“Science” in Right Wing Media

Oh, the National Post, are you even putting any effort into your bullshit?

Last month an article was printed in the “Health” section stating that men had to hang out with other men twice a week, and do “guys things” like drink beer and play team sports, in order to stay healthy. While immediately upon starting the article there is already much to question (I am a woman and I love beer and team sports… would the presence of my vagina at these events negatively affect men’s health? Or, even more obvious, are you REALLY saying that men who don’t like sports or who have a lot of women friends will be less healthy than guys who revolve their lives around trying to be the perfect (socially-constructed) image of masculinity? Or, wait, isn’t this just re-wording a more widely-accepted and reasonable belief that humans benefit from social interaction and physical activity, only with a ridiculous gender-bias?), it was the last paragraph that was the most surprising. Though the author of the article started with stating the oh-so-impressive academic qualifications of the (male) psychologist who came out with this backwards study, she ends with the oh-so-much-more-vital information that Guinness commissioned it.

While I wish I could say that everyone reading the article immediately realized the stupidity of it all because of this fact, too many people made the comment about how “cute” this is, and how “true” etc. Really, people? If you are not able to read through ridiculous gender-stereotyping and if you are not aware that there are “scientific” studies to “prove” virtually anything you want to prove, at least realize that if a corporation funds a study (and they most often do), they want to push something on you – in this case an image of masculinity that involves buying their product. This explains is why this article reads like a “scientific” version of a ridiculous beer commercial.

I was surprised that the author included this information at all, seeing as she was not being the least bit critical of the study, but was rather trying to promote it. I guess it shows the power of “science” when the author herself doesn’t catch on to the fact that she just discredited her entire piece.