Your data was terrible. I don't even think you could ever adequately prove such a vague thesis as "women are more deceptive than men". It honestly sounds more like a religious belief than some kind of scientific fact. "Deception" itself is such a vague concept. What does "more deceptive" even really mean? Are polite "white lies" even tru…
Your data was terrible. I don't even think you could ever adequately prove such a vague thesis as "women are more deceptive than men". It honestly sounds more like a religious belief than some kind of scientific fact. "Deception" itself is such a vague concept. What does "more deceptive" even really mean? Are polite "white lies" even truly deception to begin with? Do they rank the same as more important lies? This idea is just nonsense and is so vague that it is in the eye of the beholder.
Saying such a nebulous and negative thing about women is just thinly veiled misogyny.
I'm not trying to convey that females are somehow the "morally inferior" sex. That isn't meaningful in my framework, because nature is amoral. Moral and survival aspects are often at odds.
Is it *moral* for a female to lie when rejecting a male, to protect herself? Arguably so, nevertheless it is an act of deception.
Furthermore, is it *moral* for a female to lie about her mating preferences, to protect her social standing? Arguably so, nevertheless this leads to a collective delusion about what females *actually* prefer.
The takeaway is that females perhaps aren't such noble and pristine beings as males would want to imagine them. That is not misogynistic, it's realist. Pointing out that the emperor has no clothes doesn't mean you *hate* the emperor.
Most lies that people tell are not related to rejecting suitors. Men are more likely to cheat. Your entire definition of deception is vague, and you are pretending pop sci armchair bullshit theorizing is real because you want it to be so you can draw conclusions that you like.
If you read carefully, I'm not actually concerned about which sex is *more* deceptive. The source that I picked out randomly happens to claim "women lie more than men", but that's really irrelevant to my point.
What's relevant in this context is that females are deceptive about mating, in particular. That's the topic Incels are concerned with. Stereotypically, it's the virtue-signaling female that claims to care about personality above anything else, when in reality immutable facts such as looks, height and race are the most important factors.
I won't bother to supply you with data, because that too can easily be dismissed as "below your standards". Exceptions to the common case can easily be found. You can choose what to believe and I'm not interested in "converting" you.
I'd rather you question your bias as to what you *want* to believe, and whether you apply the same standards to those beliefs.
For instance, you claim that "men are more likely to cheat". If I wanted to debate like you, I would ask you for data to back that up, then dismiss that data as low-quality, then question that cheating could be measured altogether, accuse you of misandry and then divert to some tangent, such "younger women are more likely to cheat than younger men".
However, I don't actually care *which* gender cheats more. It's not a contest. I'm interested in explanations for actual behavior versus idealizations based on cognitive bias.
"in reality immutable facts such as looks, height and race are the most important factors."
This is true, and there actually is strong data to prove it. It is consistent across many studies.
"men are more likely to cheat" - There is also strong data to back this up. Look it up.
These are both very specific claims that aren't nebulous and impossible to validate.
"What's relevant in this context is that females are deceptive about mating, in particular."
This is super vague and doesn't mean anything. It is an armchair theory about how you think evolution works, and it is hard to even qualify what this means.
You agree that there is "strong data" to prove that immutable factors are the most important factors in mate choice.
So, for the sake of simplicity, let's just say that this is what I mean by "women are deceptive". They lie about these things.
If we accept this as true, let us ask: Why do women lie when rejecting men? Why do women lie about their dating preferences?
I think I gave you a plausible, evolutionary hypothesis as to why females are biologically *driven* to deception. Without a time machine, we'll never be able to settle such matters conclusively. If you have a better hypothesis, bring it forth. Otherwise, what are you adding?
Everyone lies about rejecting people, in almost all situations. Not just dating.
It has nothing to do with how big or small they are. It isn't even really something I would call deception because it is more like just being socially appropriate and trying not to hurt people's feelings.
Also "lying" implies intent whereas I'm not sure people in general really know what they want to begin with.
