Why do some men behave badly? (3 Viewers)

Optimus Prime

Subscribing Member
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jul 18, 1998
Messages
24,904
Reaction score
53,680
Online
I thought this was a very interesting article

I think there are plenty of boys who never had this mindset, some did when they were boys but grew out of it as they grew up, and some have it their entire lives
===========================

The stories come around with horrible frequency. The TV presenter of a certain age who prances around naked with nothing but a sock on his c*ck or who grabs the head of a kneeling production assistant who is cleaning his trousers, and thrusts his groin towards her face. The sports presenter who is sacked for inappropriate behaviour. The radio DJ who is accused of sexual assault.

And yes, we understand, it’s all about power imbalances. The “talent” is venerated, the power goes to the man’s head, it makes him feel invincible, he believes he has impunity. He knows his employers can’t afford to lose him.

But hang on a minute. Fiona Bruce is an irreplaceable TV star. Mishal Husain is a brilliant radio interviewer. Mel Giedroyc is a much-loved TV host. Yet can you imagine Bruce stripping off in front of her crew, with only tassels to hide her nipples? Or Mishal Husain making sexualised comments to her researchers? Or Giedroyc, back in her Bake Off days, thrusting her groin at a young man wiping cake mixture off her trousers?

They too hold the power imbalances. Their talent is venerated, but the power doesn’t go to their heads. They don’t feel invincible and they don’t behave with impunity. I saw Giedroyc host a charity event earlier this week and she was the model of good manners and humility, taking pains to thank participants behind the scenes as well as at the podium.

So once you flip it around, the excuses fall away. And we are left with only one explanation: the power imbalance between men and women. However far we think we have progressed towards gender equality, men are still much more likely than women to feel a sense of entitlement and superiority. And the worst of them will act on it (sometimes hurting other men as well as hurting women).

Not all men, of course. Plenty of men are humble, respectful and utterly delightful. We love having these men as colleagues, friends or romantic partners. But they are the ones who have taken pains to question the societal forces that have bestowed power and authority on men at the expense of equally competent women.

These forces start so young. As early as three, boys will interrupt girls of their age more than boys. By the age of six, both boys and girls believe that boys are more likely to be “really, really smart”, even though they know that girls are already doing better at school. How does this sense of male superiority affect children so early?

Well, one of the most depressing studies I found when researching my book, The Authority Gap, asked British parents to estimate their children’s IQs. They put their sons, on average, at 115 and their daughters at only 107, even though girls tend to develop earlier than boys, have a bigger vocabulary, and outperform boys academically from reception to PhD.

So boys grow up subliminally absorbing this mistaken notion that they are cleverer than girls, and girls grow up absorbing it too. No wonder that, when the same researchers asked adult men and women to estimate their own IQ, men on average said it was 110, and women, only 105. Yet the IQ distribution is identical between the genders, except at the extreme ends of the bell curve.

This sense of male superiority and entitlement is fostered at school too. Professor Allyson Julé studied classroom interactions and found that teachers repeat boys’ comments as recognition of their contributions nine times more than girls’, address questions much more to boys than to girls, and praise boys more for their answers. As a result, boys are rewarded for speaking up and girls for being quiet and well-behaved. Boys learn to believe their views are more important than girls’.

As other educational researchers, David and Myra Sadker, put it: “Girls quickly learn to smile, work quietly, be neat, defer to boys and talk only when spoken to … Little wonder that so many girls lose their voice, confidence and ambition, a problem likely to haunt them in adulthood.”

These boosts to boys’ self-esteem can also lead to overconfidence, which is much more common in boys and men.

One academic paper, unusually entitled Bullshitters. Who are they and what do we know about their lives?, studied 40,000 15-year-olds in nine countries. They were given a list of 16 mathematical concepts and asked to rate their knowledge of them, from “never heard of it” to “know it well, understand the concept”.

