Agression: Men vs Women
Pmb
(not a psychologist wannabe). If none are here then info from anyone else
will be appreciated
Take a large random sample of men and a large random sample of women (From
American society if that matters). Is there any research which has compared
the average levels of aggressive behaviour between these two samples?
Or the short version of this question - Is there evidence that men are more
aggressive then women.
Aggression in the sense of violence.
If there is a difference is there a breakdown as to why? Is it
inate/biological or is it cultural?
Thanks
Pete
Mark D Morin
I don't have an answer off the top of my head but if you have access
to PschLit (or medline, or pubmed) you should be able to find
studies--if they exist.
====================================================
The "anti" group on any subject can stall it forever
by asking an unlimited number of questions and feeding
an unlimited number of fears. And if we require that
something be absolutely safe and absolutely understood
before we use it, we'll never use anything,
because we'll never have absolute understanding.
David Wright 9/20/03
Pmb
"Mark D Morin" <mdm...@NOSPAMgwi.net> wrote in message
news:3oo1nvc9brf5mt3h7...@4ax.com...
Yeah. I ran into an anti-group. Silly people really. It's like they never
met other people. This is really common knowledge so I find it hard to
believe people have a bard time believing it. One simply has to look at the
number of male serial killers as compared the number of female ones to say
"Hmmm. Maybe I was wrong - I should look into it." Women are well known for
being less violent than men.
Problem with getting into that discusssion is the number of conclusions
people jump to accelerates out of control until all one ends up doing is
addressing an increasing number of invalid conclusions. For example: I
mentioned to someone that "men tend to be more violent than women." The
"tend" is ignored and I'm now labeled a sexist. What's with people!
Thanks for the response. I wish I had access to online info but I don't. I
was hoping for online lecture notes from a university web site in addition
to that. I forgot to ask. Anyone know of any?
Pmb
Mark D Morin
>
>"Mark D Morin" <mdm...@NOSPAMgwi.net> wrote in message
>news:3oo1nvc9brf5mt3h7...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:45:44 GMT, "Pmb" <som...@somewhere.com> wrote:
>>
>> >I'd prefer an answer to this from someone who is actually a psychologist
>> >(not a psychologist wannabe). If none are here then info from anyone else
>> >will be appreciated
>> >
>> >Take a large random sample of men and a large random sample of women
>(From
>> >American society if that matters). Is there any research which has
>compared
>> >the average levels of aggressive behaviour between these two samples?
>> >
>> >Or the short version of this question - Is there evidence that men are
>more
>> >aggressive then women.
>> >
>> >Aggression in the sense of violence.
>> >
>> >If there is a difference is there a breakdown as to why? Is it
>> >inate/biological or is it cultural?
>> >
>> >Thanks
>> >
>> >Pete
>> >
>>
>> I don't have an answer off the top of my head but if you have access
>> to PschLit (or medline, or pubmed) you should be able to find
>> studies--if they exist.
>
>Yeah. I ran into an anti-group. Silly people really. It's like they never
>met other people. This is really common knowledge so I find it hard to
>believe people have a bard time believing it. One simply has to look at the
>number of male serial killers as compared the number of female ones to say
>"Hmmm. Maybe I was wrong - I should look into it." Women are well known for
>being less violent than men.
I'm not sure I agree. Having worked in both mens' and womens' prisons,
I can tell you that there was a lot more violence in the womens'
prison. "Less violent" may be too broad of a generalization. Violence
can be categorized into type, intensity, frequency, etc. When the
variables are examined, you may find gender differences among some,
none among others, and patterns opposite your assumptions in yet
others.
>
>Problem with getting into that discusssion is the number of conclusions
>people jump to accelerates out of control until all one ends up doing is
>addressing an increasing number of invalid conclusions. For example: I
>mentioned to someone that "men tend to be more violent than women." The
>"tend" is ignored and I'm now labeled a sexist. What's with people!
>
>Thanks for the response. I wish I had access to online info but I don't. I
PubMed can be accessed here
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
>was hoping for online lecture notes from a university web site in addition
>to that. I forgot to ask. Anyone know of any?
