Wharton study: Men are more aggressive toward women since Trump election

Philly.com ^ | 4/3/2017 | Mari A. Schaefer

[Labyrinthos]

This hack of a professor wants us to believe that in a mere five months since the election, they designed and conducted an objective study, crunched and analyzed the data, wrote the paper, subjected the paper to peer review, and then published the results. Too funny.

[Opinionated Blowhard]

In sessions before the election, men were generally more chivalrous and less likely to use tougher strategies against their female partners. After the election, results suggested the "Trump election may have fractured community norms of civility and chivalry,""

I thought chivalry was a gender-oppressive tool of the patriarchy to keep women subservient and chaste. Isn't Trump's election "fracturing" these male-created "community norms" a good thing?

[I want the USA back]

A stupid pop psychology “study” that’s worth nothing and they extrapolate to the entire population.

[Larry Lucido]

Here is a link to the Wharton study by Corrine Low and Jennie Huang or, as I call it, Low-Huang fruit.

http://assets.wharton.upenn.edu/~corlow/HuangLow_PP.pdf

[Diana in Wisconsin]

Funny. I have a LOT of menfolk in my life. Not a one has disrespected me, or taken a swing at me since the election.

Of course, the feelings are mutual, so maybe if the, ‘wymyn’ interviewed for this study would be a tad more polite and not so bitchy, maybe their lives might improve?

Nah. It’s more lucrative (or something) playing the Victim.

[FrdmLvr]

Wow! That couldn’t have been much of a study! It’s been published already? In about 3 months?

[bk1000]

Couldn’t have anything to do with the leftist idiot women’s march the day after the inauguration, could it?

[BipolarBob]

Not a one has disrespected me, or taken a swing at me since the election.

That's because you're the one with the Scotch and hand grenades. That changes the picture considerably.

jk

[Dutch Boy]

Trump being elected is like global warming. Every bad can be attributed to it, even the fake things.

[frnewsjunkie]

Don’t do any such nonsense until you deal with obama’s defense and downright permission to riot and to hate. obama is the epitome of evil incarnate. He instigated.. perpetrated... encouraged.. the trouble you see now... and Trump is hated because he is trying to clean up the mess.... once untidy and loose canons... they want to live that way forever.

They like to call Trump all these names... just look at what he is accomplishing and judge a man by his deeds... it’s a stark contrast to what the dems have to offer... aka obama and bill clinton!

[Nip]

okay let’s take at the timeline for this “report”.

Today, April 4th, is less than five (5) months since the 2016 Presidential election.

Any data collection worth any thing takes at least a month to design and proof. Ones that was involved with dealing measured (objective) data took that long. Any subjective (opinions, etc.) takes longer because word choice and question construction will screw everything up unless you are repetitive and extremely careful.

Any data collected needs to be reduced and written up - converted to readable and understandable English. This, if done correctly, takes more time than designing the questionnaire. Then this entire effort has to be validated - do you get the same “answer” when you ask the question differently? This should take 4 to 6 weeks.

Then, after everything above has been accomplished you draft the final report. The last step could take up to a month.

And NO, you cannot change the order of events above nor run any of them concurrently to save time. That assumes you want to produce a real report and not one to support a preconceived finding.

So, how much time was available to collect this subjective data? About 2 months. Guess the “data universe” this report was based was very small and hardly representative.

It looks like a case of false news. Too bad Wharton.

[HangThemHigh]

Liberal men taking out their frustration over Hillary’s loss probably explains much of this.

Wonder if “men” includes trans-women?

[cymbeline]

Some women welcome that, some don’t. Can’t generalize on these things. Listen to oldies song “Johnny get Angry”.

One reason why women might like it is because a lot of guys have become girly woosies. Who can have fun with those guys?

[Diana in Wisconsin]

And don’t you forget it! ;) (And a Chocolate Stash, too!)

[txrefugee]

Rehash of the fake “Super Bowl Sunday Causes Wife/Girl Friend Beatings” story that had zero basis in fact.

[Bigg Red]

OMW! They are so desperate! This is what passes for research?

And why would the poor widdle gurlz need for the male participants to be “chivalrous” since they are supposed to be on equal footing in the business world?

[onedoug]

#BLM

Otherwise, FAKE NEWS.

[Bigg Red]

Here is a link to a thesaurus entry giving synonyms for “courage”. Please consider using one of these words instead of the vulgar word I keep seeing here on FR. We ladies do not need to be subjected to that crass term referring to a man’s genitalia.

http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/courage

[Bigg Red]

As I said in my first reply to this post:

And why would the poor widdle gurlz need for the male participants to be “chivalrous” since they are supposed to be on equal footing in the business world?

[Gumdrop]

Sounds like a fake story. OTOH, perhaps some of these women who are complaining are the ones who are upset about Hilary’s loss and crying all the time.

I truly doubt the entire story, but if it is true I believe it is only happening to liberal women, because of their irrationality.