Jinn

I really think that question was the best in the article. The answer sucked, because that question is true. Labelling this is a "disorder" just adds it to the laundry list of pyschological "disorders" that one can use to defend or rationalize asshole behavior. Hormones go up and down, but we're not rams. We have control over how we react in any given situation, and if you know anything about people you know they are NOT predictable. A man could have 0% testosterone and be a pacifist, or he could be the angriest summabitch you ever met. What's important to me, however.. is not his chemical levels.. but how he reacts -- that determines what kind of MAN he truly is.

And really, this test doesn't say much. "When stressed, men tend to be more irritable." HOLY SHIT BATMAN! I mean really, tell me that these things wouldn't immediately tell you that the person was stressed and more likely to be irritable?

If that paper (or his book for that matter) had any real science to it, I might be more convinced.

You stress your body, you'll be more likely to be irritable. That doesn't make it a syndrome or a disease or anything other than the personal choice to let stressors effect your mood. I apologize for disabling a "fun" survey but this reeks of Quack Science and it bothers me. Ask me sometime if I think PMS is a "syndrome" too. (sorry ladies) We're all built of chemicals and changes in those can certainly change our possible demeanor but its still a choice.

And despite my apparent vehemence in this post, I'm mostly a pacifist:

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel