81–90 of 111 posts
Devil's advocate: could it have something to do with hardwired differences in the brain?
Well of course. The whole topic of inequality stems from us acting like the evolutionary animals we all are inside. The only way to counter act is to consciously analyze these behaviors and try to adjust ourselves.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure I understand the assumption in the article, and in your comment, about it being important to talk over people. In my experience (as a male!), I tend to be most powerful when I shut up, listen to everybody talk for a while, identify their concerns and priorities, and formulate my position to make my point without wasting time stepping on toes (which you're likely to do if you speak before listening and un…
Long standing favorite anecdote from an article I read in a magazine eons ago: A woman took a class on assertiveness in the 80's. The instructor was a female nazi-like drill sergeant type. They were expected to practice yelling in people's faces and being super pushy and the like. One day when it came her turn in class to yell at people and all that, the author of the piece said "No, I don't really want to do that. I…
What I like about this article is that it's not trying to point blame. It's not that men are actively trying to shut out women or making a hostile environment (although some probably are), it's that they do it in subtle ways without even noticing. It's not that women are too timid, it's that they are making the optimal short-term choice. I'm reminded of a study I read a looong time back (sorry I don't remember where)…
McArdle has also written about this kind of stuff before: http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2008/06/yes-soci... ; http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2008/06/a-pack-n... : I've had about ten requests from men to explain the phrase "winning the cocktail party". None from women. A male friend, who spends a not inconsiderable time cruising feminist sites, was one of those who asked what it meant. I fin…
When females will start choosing the shy, introvert male individual over the confident, extrovert, win-it-all male than these sort of things won't happen anymore. Otherwise, it's just animal nature to behave in this manner.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"""Not to bring down everything to sexuality, but a sexually pushy woman would be typically labeled a "slut." Which is why a woman will almost never ask a man out.""" Most people seem to prefer atavism when it comes to dating and bedroom activities. Those are some really deep patterns, and I doubt that they are solely the result of social conditioning. A sexually pushy woman might be labelled a slut, but a sexually u…
> but a sexually unpushy man will be labelled a beta male True point: women pay closer attention to men's pecking order than vice versa. But then again, the reason women do this is likely because for men, pecking order is more closely linked to high salary / reproductive fitness than it is for women, which comes back to the point in the original article -- if women don't get promoted or given higher salary, then ther…
Interesting to see how many comments cite supposedly immutable male sexual dynamics as the cause of this phenomenon - like being unable to respond non-erotically to an assertive woman, or even to a woman who is simply friendly at work. Could you ever imagine a woman's sexuality being invoked as a matter-of-fact justification for a workplace dynamic? Not by a man saying a woman's wonton behavior made him act aggressiv…
I think I like your comment, but I'm not sure because I didn't understand it. Could you (honest request), maybe try to rephrase it in a way that non-English-language-PhDs can also follow? Like, what is "supposedly immutable male sexual dynamics"? I understand immutable data, but not immutable dynamics.
Interesting to see how many comments cite supposedly immutable male sexual dynamics as the cause of this phenomenon - like being unable to respond non-erotically to an assertive woman, or even to a woman who is simply friendly at work. Could you ever imagine a woman's sexuality being invoked as a matter-of-fact justification for a workplace dynamic? Not by a man saying a woman's wonton behavior made him act aggressiv…
I think I like your comment, but I'm not sure because I didn't understand it. Could you (honest request), maybe try to rephrase it in a way that non-English-language-PhDs can also follow? Like, what is "supposedly immutable male sexual dynamics"? I understand immutable data, but not immutable dynamics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Long standing favorite anecdote from an article I read in a magazine eons ago: A woman took a class on assertiveness in the 80's. The instructor was a female nazi-like drill sergeant type. They were expected to practice yelling in people's faces and being super pushy and the like. One day when it came her turn in class to yell at people and all that, the author of the piece said "No, I don't really want to do that. I…
I'm afraid you have completely lost me :)
It's okay (kind of expected, really). I've slept four hours a night the last three nights and was served a notice of eviction a few hours ago. I'm frankly shocked that I have yet to be downvoted into hell (which I was looking forward to viewing as "entertaining distraction" under the circumstances). It can't be a "good" impulse to jump into this topic under the circumstances given how many feathers I ruffle when I'm in good shape. :-D
Peace be with you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm afraid you have completely lost me :)
I'm afraid you have completely lost me It's okay (kind of expected, really). I've slept four hours a night the last three nights and was served a notice of eviction a few hours ago. I'm frankly shocked that I have yet to be downvoted into hell (which I was looking forward to viewing as "entertaining distraction" under the circumstances). It can't be a "good" impulse to jump into this topic under the circumstances giv…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm afraid you have completely lost me It's okay (kind of expected, really). I've slept four hours a night the last three nights and was served a notice of eviction a few hours ago. I'm frankly shocked that I have yet to be downvoted into hell (which I was looking forward to viewing as "entertaining distraction" under the circumstances). It can't be a "good" impulse to jump into this topic under the circumstances giv…
Ah, unfortunately I don't have downvoting privileges as of yet. I'll be sure to downvote you when I do ;) Good luck with what sounds like a tough situation!
Any ideas on how I can raise between $50k and $100k in the next 29 days, drop me a line (or something).
Good talking to you.
To summarize the article: for some reason, the society is more willing to tolerate "pushiness" in males than in females. Why is that the case? Any ideas? (Other than "because it's always been like that..."). Not to bring down everything to sexuality, but a sexually pushy woman would be typically labeled a "slut." Which is why a woman will almost never ask a man out.
I'm female. I have found it's really tough to try to initiate a relationship with a man because the default is to treat me like a "slut" if I do so and then get really threatened/angry/hostile when it turns out I am not throwing myself at him sexually, I am actually looking for a relationship. I've concluded that what "slut" means is really "someone who indiscriminately serves the needs of men/others". "Women looking to serve their own needs" is something society doesn't seem to really have a term for.
(Anyone know of such a term? I would be happy to be proven wrong and enlightened that it's just my whacked life that lacks this concept. Men who sleep around tend to get called "Players" and the assumption is they are taking advantage/doing the using. "Slut" is generally a term we use to indicate the party being used/in the subservient position.)