Men and women lie all the time in many situations related to dating. So when you say women are deceptive what does that mean? Should it be qualified with men are also deceptive? Is it really just that people are deceptive then? When you say women are deceptive the implication is that men are less deceptive, but there is no way to quantify or prove such a nebulous assertion. So what you are saying is really just at its core misogynistic.
When I say "women are deceptive (in the face of a physical power imbalance)" that does (logically) not imply that men are not deceptive in a similar situation.
Men may indeed be deceptive in a similar situation, but that's off-topic. We're not concerned with the plight of the hypothetical male that has to fight off hordes of female suitors.
This presumes that relationship rejections are evenly split 50/50, which I don't think is a reasonable assumption.
Even if it were, you're ignoring mountains of data showing women to be better at manipulating interpersonal relationships due to their nature/depth. It's well documented that men tend to have broader but shallower relationships where women tend to have fewer, but deeper relationships and their status there within is based in part on their ability to read emotions and social cues and manipulate them to their benefit.
This isn't inherently malicious, though that's clearly the connotation you seem to have attributed to it. Deception can also be neutral or even benign and you seem to be ignoring that as it would undermine your own position.
Your "strong data" is presumably referring to the GSS data. The data comes from the same type of survey that reports that men have, on average, about twice as many opposite sex partners as women. A number that has to be exactly the same.
The reality is that the error bars on our estimate of cheating is large. Large enough that men could be cheating lots more than women or women could be cheating a bit more than men.
I believe that women cheat far more than men. Not because they are more prone to cheating but because they have much more opportunities to cheat. Let's face it, if women want to cheat they can do it in 1 hour but if a man wants to cheat it will take much more time and effort.
It's not about proving a point. Our only observation on an issue is the data. The hypothesis came from the data. If you have a problem with the same size make that claim. Attacking the data should be your play, not this emotional response to something that challenges your worldview. Check your bias next time.
There is no meaningful data here. A 2000 person poll by an insurance company is pop science, not real science. Even the definition is deception is vague garbage.
Your data was terrible. I don't even think you could ever adequately prove such a vague thesis as "women are more deceptive than men". It honestly sounds more like a religious belief than some kind of scientific fact. "Deception" itself is such a vague concept. What does "more deceptive" even really mean? Are polite "white lies" even truly deception to begin with? Do they rank the same as more important lies? This idea is just nonsense and is so vague that it is in the eye of the beholder.
Saying such a nebulous and negative thing about women is just thinly veiled misogyny.
I'm not trying to convey that females are somehow the "morally inferior" sex. That isn't meaningful in my framework, because nature is amoral. Moral and survival aspects are often at odds.
Is it *moral* for a female to lie when rejecting a male, to protect herself? Arguably so, nevertheless it is an act of deception.
Furthermore, is it *moral* for a female to lie about her mating preferences, to protect her social standing? Arguably so, nevertheless this leads to a collective delusion about what females *actually* prefer.
The takeaway is that females perhaps aren't such noble and pristine beings as males would want to imagine them. That is not misogynistic, it's realist. Pointing out that the emperor has no clothes doesn't mean you *hate* the emperor.
More speculation, not data.
Most lies that people tell are not related to rejecting suitors. Men are more likely to cheat. Your entire definition of deception is vague, and you are pretending pop sci armchair bullshit theorizing is real because you want it to be so you can draw conclusions that you like.
If you read carefully, I'm not actually concerned about which sex is *more* deceptive. The source that I picked out randomly happens to claim "women lie more than men", but that's really irrelevant to my point.
What's relevant in this context is that females are deceptive about mating, in particular. That's the topic Incels are concerned with. Stereotypically, it's the virtue-signaling female that claims to care about personality above anything else, when in reality immutable facts such as looks, height and race are the most important factors.
I won't bother to supply you with data, because that too can easily be dismissed as "below your standards". Exceptions to the common case can easily be found. You can choose what to believe and I'm not interested in "converting" you.
