dangerous men

[joanna bujes]

At 06:45 PM 09/09/2002 -0400, you wrote:
> >Yeah, what I was thinking of was definitely NOT physically violent "macho"
> >men -- I could always see throught that. I think I meant something more
> >like "jerks" -- the kind your mother can see coming a mile away. So,
> >something more like, self-centered, immature, inconsiderate, and
> >aggressive in the sense of very confident (given their immaturity).
> >
>
>
>In a word, a jock.  Difficult to describe but you know exactly who they are
>when you see them.  They are always popular with high school girls and
>women who do not advance beyond that mental stage.  Which further supports
>my "sheeple" behavioral model (i.e. people doing what is conventionally
>expected).  Jocks epitomize the conventional gender roles, as opposed to
>nerds and others outcasts and weirdos.  That explains the choice made by
>most HS girls - as teenage behavior is driven mostly by following the herd
>and conformity to conventional rules of the herd.

Nah. Jocks are stupid. Stupidity is not dangerous except in doctors, 
pilots, and government officials. To further narrow the definition, I had 
in mind very smart jerks.

Joanna