>
>Pmb
>
>
====================================================
Pmb
"Mark D Morin" <mdm...@NOSPAMgwi.net> wrote
> I'm not sure I agree. Having worked in both mens' and womens' prisons,
> I can tell you that there was a lot more violence in the womens'
> prison. "Less violent" may be too broad of a generalization. Violence
> can be categorized into type, intensity, frequency, etc. When the
> variables are examined, you may find gender differences among some,
> none among others, and patterns opposite your assumptions in yet
> others.
Thanks for the input Mark. In the time since I posted last I did more
searches on the internet. It seems that The U.S. Department of Justice;
Federal Bureau of Prisons - National Institute of Corrections disagrees with
you. From "Gender Differences in Predictors of Prison Violenc: Assesing the
Predictive Validity of a Risk Classification System"
http://www.bop.gov/orepg/oreprharer.pdf
".. eveidence suggests that women are less violent than men .."
Also from -- "The Gentler Sex and the Cyle of Violence"
http://www.radcliffe.edu/quarterly/200101/inquiry-8.html - by Dorothy Lewis
-------------------------------------------------------------
"No matter how you look at it, we are just not as violent as they are.
Whether measured in childhood in terms of roughness of play or in adulthood
in terms of assault and murder, males of our species are demonstrably more
violent than females. You simply don't find shelters for battered men
springing up all over the country. "
Dorothy Lewis is a professor at New York University School of Medicine and
a clinical professor at the Yale University Child Study Center. Her studies
on violence have been cited in decisions of the United States Supreme Court.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Any idea/guesses as to why your first hand experience would suggest
otherwise?
> PubMed can be accessed here
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
Excellant! Thanks!
Pete
Jim Scannell
the only cause of) agression. Isn't that the main reason steroids are
illegal in the US? Men obviously have more T than women, but also Africans
have more than caucasians. African women have three times as much T in thier
blood than caucasian women, on average. That is the reason their sex drive
is stronger as well.
--
Jim Scannell
jsca...@wi.rr.com
http://home.wi.rr.com/jscannell/
Gratitude hence Happiness,
Faith hence Hope,
Selfishness is anti-Love,
Devotion is the Key
Pmb
"Jim Scannell" <jscannell.nosp*m...@wi.rr.com> wrote in message
news:TMhcb.39207$eF3....@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> I thought that it was well understood that testosterone causes (but is not
> the only cause of) agression. Isn't that the main reason steroids are
> illegal in the US? Men obviously have more T than women, but also Africans
> have more than caucasians. African women have three times as much T in
thier
> blood than caucasian women, on average. That is the reason their sex drive
> is stronger as well.
>
Hmm! Excellant points! Thanks.
I should note that the levels of violence seem to be the same among men and
women. It just seems to be a statistical fact that more men are violent than
women are. I would imagine that's true in many ways. And of course that is
not to say that all men are violent and that all women are not violent.
Pmb
Mark D Morin
>
>"Mark D Morin" <mdm...@NOSPAMgwi.net> wrote
>
>> I'm not sure I agree. Having worked in both mens' and womens' prisons,
>> I can tell you that there was a lot more violence in the womens'
>> prison. "Less violent" may be too broad of a generalization. Violence
>> can be categorized into type, intensity, frequency, etc. When the
>> variables are examined, you may find gender differences among some,
>> none among others, and patterns opposite your assumptions in yet
>> others.
>
>Thanks for the input Mark. In the time since I posted last I did more
>searches on the internet. It seems that The U.S. Department of Justice;
>Federal Bureau of Prisons - National Institute of Corrections disagrees with
>you. From "Gender Differences in Predictors of Prison Violenc: Assesing the
>Predictive Validity of a Risk Classification System"
>http://www.bop.gov/orepg/oreprharer.pdf
From what I see, I'm not sure they agree or disagree. For example, in
Table 3, the first item documents the prevalence of violence in the
first year of prison. Without computing the stats, the male and
female data do not look statistically different.
>
>".. eveidence suggests that women are less violent than men .."
>
>Also from -- "The Gentler Sex and the Cyle of Violence"
>http://www.radcliffe.edu/quarterly/200101/inquiry-8.html - by Dorothy Lewis
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>"No matter how you look at it, we are just not as violent as they are.
>Whether measured in childhood in terms of roughness of play or in adulthood
>in terms of assault and murder, males of our species are demonstrably more
>violent than females. You simply don't find shelters for battered men
>springing up all over the country. "
How much of that is due to prevalence and how much is due to societal
factors. There's a conference in NH next month sponsored by the folks
who run the national hotline for male victims of battering (by
females). I've had some discussions with the director and the number
of calls that come in is staggering. Suffice it to say that the reason
men do not end up in shelters is unrelated to whether or not battering
is going on.
>
>Dorothy Lewis is a professor at New York University School of Medicine and
>a clinical professor at the Yale University Child Study Center. Her studies
>on violence have been cited in decisions of the United States Supreme Court.
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Any idea/guesses as to why your first hand experience would suggest
>otherwise?
All I know is what I saw and I witnessed much more violence in the
female prison.
>
>
>> PubMed can be accessed here
>> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
>
>Excellant! Thanks!
>
>Pete
>
====================================================
Pmb
"Mark D Morin" <mdm...@NOSPAMgwi.net> wrote in message
news:5rh3nv4nnkc96a3qq...@4ax.com...
I'm not interested in th "why's" at the moment. I'm only interested in the
statistical facts.
> There's a conference in NH next month sponsored by the folks
> who run the national hotline for male victims of battering (by
> females). I've had some discussions with the director and the number
> of calls that come in is staggering. Suffice it to say that the reason
> men do not end up in shelters is unrelated to whether or not battering
> is going on.
I don't believe that at all. For what reason do you believe that?
> All I know is what I saw and I witnessed much more violence in the
> female prison.
Are you saying that if you or a gaurd didn't see a violent act then it
didn't happen?
Pmb
Pmb
"Pmb" <som...@somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:pwkcb.3434$541...@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
Perhaps I need to refine what I was refering to. If somone takes a random
sample from a genreal population then that's about the best way there is to
get statistics regarding tendancies and violence. However if you base your
opinion on what you see from prison populations then you're going to get a
radically different statistic (And even then you can't be sure if what is
going on is what you actually witness. Prisoners would tend to hurt others
when they have the least chance of being seen). There is probably a whole
different statistic for violence for men and women in prison. I would expect
them to be different. I'd be surprised if they were the same as a general
random sample.
Pmb
Mark D Morin
>> There's a conference in NH next month sponsored by the folks
>> who run the national hotline for male victims of battering (by
>> females). I've had some discussions with the director and the number
>> of calls that come in is staggering. Suffice it to say that the reason
>> men do not end up in shelters is unrelated to whether or not battering
>> is going on.
>
>I don't believe that at all. For what reason do you believe that?
Because I do not believe that the thousands of men who are calling are
lying.
>
>> All I know is what I saw and I witnessed much more violence in the
>> female prison.
>
>Are you saying that if you or a gaurd didn't see a violent act then it
>didn't happen?
I think my words were quite clear as to what I said.
Mark D Morin
>
>Perhaps I need to refine what I was refering to. If somone takes a random
>sample from a genreal population then that's about the best way there is to
>get statistics regarding tendancies and violence.
Granted. And in my original post I noted that I was unaware of any
such research.
>However if you base your
>opinion on what you see from prison populations then you're going to get a
>radically different statistic (And even then you can't be sure if what is
>going on is what you actually witness. Prisoners would tend to hurt others
>when they have the least chance of being seen).
You are back to how the term "violence" is defined. When I see the
term, I think of acts of which the consequences are visible to others.
So yes, unwitnessed violent acts are documentable.
Pmb
"Mark D Morin" <mdm...@NOSPAMgwi.net> wrote in message
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 17:29:57 GMT, "Pmb" <som...@somewhere.com> wrote:
>
>
> >> There's a conference in NH next month sponsored by the folks
> >> who run the national hotline for male victims of battering (by
> >> females). I've had some discussions with the director and the number
> >> of calls that come in is staggering. Suffice it to say that the reason
> >> men do not end up in shelters is unrelated to whether or not battering
> >> is going on.
