Repetition only reminds us of who you are - a nihilist now trying to push fancied up nihilism mixed with narcissism in an Asiatic-themed wrapper.
You havent even mastered simple mathematical concepts - how can you possibly hope to achieve enlightenment?
Regression to the mean transpires, but that mean is a derivation of the context, and is anything but static - if it were static, this would imply much as regards evolution, namely, that it doesn't exist.
Because thats not what I am suggesting, slowbro.
You are making an assumption as to the static and inevitable nature of an outcome, and you based this in the context of a flawed experiment that you clearly did not, do not, realize was flawed, and now you misconstrue my point to suit your own twisted context.
I am not saying 'a threat' will 'make women change culturally', I am saying that significant change in the parameters in this context can permit, does almost-inevitably permit, a change in outcome.
Had Calhoun dropped a cat in the pit, what would happen? Likely not a continuation of what had transpired - this significant stimulus could have, would have, major ramifications in the context of the experiment. We don't know what they might be, Johnny didnt try it, but it leaves open the notion that this outcome was an inevitability.
Likewise, whilst you spew venomous claims that the outcome you have accepted as static is and must be inevitable, I note that a significant stimuli can and historically has, acted as a major catalyst on such contexts, and we cannot know what might come about as a result - merely, that the static outcome you prophesize is not, by any means, genuinely static, for the parameters can change.
You say women will not walk backwards? I say, throw a cat in the pit, and see what happens. And if not the cat, try the hawk. try the snake, try the scorpion - any of which, in theory, represent a change to the paramenters, and open up new vistas of potentiality/probability.
You say nothing can, or will, happen as a result, and I wager thats not the case. I bet my soul on it, in fact.
You want specifics, bit we are talking in non-specific theoretical terms, which makes your request seem all the more obviously borne in venom and in vain.