I should also note that how often one frequents and posts on message boards is inversely related to how often one gets laid. Now that's scientific fact....etc.
I should also note that how often one frequents and posts on message boards is inversely related to how often one gets laid. Now that's scientific fact....etc.
Nah...for some of us it is more of a post-coital thing.Originally Posted by Meh
Adam L
Cause or effect ?
According to Dave Grossman (author of On Combat and On Killing), there is a corellation between sex and violence (killing, watching others being killed, thinking of killing, thinking of being killed, etc.).
Not a shrink, and not trying to be; so, I dunno if sex is a cause or an effect. I suppose the two things could be interactive.
If you think about it, the whole thing might be an ancient, hard-wired species survival mechanism: take a life, create a life.
Regards
Mike
Unemployment's effect (not Iraq or Afghanistan)
During 'The Troubles' in Northern Ireland the UK spent a huge amount on subsidies to all sorts of activity, including the non-state security sector. I cannot now recall the unemplyment figures, but IIRC there was at the start in 1969 higher unemployment in the Catholic / Republican ghettoes than Protestant or Loyalist areas.
Eventually one fix that appeared to work was state funding of "community projects" and an "army" of community workers. I have little doubt this meant funding paramilitaries at times, but as both "sides" had their 'snout in the trough" few complained.
The "projects" often involved IIRC sports halls and other facilities, which were rarely inter-communal.
I am sure there are learned articles on this factor, none on my radar.
Today in the UK the impact of unemployment upon radicalisation is sometimes debated in public, although IIRC those who are radicalised and are caught in acts of violence are more often employed. My own opinion is that high unemployment may contribute, making it easier for an individual to believe he is worthless and only the 'cause' provides an answer. In one area often the focus of CT and non-CT responses nearly two years ago youth unemployment was 55%; allowing for changes since then and the UK practice of fiddling the figures I would not be surprised if was 75%. Weirdly the local buoyant economic factor is drug dealing.
davidbfpo
No Job = Rebellion
Yes, there is a correlation between sex and killing, but applying it in this case is a bit of a stretch. Also, Grossman perverts the whole sex and violence relationship. (I can't go into detail on this as I haven't read any of his works in a while.) It really is more of a sex and death issue. (This isn't the best article, but it will give you an idea of what I'm talking about.)
As far as evolution is concerned, sex, like food and water, is an essential. Just as we will kill for food and water, we will kill for sex. In this case the equation is more:
Money = Sex
Job = Money
Therefore
No Job = No Sex
Then
No Sex = Frustrations
Rebellion = Frustration venting
Therefore
No Job = Rebellion
Edited: I just remembered this: for a fascinating intro to sex and death, you can either watch the David Cronenberg movie "Crash," (not for viewing by younger audiences) or the J G Ballard novel of the same title on which it is based.
Adam L
Last edited by Adam L; 12-06-2009 at 09:37 PM.
Being sexually frustrated is definitely a factor in some way. It's interesting to me that Nidal Malik Hasan would go around mosques trawling for a wife. Many Muslims in America - especially those well integrated enough to serve in the military - have no qualms about dating. Nor do many Muslims outside America.
But no, Hasan was an all-or-nothing, "if you like it, you should put a ring on it" kind of guy. Here's a guy who's totally afraid of going on an unsuccessful date. Totally afraid of rejection. Perhaps even afraid of a woman wielding power over his destiny (in this case, whether he gets to marry her). Fundamentally insecure.
But can you do something about sexual frustration? Especially on the societal level (and these problems - men with weak egos - are particularly strong in societies where women are marginalised)?
Nah. Just something you have to factor in and live with it.
not in Iraq or afgha neither but still... and more
Well, I would support Marct assumption/assertion about marriage.
In all failed State post conflict and conflict context I have been working in the question of marriage and youth has been at the center of the cause of violence.
In Liberia, the 80 revolution happened after the raw material world crisis. As Firestone was leaving the place, young men could not find any work and therefore could not afford the dot. So they could not marry and then it created (with time) conditions for civil war. (the help of C. Taylor also).
About this, I would recommand Stephen Ellis book, the mask ofanarchy. It explores and explains in details how Liberia went fromalmost peaceful place to one of the worst african war (Liberia used to say that liberia was a piece of hell the devil forgot on hearth...).
I am facing the same problem in Suth Sudan. While elections are also a source of conflict, the youth unemployment creates the conditions for violence.
That said, I am not sure that unemployed men only do rebel. Most of the european resistants (they did rebel at their time) used to have a formal job as a cover.
Mao states that the partisan has to be integrated into the villagers life and participate to daily work.
The main question would be what could possibly push an established man or woman (with a family, a job, a social position...) to take arms and run to the bush.
Also, the definition of rebel could be interresting. Is a supporter providing intelligence and logistic a rebel?
Unemployed people are more prone to rebel as they see rebellion a way to be integrated into the society and then get, through insurgent engagement, the social recognition they do not get through normal life. (especially men, that's personal opinion).
Socio-economical context is also important. Economical disruption are often the core source of social disruption leading to violence. The economical causes of rebelion and insurgencies in failed States are deeply linked with the problematic of development and ressources sharing. See the war economist and black economy authors.
And finally, taking the example of LRA, Sierra Leone, Liberia or DRC, the rebels have found a solution to the question of do working men rebel: they abduct children, brainwash them with drugs and extrem violence to let them with the only possibilty to join them. (Once you've kill your brothers and father, raped your mother and sisters... Basically the job question seems meaningless).
Last edited by M-A Lagrange; 12-07-2009 at 02:27 PM.
Footnotes
For some background on this topic, I would recommend that one starts with the Ted Gurr's Why Men Rebel. For a young social scientist or military practisioner, this book is a classic that begins to attempt to address the question.
For the Cliffnotes version, just read this review.
MikeThis is a classic book that explores why people engage in political violence (riots, rebellion, coups, etc.) and how regimes respond. Though written long before the current rash of insurgencies, it has a lot to say about what is happening in the early 21st century.
In this book, Gurr examines the psychological frustration-aggression theory which argues that the primary source of the human capacity for violence is the frustration-aggression mechanism. Frustration does not necessarily lead to violence, Gurr says, but when it is sufficiently prolonged and sharply felt, it often does result in anger and eventually violence.
Gurr explains this hypothesis with his term "relative deprivation," which is the discrepancy between what people think they deserve, and what they actually think they can get. Gurr's hypothesis, which forms the foundation of the book, is that: "The potential for collective violence varies strongly with the intensity and scope of relative deprivation among members of a collectivity."(p.24)
It is noteworthy that Gurr does not look to a more absolute or objective indicator of deprivation as the source of political violence. People can become inured to a bad state of affairs, even one that offers so little access to life-sustaining resources that members of the group are starving or dying of remediable diseases or exposure.
If, however, there is a significant discrepancy between what they think they deserve and what they think they will get, there is a likelihood of rebellion. Gurr posits this to be the case even if there is no question that their basic needs will be met. The first situation may be a desperate one, but it is the second that is frustrating. And, according to Gurr, just as frustration produces aggressive behavior on the part of an individual, so too does relative deprivation predict collective violence by social groups.
A number of other variables influence the use of violence as well, for example the culture, the society, and the political environment. The culture must at least accept, if not approve, violent action as a means to an end. Political violence is also more likely if the current leadership and/or the socio-economic/political system is seen as illegitimate. Another factor is whether violence is considered to be a viable remedy to the problem.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks