A discussion of the Research: Men just tuned to lust: Study

Their are two things about this research that should be noted about the conspiracy being hatched by the powerful forces of Heterosexualisation:

- One, about how the results are being misinterpreted to suit the interests of the forces of heterosexualisation, interspersed widely with stereotypes about the heterosexual society's version of what a man should be.

- Two, about how the two most important institutions of the society are in total control of the forces of heterosexualisation and are together being abused to spread mispropaganda about men. The institution of Science which initiated the research and the Media, which is giving so much prominence to the news, in all probability adding its own Masala to it, in order to further its own agenda of the society's and particularly men's heterosexualisation.

1. How the results are being misinterpreted to spread mispropaganda:

(a) The Study says, as per the report, that men's testosterone levels go up when they see a woman, regardless of whether they are sexually attracted to them or not. The researchers promptly interpret this, and the media is too happy to publicise it, that this means that men are geared to respond with 'attraction' when they confront a person of the opposite sex, irrespective of whether or not they want to have sex with the opposite woman.

A more likely conclusion of this phenomena could be:
- That the increase in testosterone at the time of seeing the woman doesn't have anything to do with sexual attraction (esp. becasue it also happens with females they are not sexually attracted to).
- That it may be because of other reasons -- e.g. men may actually show a natural resistance upon seeing a woman -- like seeing an opposition. Afterall, it may be this factor which makes mammalian males in the wild not mix with females at all, except for very short spells of sex during the mating season.
- Another reason could be that the men realise that women hold power over them in a heterosexual society. That they must show sexual interest in them, otherwise they would lose their status as a man (which is now called 'straighthood'). This may make them react with aggression -- to force them to generate a sexual interest.
- Even when the sexual interest for women is present, in varying degrees, men know that it is this sexual interest in the heterosexual society that is their key to the men's space -- which is now completely heterosexualised. They see women as symbols of power which they must compete to show as much sexual interest in as possible. And this feeling of competition to gain social power may trigger the onset of testosterone.

- The researchers cleary say that with increase in testosterone levels the males display more dominant behaviour. We know that genuinely heterosexual males do not become dominant towards their women, but rather, they become submissive before them. This testosterone then, definitely does not indicate a sexual interest, but could indicate an inner resistance, as, as mentioned earlier, women hold power over men in heterosexual societies and men are only too aware of it. They see the woman next to them as challenge. They must gear themselves up, rather steel themselves up to show a sexual interest in her, especially if she is attractive, because your identity as a man (a striaght man) is at stake.


(b) Another statement says: "They talk more with their hands, there is more eye contact, their posture is more upright, and they are more likely to tell stories designed to impress the woman. We know that women can be attracted by these kinds of things. All this, we believe, may be fuelled by the rise in testosterone that we have found,"

Men may do all these things, but since they also do it with women they are not interested in, it is more likely that men are reacting like that because of heavy social conditioning and pressures that they face in heterosexual, westernised spaces.

Interspersing what they believe with what they found is not in the proper spirit of science at all.

(c) Another problematic statement: "Aggressive males showed greater rise in testosterone levels, an idea supported by research that men who exhibit more dominant-like behaviour tend to make more frequent successful contact with females."

It is clear that this statement is meant to further upholster the Western 'heterosexual' identity as masculine (it surely needs frequent assurances, because it's a lie!).

However, it is such a vague statement that a proper analysis is not possible. They're just saying that masculine men have more sexual interest in women or something like that, and they are supporting this with the wrong deduction they have already made about the surge in testosterone levels. One lie goes on top of another to build the greater lie about heterosexuality. So that men can be perpetually forced into heterosexualisation. By associating masculinity and social power with heterosexuality. That's been the basis of the conspiracy against men all these centuries.

It is true that more aggressive men seek out women more -- but it is equally true that they do it only for the social power that sex with women hold. It is also true that these aggressive men lack the basic qualities of a heterosexual male -- they don't fall in love with women, they don't become emotionally involved with them or dependant on them. They just have sex with them and that is it. If they had a choice they would rarely ever seek out women.


(2) The second aspect is the collaboration of the twin most powerful modern institutes of Science and Media to spread this lie, in order to strengthen the heterosexualisation of the society as a whole, of men's spaces and of men in particular.

And just what happened to a solid ground breaking research that came about 20 years ago -- Bruce Bagemihl's painstaking compilation of evidences from the wild life that said, there's hardly any heterosexuality amongst mammalian males, and that it is sexual bonds between males which rules amongst mammals. The media of course ignored it, becasue it was a major blow to the very hollow ideals on which the entire heterosexual society is based. But what is ironical is that even the institution of science forgot all about it, and is back on its men are heterosexual and Queers are like women propaganda.