Unbeknown to the teenagers, the researchers had inserted three fake concepts – ‘subjunctive scaling’, ‘declarative fraction’ and ‘proper number’ – into the list. In all nine countries, boys were much more likely than girls to claim that they knew and understood the fake concepts. What’s more, the bullshirtters believed their own bullshirt. They thought they were better at maths than they were.............

 
Not surprised this hasn’t gotten more traction (106 views, no comments) - EE typically doesn’t like to discuss squishier, ambiguous topics like this
But having been taught mostly by women with most peers being female having gotten my degree and taught at ‘3rd wave feminist’ schools; I’ve confronted this topic a lot
one bit of research referred to is at the '***hole gene' - it argued that there has been historical advantage for 'iconoclastic' decision making
it's probably helped win battles and defend castles as well as help make scientific discovers and new artistic expressions
(obviously it's not going to be foolproof and it's going to allow for as many conmen as tortured geniuses)
the article was discussing that it sees the gene phasing out
BUT I think it must be noted that for the iconoclastic gene to work, there must also be genes in others that is receptive to that
we are a social species - believing in something is vital for the survival of the group - if we were all natively skeptical we'd have probably dies out before we started
technologically we have developed past the place where the ***hole gene is a net benefit - BUT that's not how genetics works (much slower process) which is why it is most vital to socially learn information skepticism
to learn to not follow something that clearly is toxic for our development

to the gender thing, the reality of the boy/girl socialization difference is why we should strongly encourage lifting up female leaders
females, by the socialization process mentioned in the article are forced to learn the male way of seeing the world as well as their own
males only learn/are taught a much narrower range of problem solving
of course you would (mostly) want the leader with a much broader set of problem solving skills
 
I have always attributed this with insecurity, the need to feel better than others.....for lack of a better term, the bully mindset.....

I agree with the premise that some men do "grow out of it", they learn empathy/kindness, etc.....and some never do.....those that never do often are surrounded by other bullies in their orbit.....

I do expect this to get worse over the next 4 years.....
 
I have always attributed this with insecurity, the need to feel better than others.....for lack of a better term, the bully mindset.....

I agree with the premise that some men do "grow out of it", they learn empathy/kindness, etc.....and some never do.....those that never do often are surrounded by other bullies in their orbit.....

I do expect this to get worse over the next 4 years.....
weirdly I 'just' had this interaction with my wife - our oldest had overslept (by 45 minutes) a voice lesson this morning. I'd been reaching out about an hour before his lesson. My wife cancelled the lesson
when he finally wakes up, he calls her upset even though she's in Denver at a conference
she calls me up sad bc she's internalizing his anger (obviously he's projecting his frustration with himself and his not being responsible)
he doesn't call me even though i'm the one who'd'll be taking him bc he knows i won't let him target his anger at ma and will remind him of all the chances he had to get it right

and he's mostly a good kid - just a 16 yr old boy only just learning to develop his social skills (and his mother and I probably did not hold him to account as much as we could have)
 
Do you feel better or worse if you’re diagnosed as genetically an butt crevasse?
 
Last edited:
Why is this article acting like there aren't plenty of women in positions of power/authority who abuse there underlings or treat people badly?
I agree with plenty in that article but the cherry picked examples are ridiculous and ignore that women express their butt crevasse gene in different ways from men.
It isn't hard to do a little research and find plenty of examples of female politicians and entertainers using their status/positions in immoral or unscrupulous ways. Women, and i say this as a complement, are more subtle than men.
Research also shows that men are far less likely to report things like domestic or sexual abuse.
Women are newer to the power game and there are less of them in these positions...that coupled with men being likely to not report incidents means that cherry picked examples or gross numbers are useless

Look at all the incidents of female teachers sexually abusing students. Those same gender dynamics cause less societal outrage and women's sentences are on average almost 50% less than men.
 
I think this fits with this thread

My daughter is a sophomore at Cleveland and I will have another daughter there next year.

I know these boys btw. One has a twin sister that is one of Althea's best friends.