I'd rather you question your bias as to what you *want* to believe, and whether you apply the same standards to those beliefs.
For instance, you claim that "men are more likely to cheat". If I wanted to debate like you, I would ask you for data to back that up, then dismiss that data as low-quality, then question that cheating could be measured altogether, accuse you of misandry and then divert to some tangent, such "younger women are more likely to cheat than younger men".
However, I don't actually care *which* gender cheats more. It's not a contest. I'm interested in explanations for actual behavior versus idealizations based on cognitive bias.
"in reality immutable facts such as looks, height and race are the most important factors."
This is true, and there actually is strong data to prove it. It is consistent across many studies.
"men are more likely to cheat" - There is also strong data to back this up. Look it up.
These are both very specific claims that aren't nebulous and impossible to validate.
"What's relevant in this context is that females are deceptive about mating, in particular."
This is super vague and doesn't mean anything. It is an armchair theory about how you think evolution works, and it is hard to even qualify what this means.
You agree that there is "strong data" to prove that immutable factors are the most important factors in mate choice.
So, for the sake of simplicity, let's just say that this is what I mean by "women are deceptive". They lie about these things.
If we accept this as true, let us ask: Why do women lie when rejecting men? Why do women lie about their dating preferences?
I think I gave you a plausible, evolutionary hypothesis as to why females are biologically *driven* to deception. Without a time machine, we'll never be able to settle such matters conclusively. If you have a better hypothesis, bring it forth. Otherwise, what are you adding?
Everyone lies about rejecting people, in almost all situations. Not just dating.
It has nothing to do with how big or small they are. It isn't even really something I would call deception because it is more like just being socially appropriate and trying not to hurt people's feelings.
Also "lying" implies intent whereas I'm not sure people in general really know what they want to begin with.
Men and women lie all the time in many situations related to dating. So when you say women are deceptive what does that mean? Should it be qualified with men are also deceptive? Is it really just that people are deceptive then? When you say women are deceptive the implication is that men are less deceptive, but there is no way to quantify or prove such a nebulous assertion. So what you are saying is really just at its core misogynistic.
When I say "women are deceptive (in the face of a physical power imbalance)" that does (logically) not imply that men are not deceptive in a similar situation.
Men may indeed be deceptive in a similar situation, but that's off-topic. We're not concerned with the plight of the hypothetical male that has to fight off hordes of female suitors.
This presumes that relationship rejections are evenly split 50/50, which I don't think is a reasonable assumption.
Even if it were, you're ignoring mountains of data showing women to be better at manipulating interpersonal relationships due to their nature/depth. It's well documented that men tend to have broader but shallower relationships where women tend to have fewer, but deeper relationships and their status there within is based in part on their ability to read emotions and social cues and manipulate them to their benefit.
This isn't inherently malicious, though that's clearly the connotation you seem to have attributed to it. Deception can also be neutral or even benign and you seem to be ignoring that as it would undermine your own position.
neutral or beneficial*
Your "strong data" is presumably referring to the GSS data. The data comes from the same type of survey that reports that men have, on average, about twice as many opposite sex partners as women. A number that has to be exactly the same.
The reality is that the error bars on our estimate of cheating is large. Large enough that men could be cheating lots more than women or women could be cheating a bit more than men.
I believe that women cheat far more than men. Not because they are more prone to cheating but because they have much more opportunities to cheat. Let's face it, if women want to cheat they can do it in 1 hour but if a man wants to cheat it will take much more time and effort.
Rejecting a suitor is a single lie. Ongoing infidelity is hundreds and thousands of lies.
We can all play the armchair pop sci game to come up with silly conclusions.
It's not about proving a point. Our only observation on an issue is the data. The hypothesis came from the data. If you have a problem with the same size make that claim. Attacking the data should be your play, not this emotional response to something that challenges your worldview. Check your bias next time.
There is no meaningful data here. A 2000 person poll by an insurance company is pop science, not real science. Even the definition is deception is vague garbage.
Seems like a defensive take rather than one addressing the position^