Then don't appeal to genetics to make your case for what's obviously a social and cultural issue.
I'm a Buddhist, and I live in Sweden.
Care to try again?
And another got shot in his bed in Pakistan.
O child of privilege and leisure, you really have not a blessed clue, have you?
The poor are the MOST affected by climate change. For example, they can't just turn on the A/C or hop in the SUV and drive up to the Poconos to cool off when it's too hot for comfort, like you can. And most likely do.
Please engage sarcasm detector, then read it again.
Nice mixture of racism and social Darwinism you've managed to concoct there, but shouldn't you be off attending a Hitler Youth meeting or something?
You conveniently glossed over the fact that the study was concerned with *violent* pornography and *depictions of rape*.
It was not about videos that simply show consenting adults naked and/or fucking. It was about videos that show (or re-enact) the commission of violent sex crimes.
Not the same thing at all. But, hey, thanks for playing.
Usually I'm with you. But this time you're (over)reacting to a phrase.
Congratulations and welcome to Slashdot.
Your eyeglasses with attached rubber nose & fake moustache are in the mail.
Mr. Sexually Inadequate wonders why the women he encounters don't react like those he sees on porn sites panting and groaning in response to the guy's every demand and whim. He concludes, not entirely surprisingly, that women are untrustworthy, phoney bitch whores who deliberately tease guys like him then withhold what they've given to every other guy and so need to be taught a lesson.
Whereas the simple truth of the matter is that they're carrying on that like in the video because they're getting *paid* to do so.
It's all a matter of the one drive we have, can't rid ourselves of, and that's not essential for day-to-day survival being used for control. It's basically the leader saying, "Sex is bad for the crops unless I'm the one having it."
But that is certainly not the conjecture on which such laws are based, is it?
Yeah, some of them managed to make a fair amount of money before they ended on the gallows.
The authorities tended to put down their attack dogs once they'd become no longer expedient to keep around.
So some business with the absolute bargain-basement IT staff, chock full of bargain-basement novices is going to decide if a compromised workstation the receiving department at another company is sufficient cause enough to shut that firm down? This would be like carpet-bombing an entire office building because a bank robber ducked into the building's lobby.
It's more like carpet-bombing a shoe store chosen more or less at random because you heard that, yesterday, a bank robber had run into one.
Even though, today, the same place he ran into yesterday might already be a café and not even be a shoe store any longer.
Thank you! I was coming here to post the same thing.