Why some men feel they can do what they like (Mary Ann Sieghart article in Graun)

[PoppySeedBagelRedux]

This is an interesting short read:

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/dec/06/why-do-some-men-behave-badly-i-think-i-have-the-answer

Some very interesting and telling data in it. But it was odd how this data was wrenched around to try and make it into an explanation of men's abusive behaviour. Essentially, the data was how both men themselves and the people around them over-rate their intellectual abilities.

That is certainly a cause for concern but it doesn't seem like the most relevant data for looking at sexual abuse. I felt that this person had a potentially interesting article to write but made a bad decision to hook it to the G?reg Wallace thing.

Women are attracted to confident assertive men who get promoted. If women preferred quiet shy men who wouldn’t say boo to a goose then this is how men would behave in order to find a partner. I don’t think it’s fair to link the sexually abusive behavior of male stars - behavior that everyone at the BBC seemed to know about but did nothing to address - with the average bloke just trying to make his way in the world, buy a house and compete for a partner.
I tend to feel a bit sorry for men because they are being rewarded by women for acting confident and then being criticised for it in the media.

Some very interesting and telling data in it. But it was odd how this data was wrenched around to try and make it into an explanation of men's abusive behaviour. Essentially, the data was how both men themselves and the people around them over-rate their intellectual abilities.

Yes, she seems to be determined to link two completely different aspects of the behavioural differences between men and women and concludes that the reasons are the same for both.

Does she really think that if girls were encouraged from an early age to think of themselves as intellectually superior to boys that they would become sexual predators?

She’s linking a sense of entitlement and superiority to sexual abuse, I think that’s valid. It must be a factor in the make up of some sexual abusers, people like Al Fayed and Weinstein I would’ve thought.

If I recall correctly, she has an enormous regard for her own intellectual capabilities. She's pretty smart, just not as smart as she thinks she is.

If women preferred quiet shy men who wouldn’t say boo to a goose then this is how men would behave in order to find a partner.

Women do prefer that, though.
They also prefer kind men, flamboyant men, vegetarian men, bitchy men, men who try too hard, men who don't try hard enough, men who speak other languages, men who have a quirky sense of humour, men who don't see finding a likeminded partner as a competition.

Men commit over 98% of sexual crimes. This isn't purely due to men feeling over confident and being taught that they're superior to women. Men appear to be more inclined to sexually predatory behaviour, no matter what their status. Celebrity status and positions of authority just give them an opportunity to indulge this behaviour, often more openly.

Men who are inclined to behave in this way but don't have this status still assault women (or men, or children). They're just the flashers in a dark alley or the blokes who grope a stranger in a crowded place or the opportunist rapists.

I don’t think it’s fair to link the sexually abusive behavior of male stars - behavior that everyone at the BBC seemed to know about but did nothing to address - with the average bloke just trying to make his way in the world, buy a house and compete for a partner.

One is essentially an extreme version of the other.

Take Giselle Pelicot's situation: ordinary men, loving husbands, average blokes, thought their behaviour was acceptable, excusable, justifiable. Even those who refused to rape her did not think it necessary to stop others rape her.

They got away with it for so long because nobody knew about it, or at least nobody who cared. Celebs get away with it for so long, even though people know about it, because nobody cares and everybody defers to the celebs' status.

I used to think this myself, but i always ended up dating the traditional ideal of a man who was older than me who earned more than me and was more worldly and confident than me, one of which i married.

As I got older i realized that everyone of my friends were looking for the same qualities, and the whole line about women loving sensitive men in touch with their emotions wasn’t playing out anywhere in my social circle. Now that I’m middle aged I’m just going to start calling a spade a spade.

They got away with it for so long because nobody knew about it, or at least nobody who cared, and everybody deferred to male entitlement - ie status. Celebs get away with it for so long, even though people know about it, because nobody cares and everybody defers to the male celebs' status.

What has this got to do with men being sexual predators?

I do agree that we're conflating two different things. There are certain types of men who are very sexually charged and the more powerful and entitled they are the more they indulge it. They can get away with having affairs with 20 year olds and making lewd comments to attractive colleagues so they do.

The proportion of women with raging libidos is far smaller which is just a fact of biology. Plus it's far less socially acceptable to be female and be making crass comments about your genitals or shagging people half your age. Can you imagine Fiona Bruce being allowed to get away with this kind of behaviour?! People would think she'd gone mad.

I never said it was ‘purely’ due to men feeling over confident and superior. I said it was likely a factor in some abusers.

It was more to do with the part of the article about boys being more confident. The article suggests this confidence can lead to entitled sexual predators, whilst glossing over the fact that powerful institutions protected these men for years. I’m basically saying that i disagree with the link between male confidence and sexual abuse and would like investigations into who hushed up this stuff up in the first place.

The article is sadly similar to things written in the 70s and 80s, when it was new and brave to talk about men feeling entitled, boys receiving more affirmation from teachers, girls outperforming boys in anonymised exams, women not being promoted fairly etc.

But that was the era of the dinosaurs - it's a post-feminist world now, isn't it?

It's interesting to read a contemporary commentator making statements that suggest - as a lot of women including myself believe - that the advances made by previous generations of feminists were not permanent, they flourished for a bit and then along came the backlashes, the fairly princess industry, TWAW, and the likes of Andrew Tate.

Mentioning Andrew Tate reminds me about the claims that things are so difficult for men, the crisis in masculinity, how boys are disadvantaged in education, how unfair and damaging phrases like 'toxic masculinity' are. And how all that unfairness to men is fuelling the rise of incel culture.

This all seems to have passed Mary Ann Sieghart by - either that or she thinks it's so obviously baseless that it's not worth mentioning.

'But that still leaves far too many bullshitters in place whose jobs would be better done by the Mishal Husains and Fiona Bruces of this world.'

Or the Christine Lagardes and Kristalina Georgievas of this world:
when Christine Lagarde became the first female head of the IMF, replacing the disgraced Dominique Strauss-Kahn, I remember a commentator saying grudgingly- 'Well at least there won't be any sex scandals this time!'.

Oh so it is yet again women's fault that men behave as they do!

I don’t think sexual abuse is necessarily about men being overconfident in themselves, but it’s certainly linked to abusers thinking of women as being lesser, or less human, or even just less threatening. It’s the same data, looked at from the other end of the tube. Even many of the good ones think well of the women in their lives but can’t help thinking that chaps in general are just that bit more capable.