Another article

 
Why is this article acting like there aren't plenty of women in positions of power/authority who abuse there underlings or treat people badly?
I agree with plenty in that article but the cherry picked examples are ridiculous and ignore that women express their butt crevasse gene in different ways from men.
It isn't hard to do a little research and find plenty of examples of female politicians and entertainers using their status/positions in immoral or unscrupulous ways. Women, and i say this as a complement, are more subtle than men.
Research also shows that men are far less likely to report things like domestic or sexual abuse.
Women are newer to the power game and there are less of them in these positions...that coupled with men being likely to not report incidents means that cherry picked examples or gross numbers are useless

Look at all the incidents of female teachers sexually abusing students. Those same gender dynamics cause less societal outrage and women's sentences are on average almost 50% less than men.
and it's part of why the discussion is squishy/ambiguous
there are almost certainly genetic markers at play - but the article and analysis is mostly about socialization
neither is a complete picture - both can help you analyze the past but are less equipped to help you predict behavior
genetics wants its trait to survive so it's not going to put all of its eggs in one basket - it will spread traits broad enough but put most of the where the have the best chance of surviving (I do realize that's more a narrative framing of a more complicated process)
so sure some women will have more masculine traits than other women (and some men)
BUT
the socialization along gender lines is certainly in play - some will be raised in environments that educate against those roles but they're fighting a social system just as entrenched as systemic racism

so sure there are going to be a handful of women who use power like men - women who use femininity to wield
just like there are women who commit sexual or domestic abuse - but it's certainly a much smaller % and the existence of those does not ameliorate the need to redress the antisocial tendencies taught to young boys (it should be taught to everyone

and TBC - it's not a 'male' trait - it's a trait that mostly men present
 
I think this fits with this thread

My daughter is a sophomore at Cleveland and I will have another daughter there next year.

I know these boys btw. One has a twin sister that is one of Althea's best friends.


Another article

it won't let me read the article but i wonder how much this resembles the mythopoetic mens movement of a few decades ago?
 
I think this fits with this thread

My daughter is a sophomore at Cleveland and I will have another daughter there next year.

I know these boys btw. One has a twin sister that is one of Althea's best friends.


Another article

good article, important takeaway:

In the years since, the club’s mission has expanded, amid an onslaught of alarming statistics about the state of U.S. boys and young men. Yes, it’s still very much a white, straight man’s world, but these days, boys are less likely than girls to go to college, more prone to suicide and more likely to drop out of high school.


Studies show they have fewer friends, higher rates of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder diagnoses and are prime targets for both the torrent of violent language in gaming chats and the array of misogynistic, protein powder-hawking hucksters who fill young men’s social feeds with reactionary politics.
 
and it's part of why the discussion is squishy/ambiguous
there are almost certainly genetic markers at play - but the article and analysis is mostly about socialization
neither is a complete picture - both can help you analyze the past but are less equipped to help you predict behavior
genetics wants its trait to survive so it's not going to put all of its eggs in one basket - it will spread traits broad enough but put most of the where the have the best chance of surviving (I do realize that's more a narrative framing of a more complicated process)
so sure some women will have more masculine traits than other women (and some men)
BUT
the socialization along gender lines is certainly in play - some will be raised in environments that educate against those roles but they're fighting a social system just as entrenched as systemic racism

so sure there are going to be a handful of women who use power like men - women who use femininity to wield
just like there are women who commit sexual or domestic abuse - but it's certainly a much smaller % and the existence of those does not ameliorate the need to redress the antisocial tendencies taught to young boys (it should be taught to everyone

and TBC - it's not a 'male' trait - it's a trait that mostly men present
The issue that I have is that nothing in what you just said is verifiable fact. You have no idea if women abuse positions of authority in significantly lesser rates than men. You are also throwing in a caveat that those that do are expressing 'masculine' traits which is absolutely meaningless. It's unproveable rhetoric to support a conclusion that you are convinced of.
It's also reinforcing that abuse of power in "this" manner is somehow not as bad as abusing it in "that" manner which also becomes a justification.
 
Why isn't this thread considered sexist?

Is it normal to bash men, and taboo to say, anything negative towards woman?

Just checking. Need clarification.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom