🚀 go-pugleaf

Ford Prefect <remailer@bi-node.zerberus.de> wrote:

[usual Ford Prefect dribblings snipped for sanity's sake]

>That's pretty close.  In San Francisco it was primarily a broadcast
>media story that peaked in '93.  The SF area TV stations covered it
>heavily in the days preceeding the Superbowl, but otherwise it was
>rarely mentioned in the off-season except in dubious media "public
>affairs" dronings about spousal abuse or sports violence.  Prior to
          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^                          
>Superbowl Sunday, however, I saw it referred to on each Saturday
>evening local news broadcast I saw, and sometimes in considerable depth
>- including interviews with abuse hotline personnel, etc.  As I said, in
>'92 - '93 period, I am positive that I heard at least two-dozen
>references to it on TV and radio, including NPR.
>

On this morning's [Monday, 25 September 1995] front page of the
_Independent_, there is an article entitled 'Testosterone Levels
Rise When Footballers Score' (that's soccer for the Merkins).

This reports the results of a study by two psychologists from
Georgia State University who studied the average levels of 
testosterone in Brazilian and Italian fans both before and after
last year's World Cup final. This found that testosterone levels
of Brazilian fans increased by 27.6 per cent while they decreased
26.7 per cent for Italian fans.  The finding was linked by the 
researchers to more aggressive post-match behaviour by fans of the 
winning team & less aggressive behaviour by fans of the losing team.

Obviously, the behaviour of American football fans in the US and 
other football fans would be uncorrelated, so that we may draw no
conclusions about post-match domestic violence by Superbowl fans.
Just another myth promulgated by those wacky feminists.

---
Kate 'But why let scientific evidence get in the way of a good
feminist-bashing session' Blackmon