> >
> >I don't believe that at all. For what reason do you believe that?
>
> Because I do not believe that the thousands of men who are calling are
> lying.
The topic is about statisics. How are you determining what the statisics
are? What gives you an impression on the number of aggressive/violent men
versus the number of aggressive/violent women?
Pmb
Pmb
"Mark D Morin" <mdm...@NOSPAMgwi.net> wrote in message
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 19:00:36 GMT, "Pmb" <som...@somewhere.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >Perhaps I need to refine what I was refering to. If somone takes a random
> >sample from a genreal population then that's about the best way there is
to
> >get statistics regarding tendancies and violence.
>
> Granted. And in my original post I noted that I was unaware of any
> such research.
>
> >However if you base your
> >opinion on what you see from prison populations then you're going to get
a
> >radically different statistic (And even then you can't be sure if what is
> >going on is what you actually witness. Prisoners would tend to hurt
others
> >when they have the least chance of being seen).
>
> You are back to how the term "violence" is defined. When I see the
> term, I think of acts of which the consequences are visible to others.
> So yes, unwitnessed violent acts are documentable.
That was not what I meant. I was thinking along the lines of your
experience. In American civlilization we have decent sample if we include
everyone in America. Especially when I'm interested in the stats in America.
Let me stick to acts so violent as to be criminal - just for the sake of
arguement. When a violent act occurs and the person lives then they file a
complaint. That will add to the statistics since quite often the gender is
known. These violent acts rarely happen around police.
In prison it's different. It one prisoner gets pounded on then they'd be
stupid to do it in front of a gaurd. So they do it out of site of a gaurd.
that will happen for most premeditated violent acts right? (Maybe not but
that's what a discussion group is for huh?) This will happen for things like
revenge, to establish dominance etc. So these things never make it to what
is actually seen. I'd say that random unplanned violent acts are what get
observed.
And that has little to do with definition. If someone punches me in the
stomach and nobody sees it then it doesn't mean that it's not a violent act.
Not in my book anyway.
Pmb
Mark D Morin
>
>"Mark D Morin" <mdm...@NOSPAMgwi.net> wrote in message
>news:u724nv4t50okh6m09...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 17:29:57 GMT, "Pmb" <som...@somewhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >> There's a conference in NH next month sponsored by the folks
>> >> who run the national hotline for male victims of battering (by
>> >> females). I've had some discussions with the director and the number
>> >> of calls that come in is staggering. Suffice it to say that the reason
>> >> men do not end up in shelters is unrelated to whether or not battering
>> >> is going on.
>> >
>> >I don't believe that at all. For what reason do you believe that?
>>
>> Because I do not believe that the thousands of men who are calling are
>> lying.
>
>The topic is about statisics.
But the question was, "why don't we see men in domestic abuse
shelters?" (paraphrased)
johnlod
Not a psychologist (but definitly a wannabe). However I do have
anecdotal evidence of a huge difference between agression in men
versus women.
Years ago, a group of us went to Quasar (its like a mock war game with
lightweight electric guns). The women decided that the girls should
fight the boys (average age about 30). Neither the men or women had
any military or police background, which is just as well because there
was absolutely NO skill required.
We the men were a little nervous and anxiously awaited the score. We
need not have worried. The men scored several times the women's score
and there was only one case where a particular woman shot a particular
man more than any of the men shot any of the women. This instance was
my wife shooting me because she thought it would be impolite to shoot
anyone else.
The stats they can produce after the game are fantastic, so if you
needed to do a little experiment where neither sex has a physical
advantage over the other and so that it was only non-contact agression
that got measured, Quazer is as good as any other activity.
I notice that a prison employee mentioned earlier that women appear
just as agressive. I wonder if women are less afraid of the actual
physical damage that can be caused to them by other women because of
the strength difference between men and women. Its a bit like people
who know they have anti-lock brakes and air bags driving too fast
beacuse they feel safe.
johnlod
http://www.classicalien.com
Mark D Morin
>
>"Mark D Morin" <mdm...@NOSPAMgwi.net> wrote in message
>news:kc24nvsio8omdoi8r...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 19:00:36 GMT, "Pmb" <som...@somewhere.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Perhaps I need to refine what I was refering to. If somone takes a random
>> >sample from a genreal population then that's about the best way there is
>to
>> >get statistics regarding tendancies and violence.
>>
>> Granted. And in my original post I noted that I was unaware of any
>> such research.
>>
>> >However if you base your
>> >opinion on what you see from prison populations then you're going to get
>a
>> >radically different statistic (And even then you can't be sure if what is
>> >going on is what you actually witness. Prisoners would tend to hurt
>others
>> >when they have the least chance of being seen).
>>
>> You are back to how the term "violence" is defined. When I see the
>> term, I think of acts of which the consequences are visible to others.
>> So yes, unwitnessed violent acts are documentable.
>
>That was not what I meant. I was thinking along the lines of your
>experience.
Well, my experience included the witnessing of the effects of
violence--black eyes, broken bones, chunks of hair missing, scratches,
lacerations, etc.
> In American civlilization we have decent sample if we include
>everyone in America. Especially when I'm interested in the stats in America.
>
>Let me stick to acts so violent as to be criminal - just for the sake of
>arguement. When a violent act occurs and the person lives then they file a
>complaint. That will add to the statistics since quite often the gender is
>known. These violent acts rarely happen around police.
You are making assumptions. We have no way of knowing anything about
those who do not call. One thing that is consistent throughout the
literature is that the incident rate is higher than the reporting
rate. Another assumption is that the failure to report rate is the
same between the sexes. Until I started listening to some of the
unheard voices, I too assumed that men were rarely the victims of
violence by women. Since I have been listening, those assumptions have
gone out the window. Granted there needs to be research to examine the
question empiricaly but quite frankly, it seems that you have your
eyes closed to that which you don't want to see.
you can find more information about the conference at
http://www.noexcuse4abuse.org/. You might think about going; you'll
probably have a chance to talk with some of the people actually doing
the research.
>
>In prison it's different. It one prisoner gets pounded on then they'd be
>stupid to do it in front of a gaurd. So they do it out of site of a gaurd.
>that will happen for most premeditated violent acts right? (Maybe not but
>that's what a discussion group is for huh?)
Having worked in prisons, I can tell you that these unobserved acts
are observed in their consequences.
>This will happen for things like
>revenge, to establish dominance etc. So these things never make it to what
>is actually seen. I'd say that random unplanned violent acts are what get
>observed.
>
>And that has little to do with definition.
Of course it does. If you are going to do the research, the terms have
to operationally defined.
Steve Dufour
> I can tell you that there was a lot more violence in the womens'
> prison. "Less violent" may be too broad of a generalization. Violence
> can be categorized into type, intensity, frequency, etc. When the
> variables are examined, you may find gender differences among some,
> none among others, and patterns opposite your assumptions in yet
> others.
But is women in prison vs. men in prison a fair comparison. I'm sure
there are far fewer women in prison, so they must be a very
exceptional group within the gender. Seems to me anyway.
Steve Dufour
> just as agressive. I wonder if women are less afraid of the actual
> physical damage that can be caused to them by other women because of
> the strength difference between men and women. Its a bit like people
> who know they have anti-lock brakes and air bags driving too fast
> beacuse they feel safe.
Good point.
>
> johnlod
> http://www.classicalien.com
I liked your classic aliens. :-)
RefugeeDeveloper
and Females as mad. Just dont get branded "mad and bad"
Males obviously are more violent --- hormonal linked. There are a few
species such as hyenas where the female is as aggressive. Again here
the reason is hormonal -- female hyenas secrete as high a level of
testosterone as the males.
The psychology of it is interesting, I think. Social situation also
plays a part.
"Pmb" <som...@somewhere.com> wrote in message news:<s24cb.148$541...@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>...
RefugeeDeveloper
fighting in the street (seen it a couple of times) and 2 ppl sorting
their problems by fighting in the street is that ppl can [usulally]
exert some level of self control and resolve their issues in some
other ways.
The above theory does not hold water every time.
refugeed...@yahoo.co.in (RefugeeDeveloper) wrote in message news:<45df729e.03100...@posting.google.com>...