IGX

This is just marvelous.

Men with less upper body strength are more likely to support the welfare state - like Labour leader Ed Miliband

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/artic ... z2TTPFrbRK
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSqkdcT25ss[/youtube]

Just to keep the thread fair and balanced...

nafod wrote:Just to keep the thread fair and balanced...

It's a fair question...what is the upper limit on strength where you go from enlightened self interest to utterly retarded?

This is both a political and programming question.

Presumably the Mail thinks this guy is a powerlifter in his down time.

milosz wrote:

Presumably the Mail thinks this guy is a powerlifter in his down time.

No, but he could whip Obama's ass in an armwrestling contest.

nafod wrote:Just to keep the thread fair and balanced...

It seems as if certain people who are "lets say mentally challenged" have the governor turned off so to speak. The safety mechanism that keeps us from recruiting muscles beyond a certain point and hurting ourselves somehow seems to be adjusted higher in those people. I think it isn't only them either - I think many of the stronger people out there of more normal intelligence were given adjusted governors if that's a good way to say it.

milosz wrote:

Presumably the Mail thinks this guy is a powerlifter in his down time.

Article: If a guy is strong, then he is conservative.
Your conclusion: That guy is conservative, then he must be strong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent

climber511 wrote:

nafod wrote:Just to keep the thread fair and balanced...

It seems as if certain people who are "lets say mentally challenged" have the governor turned off so to speak. The safety mechanism that keeps us from recruiting muscles beyond a certain point and hurting ourselves somehow seems to be adjusted higher in those people. I think it isn't only them either - I think many of the stronger people out there of more normal intelligence were given adjusted governors if that's a good way to say it.

kreator wrote:

milosz wrote:

Presumably the Mail thinks this guy is a powerlifter in his down time.

Article: If a guy is strong, then he is conservative.
Your conclusion: That guy is conservative, then he must be strong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent

He would not be very conservative by our standards.

That's the interesting thing about the study, it had Danish, Argentinian and US participants. Three very different political backdrops but assertive self interest (proxy for conservatism I guess) was correlated with upper body strength.

Professor Petersen said: ‘Our results demonstrate that physically weak males are more reluctant than physically strong males to assert their self-interest - just as if disputes over national policies were a matter of direct physical confrontation among small numbers of individuals, rather than abstract electoral dynamics among millions.’

The terms "conservative" and "liberal" don't mean the same things in Canada and the UK that they do in the US.

Here, our Conservative and Liberal parties (for that is how they are so named) are both conservative, with gradations shaded between large-C and small-C. They're basically interchangeable, and we swap them out in Parliament every few years. You can tell them apart by the color of their ties.

Our third party, the New Democrats are more what you think of as Liberals down south: leftys, granola eaters and unreconstructed hippies.

Without knowing that, Canadian political headlines are even more confusing for you than they need to be.

This falls into a rule of sociology a buddy of mine with a masters in it told me that I have always liked and from my perspective holds a lot of weight.

You can take a group and make generalisations about it based on data.

But when you take individuals out of that group and you apply those generalisations to them, many times it falls apart or they might fit 1 or 2 generalisations but not all.

Cleaner is a strong, hard training motherfucker and he's pretty Liberal. A great guy in RL as well, enjoyed every second when we ave hung out together.)

I do think what this study shows is those who work hard for something, appriciate strengtyh are going to be less likely to buy into touchy feelly ideas or give a fuck about people who are weak from lack of effort and balls.

I know plenty of folks who are politicolly Liberal but they live their own lives in what one would consider a conservative way and I have met the exact opposite.

It's like you dont find many Libs or Democrates in Combat Arms but there are some, where as you meet guys who did the rear stuff and you meet more that are Dems or Libs.

For me it's on what level of Government we are talking?

We focus more on national and international here on this forum, so to consider me right of Ghengis Khan would not be a misunderstanding.

I'm more open to debate or even agree with some Liberal ideas on the State and local levels.

Read the article nimrod.

kreator wrote:
Article: If a guy is strong, then he is conservative.

More like: Bicep size correlates to self-interest.

As if we didn't know the mirror watchers were self interested...

Blaidd Drwg wrote:Read the article nimrod.

I did.

I digressed a bit from the focus of the article but it does tie in Professor Wolf, so if you mark down my paper too much be advised I've graduated from propane bombs to more Irish methods involving cars.



It's a joke!

Well then..if we're digressing, remember when Son's of Anarchy went to Ireland? and they were clearly riding around in N. California. Yeah. that was lame.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:Well then..if we're digressing, remember when Son's of Anarchy went to Ireland? and they were clearly riding around in N. California. Yeah. that was lame.

LOL!

OK, fuck you Cockbreath, but that's pretty good. Touche' Hervae'.

The point is that those who work hard or face stark realities they have to fight and kill their way out of are not going to be as open to liberal ideas politically. But some are fucking freaks at a party and make no bones about it, not exactly Pat Robinson types. ( Who might be freaks but stay on the down low or do it through the hole in the sheet.)

I don't know that it plays out that way or not. I think it may be as simple as, those who feel they CAN physically assert self interest are more likely to do so and more likely to think in those terms (again, acting out of individual self interest being a proxy for conservatism whether that's fair or not ).

Something that does ring true that is not in this study in the following observation: Those who put in significant time attempting to improve themselves (think practice of a sport, art or craft, esp. physically intense training), do tend to think in terms of I Work=I am Rewarded. They are skeptical of arguments based on inherent "equality" or the idea of "fairness" . Could be my bias or if I'm right, could be a matter of those people self selecting.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:I don't know that it plays out that way or not. I think it may be as simple as, those who feel they CAN physically assert self interest are more likely to do so and more likely to think in those terms (again, acting out of individual self interest being a proxy for conservatism whether that's fair or not ).

Something that does ring true that is not in this study in the following observation: Those who put in significant time attempting to improve themselves (think practice of a sport, art or craft, esp. physically intense training), do tend to think in terms of I Work=I am Rewarded. They are skeptical of arguments based on inherent "equality" or the idea of "fairness" . Could be my bias or if I'm right, could be a matter of those people self selecting.

Wait, life is fair? WTF?

See, I'm starting to doubt this study...negroids are reknowned for their inordinate strength levels, but they all vote Democrat and would turn down a handout about the same time that Ed Zachary would spit Bailey Jay's cock out of his mouth.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:I don't know that it plays out that way or not. I think it may be as simple as, those who feel they CAN physically assert self interest are more likely to do so and more likely to think in those terms (again, acting out of individual self interest being a proxy for conservatism whether that's fair or not ).

Something that does ring true that is not in this study in the following observation: Those who put in significant time attempting to improve themselves (think practice of a sport, art or craft, esp. physically intense training), do tend to think in terms of I Work=I am Rewarded. They are skeptical of arguments based on inherent "equality" or the idea of "fairness" . Could be my bias or if I'm right, could be a matter of those people self selecting.

I think your right about a lot of people with that. From valid reasons to just being assholes who can push people around.

I call it the Darth Vader Attitude. I will admit I started to drift toward it a bit as a high brown belt, before I had a kid.

You have skills to fuck up most people you come across royally. You have enough experience in and out of the Dojo to back that thinking up. You are better than almost everyone at the same rank there and the assholes you had to handle from other schools and on the street where no problem to deal with. You've dominated and submitted guys much bigger and better athletes than yourself. You are like a Sith, you train all the time, your physical and mental state is geared towards it. Add to that I was training up with the idea I might be able to get into combat arms if I pushed hard enough. So all you do is train, think about training and read about conflict. Run, work, lift, dojo, read, uck, sleep, somewhere in there you eat and shit.

Therefore you start to really not want to put up with any shit from a "lessor being", especially some fucking little wigger or Gen Y botch boy. You can't Force choke them across the room but you could crush their trachea if you get your hands on them.

I caught myself before this got unleashed on any decent person but I came very close, a few borderline types got punked in the extreme and I look back and would not play it like that again.

You see this at the gym from huge monsters who can lift small cars, but they tend to be the younger ones.

The strongest guys I know are pretty chill, you'd really have to be asking for it for them to get nasty.

Kazuya Mishima wrote:See, I'm starting to doubt this study...negroids are reknowned for their inordinate strength levels, but they all vote Democrat and would turn down a handout about the same time that Ed Zachary would spit Bailey Jay's cock out of his mouth.

That's because they are the ones they think will benefit from the DNC being on top. They are right, in the short run but that's what they see, the short run.

Again a generalisation that works with a large section of a group and then cn fall apart when you get to individuals and specifics.

The same folks who voted about unamously for Barrack Obama in California in 08 said No to Homosexual marrage.

"Gimmie my shiot but fuck that faggot muthafuckah!"

And I know some black dudes that laugh at blacks marching behind the DNC and I know one that calls them "Slaves".

Gotta go google bailey jay.