The Ever Increasing Struggle Of The Intellectual Discussion

The dumbing down of Google+

in·tel·lect
ˈintlˌekt/Submit
noun
the faculty of reasoning and understanding objectively, especially with regard to abstract or academic matters.
"he was a man of action rather than of intellect"

synonyms: mind, brain(s), intelligence, reason, understanding, thought, brainpower, sense, judgment, wisdom, wits; More
the understanding or mental powers of a particular person.
plural noun: intellects
"his keen intellect"
an intelligent or intellectual person.
"sapping our country of some of its brightest intellects"
synonyms: thinker, intellectual, sage;

The other day, Miri Dunn shared a post by Matthew Graybosch that was timely and intellectually intriguing.
 Although it was posted in the evening I didn't see this stream until 4:00 the next morning.  That's the problem with getting up early; you miss all the good stuff and your little late to the party.

But in reading the stream I became more and more disenchanted with the responses that came from other people.  Miri simply brought forth a point of discussion and ended up having it hijacked by people who are less concerned about growing intellectually than about defending their gender.

Needless to say the discussion led nowhere and a wonderful opportunity to share thoughts and  views was lost.
I find this to be an increasing tragedy on Google+ that great discussions are often lost or hijacked by either trolls or stupid people.

 If there's one weakness in our current Google community; it is that as the pool of people has grown, so our median intellect has shrunk.
Personally I find this to be a tragedy.  One of the great things about G+ was that you could always find intelligent people who are open to discussion.  This willingness to learn as opposed to talk to be heard as one of the reasons I chose G+ over other communities.
OK, now my Rant is over!  Onto the original thread.

Matthew Graybosch originally shared:
PATRIARCHY HURTS MEN, WHO IN TURN HURT WOMEN
Boys and men who feel they're stuck in the man box and don't have the emotional or intellectual resources to rebel against social expectations instead turn their anger on an "acceptable" target. If they can't find a man they consider less masculine than them to bully, they lash out at women instead.
http://www.psmag.com/navigation/health-and-behavior/new-insights-men-assault-women-82297/

I found this to be a good article.  It brings forth both the strengths and weaknesses of the supposition along with some normal caveats that our knowledge is incomplete.
Although I'd disagree to an extent with the supposition that this is based on a patriarchal society.  I think it has more to do with pack mentality and self image than with gender.

Here's my reasoning.  In most base species you can see a hierarchal structure involving one Alpha (not gender exclusive) with an assortment of followers that helped to define or finish the structure of the group or pack.

Often conflicts occur as leadership roles evolve over the course of the life of this organization.  The desire to do better or to increase one's position within any group often requires supplanting the one who is immediately above you or defending your current position as others try to supplant you.  Therefore, the structure of any group is going to lead to some form of conflict and conflict often results in violence.

That conflict is a relatively normal within any organization must be discounted as far as violence against women because that is far more gender specific.
 The next step in that thought is self image.
Self image, or lack of good image along with all the insecurities and fears that are associated with not measuring up to the social expectations of any group that we're part of I believe the crux of the problem.

One of the most succinct statements I've ever heard was " I'm comfortable in my own skin".
People who are comfortable with their own image are far more relaxed, confident and less prone to  emotional outbursts than people who are insecure, frightened or unsure of their abilities.  Additionally people who have a good self image are more likely to recognize and accept both the strengths and weaknesses of others because they accept that within themselves.

The other day I posted a thread about watching children, tweens to teens who were waiting for the bus to go to school.  As I explained in that thread when the bus pulled up; all the boys formed a parallel line and allowed the girls to enter the bus first.
This was not some exercise in gallantry from a theatrical sense.  But seemed very commonplace and normal for this specific group from this small neighborhood.
 In that stream I commented on how their parents needed to be congratulated for teaching self respect and the respect of others.  That when consistent values are taught at a young age they will bear fruit in adolescence and adulthood.
Teaching or developing core values along with a good self image would do more to decrease violence overall and specific gender violence both within intimate and non intimate relationships.

Those of you are interested her few links that might add some meat to this discussion.

http://www.education.com/reference/article/children-emotional-behavioral-disorders/

http://www.stripes.com/reports-of-family-violence-abuse-within-military-rise-1.148815

http://www.futureswithoutviolence.org/userfiles/Military%20Factsheet%20update%2003%2003%2013.pdf

http://www.endvawnow.org/uploads/browser/files/vaw_prevalence_matrix_15april_2011.pdf

http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/ageing/documents/egm/NeglectAbuseandViolenceofOlderWomen/Violence%20against%20women.pdf