Being dominated sexually: 65 percent women + 53 percent men
Dominating someone sexually: 47 percent women + 60 percent men
Being tied up during sexual activity: 52 percent women + 46 percent men
Having anal sex: 32.5 percent women + 64 percent men
According to you, that would mean there are a lot of male Karens out there, that want to be dominated. We can allow our fantasies to do their part about the last point.
Fantasies and real life aren't the same. Some people still know the difference. Wanting the strong type and be swept off is one thing, while dad bod is reality. Especially these days, especially in North America.
The same studies usually also confirm that when asked about real life, most women do not want this to happen in real life.
Should the women in your life be concerned that you are a bit obsessed with rape fantasies? Have a look at the study results about men who are preoccupied with that...
Would lesbian women have fanatsies about men raping them??? Studies on that are rare, the ones that do exist show such fantasies, but are limited to being raped by women. So according to you that means they want to be dominated by women. Down with the patriachy.
Other studies show that women usually have fantasies while ovulating, even more so while ovulating when not having access to a partner. So its a chemical thing, not an actual dominance thing.
Had a girlfriend who freely admitted to rape fantasies. It wasn’t the act of rape that turned her on. It was imagining that she was so damn hot men couldn’t control themselves and were willing to commit a crime to have her.
but definitely, "victimhood" and fighting the "patriarchy" are big factors
I think there's also fallout from feminism
Lots of "liberal" man-hating women out there who have led soft, comfortable lives having never experienced true misogony (killed from removing a hijab anyone?) who are wannabe the next viral girl boss
according to the former editors of the top two medical journals, 50% of published studies are bogus.
“The Nature of Women’s Rape Fantasies:" is not science. none of that non-replicatable 'science' ala fauci is actual, real science.
it's garbage and not worthy of your promotion. you should be able to make your case without without having to quote some obviously bogus ivy league numbnut's phd thesis.
The methodology relied on self-reporting of subjective feelings (rape fantasies) from 355 women. Until some scientist invents a way to lbreak into people's consciousness and record events empirically, that's the best you're going to get methodology-wise to gauge rape fantasies.
It's possible it was all made up, but I don't see any evidence to that effect. It also squares with what we already know about female psychology. So I don't see how you could claim it's "obviously bogus."
>>One of the team behind the letter was blunt. “The brain microplastic paper is a joke,” said Dr Dušan Materić, at the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research in Germany. “Fat is known to make false-positives for polyethylene. The brain has [approximately] 60% fat.”
publish or perish has destroyed science. you'd be healthiest if you do exactly the opposite of what the ama/bmj recommend.
Since we're moving on to microplastics, is it not true that microplastics accumulate in tissues? One study can have flaws and I'm not above falling for it but all you can do is look at all of the available evidence and make your best guess about what's going on. There are dozens if not hundreds of studies showing microplastic accumulation in tissue so cherry picking one study that might be flawed seems like a red herring
>>The Guardian has identified seven studies that have been challenged by researchers publishing criticism in the respective journals, while a recent analysis listed 18 studies that it said had not considered that some human tissue can produce measurements easily confused with the signal given by common plastics.
it's the same problem as fauci's abuse of pcr. 'science' delivered the false (30 cycle) results needed to shut down the schools and the churches.
or, another way to think about it - would i get published if my study was titled 'inconclusive and dubious evidence of microplastics in brain tissue'.
I'll take it under consideration. But even if it's granted those particular studies are bunk I'd have to see a lot more to convince me that non biodegradable materials in almost literally every consumer product don't end up in human tissues
Physics is the only true science and even that has been corrupted for at least 120 years but the rape fantasy thing was so shocking that it has been replicated over and over again in numerous studies.
It isn't a theory its a well studied fact. Name a single man you know that bought fifty shades of grey the biggest selling book for years that is, by all accounts, full of abuse of women. I haven't read it.
I didn't weigh in on the shooting of Renee Good one way or the other. Regardless of whether it was justified, it was obviously a tragedy and I feel bad for her and her kids.
Lets update that to one of their 2014 studies:
Being dominated sexually: 65 percent women + 53 percent men
Dominating someone sexually: 47 percent women + 60 percent men
Being tied up during sexual activity: 52 percent women + 46 percent men
Having anal sex: 32.5 percent women + 64 percent men
According to you, that would mean there are a lot of male Karens out there, that want to be dominated. We can allow our fantasies to do their part about the last point.
Fantasies and real life aren't the same. Some people still know the difference. Wanting the strong type and be swept off is one thing, while dad bod is reality. Especially these days, especially in North America.
The same studies usually also confirm that when asked about real life, most women do not want this to happen in real life.
Should the women in your life be concerned that you are a bit obsessed with rape fantasies? Have a look at the study results about men who are preoccupied with that...
Would lesbian women have fanatsies about men raping them??? Studies on that are rare, the ones that do exist show such fantasies, but are limited to being raped by women. So according to you that means they want to be dominated by women. Down with the patriachy.
Other studies show that women usually have fantasies while ovulating, even more so while ovulating when not having access to a partner. So its a chemical thing, not an actual dominance thing.
Weak and poorly researched reasoning.
Had a girlfriend who freely admitted to rape fantasies. It wasn’t the act of rape that turned her on. It was imagining that she was so damn hot men couldn’t control themselves and were willing to commit a crime to have her.
D_eny
A_ttack
R_everse
V_ictim and
O_ppressor
...has been normalized, to western culture's great detriment.
Not sure I agree with the rape fantasy thing...
but definitely, "victimhood" and fighting the "patriarchy" are big factors
I think there's also fallout from feminism
Lots of "liberal" man-hating women out there who have led soft, comfortable lives having never experienced true misogony (killed from removing a hijab anyone?) who are wannabe the next viral girl boss
according to the former editors of the top two medical journals, 50% of published studies are bogus.
“The Nature of Women’s Rape Fantasies:" is not science. none of that non-replicatable 'science' ala fauci is actual, real science.
it's garbage and not worthy of your promotion. you should be able to make your case without without having to quote some obviously bogus ivy league numbnut's phd thesis.
The methodology relied on self-reporting of subjective feelings (rape fantasies) from 355 women. Until some scientist invents a way to lbreak into people's consciousness and record events empirically, that's the best you're going to get methodology-wise to gauge rape fantasies.
It's possible it was all made up, but I don't see any evidence to that effect. It also squares with what we already know about female psychology. So I don't see how you could claim it's "obviously bogus."
self reported anything is not science. it cannot be.
when they attempt to replicate studies like these (necessary for science!) they fail.
recently you reported on nano plastic particles in our brains.
bogus:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/jan/13/microplastics-human-body-doubt
>>One of the team behind the letter was blunt. “The brain microplastic paper is a joke,” said Dr Dušan Materić, at the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research in Germany. “Fat is known to make false-positives for polyethylene. The brain has [approximately] 60% fat.”
publish or perish has destroyed science. you'd be healthiest if you do exactly the opposite of what the ama/bmj recommend.
Since we're moving on to microplastics, is it not true that microplastics accumulate in tissues? One study can have flaws and I'm not above falling for it but all you can do is look at all of the available evidence and make your best guess about what's going on. There are dozens if not hundreds of studies showing microplastic accumulation in tissue so cherry picking one study that might be flawed seems like a red herring
the article debunks 7 studies, not just one:
>>The Guardian has identified seven studies that have been challenged by researchers publishing criticism in the respective journals, while a recent analysis listed 18 studies that it said had not considered that some human tissue can produce measurements easily confused with the signal given by common plastics.
it's the same problem as fauci's abuse of pcr. 'science' delivered the false (30 cycle) results needed to shut down the schools and the churches.
or, another way to think about it - would i get published if my study was titled 'inconclusive and dubious evidence of microplastics in brain tissue'.
I'll take it under consideration. But even if it's granted those particular studies are bunk I'd have to see a lot more to convince me that non biodegradable materials in almost literally every consumer product don't end up in human tissues
Physics is the only true science and even that has been corrupted for at least 120 years but the rape fantasy thing was so shocking that it has been replicated over and over again in numerous studies.
replicating bogus science is how you get 'consensus'.
replicating bogus science is how you get dozens of school shootings tied to psych meds.
this is the field we're talking about, right? the people who dispense meth to teenagers? who treat the suicidal with meds known to encourage suicide?
Does your wife have an opinion about your theory?
It isn't a theory its a well studied fact. Name a single man you know that bought fifty shades of grey the biggest selling book for years that is, by all accounts, full of abuse of women. I haven't read it.
Glad it wasn't your sister who had half her face blown off.
I didn't weigh in on the shooting of Renee Good one way or the other. Regardless of whether it was justified, it was obviously a tragedy and I feel bad for her and her kids.
His sister wasn't dumb enough to endanger law enforcement officer's lives for social brownie points.