A Quote by Brian Sutton-Smith

I feel playful aggression is important for children because they have to deal with all kinds of anger and aggression in their lives. — © Brian Sutton-Smith
I feel playful aggression is important for children because they have to deal with all kinds of anger and aggression in their lives.
The problem isn't testosterone and aggression; it's how often we reward aggression. And we do: We give medals to masters of the "right" kinds of aggression. We preferentially mate with them. We select them as our leaders.
I can remember watching MTV Cribs - these amazing houses - and looking around my house where there was no carpet on the floors. You feel hopeless, and that can manifest itself in all kinds of emotions: sadness can turn to anger, and anger might turn to aggression.
As for testosterone, it's gotten a bum rap. Yes, it has tons to do with aggression but it doesn't cause aggression as much as sensitizes you to the environmental triggers of aggression.
Aggression, it's the next thing to war, except you don't get killed. Aggression is what you have every day with your wife. Aggression is what you have every day at the office. Box is a legalized form of aggression, where the ending is well-defined, the combat is well-delivered, and you got 10 rounds of two equally-sized fighters fighting aggressively to hurt each other.
Controlled aggression, to me, is one of the most important traits to have. To have that social intelligence to know when to exert aggression in the military environment, and when to stay calm, cool, and collected.
Because the state necessarily commits aggression, the consistent libertarian, in opposing aggression, is also an anarchist.
Aggression only breeds more aggression. It only creates more fear and anger.
To be an anarchist only means that you believe that aggression is not justified, and that states necessarily employ aggression. And, therefore, that states, and the aggression they necessarily employ, are unjustified. It's quite simple, really. It's an ethical view, so no surprise it confuses utilitarians.
By reacting to aggression with aggression we lose the opportunity to spiritually benefit from the experience.
Aggression only moves in one direction - it creates more aggression.
All this going around is not aggression. If you want to see aggression on cricket field, look into Rahul Dravid’s eyes
Historically, aggression unanswered has led to more aggression.
What many teachers observe as violent behavior is often really just playful aggression.
For me, the association with rock is one of force and anger and aggression. And definitely, in the past, I've made songs that attack like that. But what I usually try to appeal to is peoples' everyday feelings, the things that they're going through as they deal with the system on a one-to-one level.
It seems to me the worst possible concept, militarily, that we would simply stay there, resisting aggression, so-called...it seems to me that the way to "resist aggression" is to destroy the potentialities of the aggressor to continually hit you...When you say, merely, "we are going to continue to fight aggression," that is not what the enemy is fighting for. The enemy is fighting for a very definite purpose-to destroy our forces.
Female psychotic bosses can be particularly devilish. They will tend to mix in a lot of passive aggression, making you feel guilty for all kinds of things.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!