Calling Out: David S. Chester Ph.D. & Psychologytoday

Liliyan Hassan Call-out Leave a Comment

When men speak of things like “rejection” and when they want to tell us—as David S. Chester Ph.D. stated in his article entitled The Neuroscience of Revenge— that “Although the motives of murderers are not always clear, the role of rejection in motivating aggression is well-established”, women have no choice but to take such statements as a WARNING and as a THREAT.

AGAIN: WHEN MEN SAY THINGS LIKE, “REJECTION IS TIED TO MURDER”, WE NEED TO TAKE SUCH STATEMENT AS A WARNING THAT TELLS US “DO NOT DARE TO REJECT US!” This is due to the fact that “informing us” is no longer applicable given that such statements do not qualify as “information” and neither do they qualify as “statement of facts” since the facts are not finished in being created. Hence, a warning is the least harmful way to look at such statements…. although it is more of a direct threat against us. IS THE INFO IN SUCH STATEMENT NOT A THREAT AGAINST US?! Indeed, a woman is being warned that rejecting men may not lead to good endings. 

SHUT THE HELL UP is in order, however, as Mr. Chester attempts to make genius that which is utter stupidity as he tells how “To better understand how the brain regulates aggressive responses to rejection, we conducted and published a new functional brain imaging study on this topic. ”  And the “SHUT THE HELL UP” is the insult that has already been asserted in the attempt to neglect. YES, Neglect: you know?  The way men are neglecting the fact that we are forced to reject our own desires and interests and selves for the sake of a sexist thoughtless-brain ideology courtesy of men who think that we ought to accept any type of treatment no matter how abusive it is. Hence, “Shut the hell up” has been given to women… and so I say, “YOU SHUT THE HELL UP!” 

If you have a few minutes you do not mind tossing into the dumpster out of your “No Vacancy For Propriety” hotel window, go ahead and do so in order that we can take a look at the “study” conducted by Chester and and colleagues et al: 

In this study, 60 healthy young adults arrived at our MRI research center. These participants laid down inside of an MRI scanner and played a computerized ball-tossing game. The focus of the game was to simply toss a ball back and forth with two other partners and to imagine that the game was occurring in real life. After playing the game for several minutes, their two partners stopped throwing them the ball and tossed it to each other repeatedly while the participant watched. This seemingly innocuous form of exclusion elicited strong feelings of rejection. Several of the participants in this study spoke to me after exiting the MRI scanner, saying things like, “Did you see what those jerks did to me in that ball-tossing game?”

 

You know what? I will leave the analysis for how abusive that study is for another time as I just want to focus on the point that men cannot speak of threats without being a threat themselves when it comes to women. Now, you may ask, “what the hell are men supposed to say when addressing those things?” But we have a question of our own: WHAT THE HELL ARE WE SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THAT INFORMATION?!

About the Author
Liliyan Hassan

Liliyan Hassan

Founder: Go for Women

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *