
5 [deleted] 2014-02-12
True, but when EVERY SINGLE males T levels in the nation have been lowered, most aren't aware of it and taking medication to increase it takes time, money and effort, the overall effect is still a population with lower than natural T levels. Besides, closing clinics would be much more obvious.
I'm really just speculating, you're right, i don't know much about endocrinology. But i've read quite a bit about testosterone (trying to raise it naturally myself) and i understand that it not only has physical effects on a person, but mental effects as well. And i would imagine that if one was trying to control or sedate a population, it would be easier to do so with men with lowered t.
0 [deleted] 2014-02-12
I mean, I wouldn't really see the logic behind the whole thing. It doesn't make people violent, I mean don't get me wrong I do feel more confident and a sense of well being on it. Also, it doesn't really take much time or money. Straight test, 500mg a week for 15 weeks (average cycle) I could get for 70 bucks of UG grade. Pharmacy grade being sold on the street is actually cheaper then that. If we're talking about straight test I could take one with no ester attached and it'll immediately increase my test levels after I inject it so it doesn't really slowly increase unless you want it to be.
Where have you heard or saw that test levels are lower? In relation to what? I mean, it's natural for test levels to decrease with age that's why people jump on TRT or HRT. I could get into details on how clinics work but it's really long write out. I've personally never used one but they artificially create their own standards for what a normal test level is, so when you write them that check and send in that blood sample (via mail) and give them your scouts honor that it's your blood, they will send you back your results. Would you look at that, you qualified because you have low test levels. And you will have yourself a script for some test.
And if you want to raise your test levels naturally, workout your legs. Squats are your friend, don't believe those supplements you see at GNC that claim to raise your test levels 10000x or whatever bullshit it says. Most supplements that claim to raise your test are expensive placebos. Actually, most of the supplements you see in magazines are garbage. Or goto your doctor, he will prescribe you AndroGel, I can't think of it now but you rub the gel on, I think your thigh? And it slowly raises your levels. Insurance I think should pay for it also. It's safe.
1 [deleted] 2014-02-12
http://www.healio.com/endocrinology/hormone-therapy/news/print/endocrine-today/%7Bac23497d-f1ed-4278-bbd2-92bb1e552e3a%7D/generational-decline-in-testosterone-levels-observed
I'm sure you're aware of all the relatively recent environmental changes that can cause decreased T.
1 [deleted] 2014-02-12
Interesting. They give a list of plausible reasons why this slight decline have occurred and would love to see what other countries or areas of the US compare instead of just Boston.
They said that people are healthier now a days then they use to be, test levels are not an indicator if your healthy or not which I don't really know why they brought that up. Because they also said smokers have higher levels of test which contradicts that if we propose that smokers are 'unhealthy'. I'm on my phone but I'll look it up later and I don't feel like typing this again just to go back to check the article but that's what I'm pretty sure it said. I still stand by by original statement though that AAS don't cause violence, and roid-rage is a huge myth.
3 s70n3834r 2014-02-12
It's well known that castration makes male animals more docile; and if we are no better than pets and livestock to the elite...
3 InternetPropagandist 2014-02-12
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenoestrogen
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12419695
I'd bet a lot of the people who are paranoid of chemtrails and GMO's lather their bodies in these xenoestrogens every day before work. The stuff goes through your skin. This is a real conspiracy.
Consider BPA. Some companies market their plastic as "BPA free," and simply replace BPA with BPS in the formula. BPS is hardly less toxic, and they dont tell you they replaced the xenoestrogen with a similar one.
2 thetimeisnow 2014-02-12
http://www.peaktestosterone.com/Testosterone_Vegetarian.aspx
http://nutritionfacts.org/2013/02/12/less-cancer-in-vegan-men-despite-more-testosterone/
2 [deleted] 2014-02-12
I am sorry but lols. I am not saying I disagree but consider this. Testosterone is formed from cholesterol. You cannot get cholesterol from any plant based food. Now your body builds Cholesterol in the liver daily but you have to have enough fat in your diet or else it is gonna drain your body just to make it. Soo It is not as cut and dry as veganism or vegetarianism.
2 [deleted] 2014-02-12
haha man it gets worse, Dr. Greger has lectured at the Conference on World Affairs, the National Institutes of Health, and the International Bird Flu Summit, testified before Congress, appeared on The Dr. Oz Show and The Colbert Report, and was invited as an expert witness in defense of Oprah Winfrey at the infamous "meat defamation" trial. Tell me what you see here.
Oh and he responded to a comment about how to raise tesosterone and was recommending Flax seed's...
"Although flax does deserve all the accolades it gets, there is one problem with flax seed consumption and T production- the lignans contained in flax have a weak estrogenic effect."
2 [deleted] 2014-02-12
This is most definitely the case. If men had high testosterone they would be more able to fight back if ever the government tried to take over. Also lowering men's test kills them early.
1 [deleted] 2014-02-12
But the question is is this being done purposely.
1 [deleted] 2014-02-12
Absolutely.
2 nnDMT420 2014-02-12
I've also noticed that many male-feminists look rather feminine themselves (how ironic). This could be attributed to them collectively having low T-levels.
Is feminism a sinister plot to make us feel more and more different from one another, and even harvest resent in some cases? Or is this a legitimate civil rights movement?
1 chemicalreality 2014-02-12
Feminism was a way to get the other half of the population up and out to work and paying taxes.
1 [deleted] 2014-02-12
thought i saw something about the chemicals in plastic containers? hormones in meats/milk too
2 Scoled321 2014-02-12
Yes, those things.
2 ZapPowerz 2014-02-12
Git off MUH LAWN!