To think women are more toxic than people would like to admit?

[MarthaMayver]

I'd like to start by saying by no means are all women toxic, I'm a female myself and have always been a huge supporter of feminism and "sisterhood" if you will. However the more behaviour I witness from women, I'm starting to stray away from seeing them as allies.

I have worked in female dominated sectors my entire life and have constantly had to witness cliques, gossiping, power plays, passive aggressiveness, and downright bullying. I had to leave my last job as it was affecting my mental health so badly.

I always thought this was just part and parcel of working in groups. However I started a new job last year, with an equal spread of male and female colleagues and there has been none of this. I'm now wondering if the problem with all of my previous workplaces was the fact that they were female dominated.

To me, it's very obvious in person how women favour men over their own gender, regardless of how much "female empowerment" and "Women Supporting Women" is preached these days. For example, they will let men get away with mistakes they wouldn't let other women get away with. Male incompetence is often seen as "cute", whereas the same behaviour coming from a woman would be laughed or sneered at.

There are so many stories coming out in recent years of mothers favouring their sons over their daughters, and at worst bullying and abusing their daughters whilst worshiping their sons. I now think back to my own childhood and I can remember many occasions where my mother would put me down for something, while supporting my male siblings for doing the same thing. There were also a lot of sly, underhand insults that I didn't realize at the time, that were never directed towards my brothers.

I'm prepared to be told IBU, but I'm also very interested in knowing how many people agree, or if anyone has any similar experiences.

We'll have to agree to disagree then because it seems pretty clear to me that in mammals the male is usually inherently more aggressive.

Of course it wouldn't help a struggling male to tell them that because you're basically implying it can't be helped, when in most cases social structures/conventions suppress violence as mentioned in one of the links I posted.

I would be cautious about saying men are biologically more violent than women. That's like saying women are biologically more emotional. There must be loads of intersecting factors that influence any individual's behaviour. I hear what people are saying about animals, but we do live in a much more complex society than they do and are subject to many more influences.

I’m saying the exact opposite. I’m saying they can be helped because violence is not innate in them.

I think we will have to agree to disagree. You’re absolutely determined to believe men are biologically violent even when all the evidence you provided tells you otherwise. I’m not really sure what else there is to say.

I agree, hence my comment about violence usually being suppressed by our social norms. But it still seems men are much more likely to succumb to anger and become violent.

I also think it's possible women are in aggregate more emotional. Some studies have found that hormones also affect empathy and anxiety etc. And anecdotally women seem to get involved in much greater levels of drama. I mean, look at all the MIL threads. 😂 Men don't do this with their FILs. They go fishing a drink a few beers.

Was replying to Gnillidog.

I don’t think women are more emotional either. I think societally men are taught to suppress their emotions so they do.

@gnilliwdog

At a species wide level it’s pretty certain that they are. Couple that with the fact we evolved from primate types where males are more agressive and have more testosterone (couple this with the fact it’s true of basically every mammal).

Men we’re more aggressive long before complex societies back when we were barely human yet. They were more aggressive in pre history (as the bone record shows evidence of their injuries and violence through small scale conflict to each other). They’ve been more aggressive at every stage throughout history and they’re more aggressive now. Just like every other primate and every other mammal the males who have higher testosterone are far more aggressive species wide.

Now we live ina complex society. And they’re still more aggressive just as they’ve always been.

I mean what more do you need?

Im not saying you shouldn’t help individuals who that is causing problems for or make room for men who aren’t. I’m not even saying it’s bad all the time.

The evidence shows strong links between violence and higher testosterone, and that it's a common trait shared in violent offenders.

I don't think we should derail this thread anymore. The studies are there and I'm confident most unbiased readers will connect the dots.

@Pumperthepumper

And when did men start suppressing the emotions which females who more which they would otherwise be showing?

Dont you think you may just be thinking that men are suppressing their emotions because your ideological stance means you can’t accept they don’t feel the same way as you because they are not the same as women?

The studies don’t say what you’re claiming they say though. Who do you think I’m biased towards?

I’m not sure what this means but I think we might just be back to you thinking men are biologically violent.

Having worked in education and the NHS for most of my career I've encountered some absolute twats - some of whom were women and some men.

I have found that men tend to get promoted quicker despite obvious incompetence, but then I've met a number of incompetent women in positions that they should never have been given. The difference is that the women are accused (overtly in general) of getting there by offering sexual favours, whilst the men never get that.

I've also found that some senior male clinicians tend to treat women in senior positions like they are admin. I've definitely experienced the very important man asking me to make coffee for the meeting instead of my male junior. Luckily I've seen a change in attitude in recent years - or maybe I'm just more arsey.

A lot of the women I have worked with do tend to judge me by my reproductive status rather than getting to know me. I have definitely worked with women with "golden womb syndrome" and have had comments about how I'm not a proper woman, don't knkw love etc all the usual cliches women without children hear every fucking day.
Men just see me.

I don't support women because we share the same chromosomes and reproductive organs (actually we don't as I have had a hysterectomy). I will support women if need be, and will support men if need be.

100% this

I don't support women because we share the same chromosomes and reproductive organs (actually we don't as I have had a hysterectomy). I will support women if need be, and will support men if need be.

Pretty much my view.

This post is the biggest load of rubbish I have read in a long time.

OP, quite seriously, I don't think this way of thinking is very healthy at all.

'Men we’re more aggressive long before complex societies back when we were barely human yet. They were more aggressive in pre history (as the bone record shows evidence of their injuries and violence through small scale conflict to each other). They’ve been more aggressive at every stage throughout history and they’re more aggressive now'

But maybe men were fighting each other because they were stronger than women and did not have a baby at the breast or were pregnant? They may have been the ones fighting for these practical reasons rather than because testosterone made them do it.

@Tinaaaaarrrghhh

They may have been the ones fighting for these practical reasons rather than because testosterone made them do it.

I think there's a fighting (excuse the pun) chance that men evolved to have higher testosterone in order to aid survival.

@gnilliwdog

Unlikely. It’s not like women were telling them to seek out other men to fight or to push into other groups territories (what would come to be known as warfare). I’m not saying no women have ever benefited from male on male violence because they definitely have but they overtly didn’t cause it in the first place. It mirrors what happens in pretty much every other mammal and especially mirrors what happens with male chimps.

I agree that it would have been impractical for women to fight more at that point, but the truth is and for other animals too, it likely never occurred to them because the roles were decided by the biology and the agression and testosterone were a part of that.

Keep in mind in those days especially, male aggression was often put to use to protect one’s young in the same way you’ll see it in animals today (if you ever see a mum and dad duck with ducklings and then the dad duck takes a run at you or your car you know what I mean). It’s been lost on people in the modern day but aggression in males was a nurturing quality at one time, because it increased the chances off his offsprings survival.

I think it’s all intertwined and can’t be separated. Testosterone not only makes men more aggressive, it also makes them bigger and gives them more benefit from aggression. Women being more aggressive wouldn’t be beneficial for humans evolutionary speaking if they were smaller than men, as they wouldn’t be as good at fighting off threats. So then naturally men tend to make up those who decide what to do with that male aggression and these people would be the leaders and what have you of early society and then they socialise other men into that and women were in that more nurturing role (at that time). So mens testosterone and biology is actually causing socialisation not stemming from it. It may be the greatest driver of all human socialisation and progress really.

@YesJess

Yeah but when we say “men evolved”, they would have really had that long before they were even human men, they just continued on in the same vein as the primates and mammals they evolved from. It’s not like human men were the start of it.

Do you have any evidence for any of this? Or is it just a theory that makes sense to you?

@Tinaaaaarrrghhh I thought you were talking about a hunter gatherer period, where I imagine there might be an occasional argument over resources and territory between neighbouring tribes. I don't know how we would know what women were telling men to do in those days?

Women being more aggressive wouldn’t be beneficial for humans evolutionary speaking if they were smaller than men, as they wouldn’t be as good at fighting off threats.

This doesn’t even make any sense - if you’re saying testosterone leads to an ability to protect their young then of course it would be beneficial for women to be equally as protective. And they wouldn’t need physical strength because they could use weapons or poison.

@Pumperthepumper

Use poison? We’re talking about caveman days not a Miss Marple case

@YesJess Possibly men evolved to have testosterone to aid survival, I don't know. But I meant that the reason men appeared to fight more than women in prehistory may be because of practical considerations, rather than having an innate desire to fight due to testosterone.