Men, boys and tomboys form teams. Women, girls and sissies form cliques. This is for evolutionary reasons. Our biologically expensive children—it takes almost 20 years for a forager child to reach subsistence adulthood (forage as many calories as they consume)—require cooperative subsistence and reproductive strategies that transfer resources to, and risks away, from child-rearing.
Men deal with the risks exported away from child-rearing, women seek the intimate connections that support child-rearing.
Teams require suppression of emotion and stress achieving functional roles. There is often “ragging” as members test whether you will fold under pressure.
Cliques represent emotional investment. Hence female friendships tend to be more intense but cliques are more unstable than teams.
As Rob Henderson says, men insult each other and don’t mean it, women compliment each other and don’t mean it.
Women are physically weaker, more agreeable, and have higher emotionality (neuroticism) than men. They find emotions more threatening and so tone police. They find what men do to build teams uncomfortable, even threatening. They are also more self-deceptive in their aggression: parading relational aggression (destroying social connections) as moral or social concern, including to themselves. The physically weaker sex with bubs in tow has to be more self-deceptive about aggression. Hence, women in sporting teams are much more likely to be aggressive against team mates during a game than are men.
Women are also much less the social solidarity sex. Women are much less likely than men to have friends of a lower socio-economic background, as they are not likely to be worth the emotional investment. Men are much more likely to have friends of a lower socio-economic background—you never know when you might want them on your team.
In the late C19th Britain, the abduction of poor girls for prostitution was an enormous scandal. In the early C21st Britain, systematic sexual abuse of underage girls by Muslim gangs, that you are not allowed to call Muslim gangs, is something you don’t talk about honestly in public—that’s Islamophobia. The social leverage through tone-policing control of legitimacy is trumps, social solidarity is nowhere. Working class social solidarity is treated with vicious contempt (ask Tommy Robinson). Welcome to feminised institutions and discourse.
Institutions are formalised teams. As women enter institutions, those institutions become less functional. There is more tone policing, more conformity, more relational aggression, more avoiding awkward facts.
Read Joreen Freeman’s essay Trashing: the Dark Side of Sisterhood. jofreeman.com/joreen/tr…
Cancel culture is a predictable result of social media and feminised public discourse, policing emotions and destroying livelihoods through relational aggression. I used to wonder why lesbians were so prominent in the women’s movement. I now realise that, without those more masculinised personalities able to team build, there would not have been a women’s movement at scale. Of course, lesbians also have less interest in building productive relations with men.
Feminism, with its delusion that evolution is not a thing—so there are no systematic cognitive differences between men and women—and its collective narcissism that women are a superior form of Homo sapien—so if you criticise men it’s feminism, but if you criticise women it’s misogyny; adding women can only ever makes things better, never worse; if things go wrong for girls and women, it’s men’s fault, if they go wrong for boys and men, it’s also men’s (and boy’s) fault—makes it impossible to have adult conversations about this. If you cannot have adult public conversations about bad female-typical behaviour, you get more of it.
Every institution women take over becomes less functional. Hence men leave.
Things that cannot continue indefinitely won’t. Either (1) we tell feminists to f-off so the rest of us can have adult conversations about all this or (2) the decay of institutions continue until, at some point in the collapse, men solve the relevant coordination problem and put women back in the social box (i.e. patriarchy returns full bottle so that things can function). The questions becomes at what level the collapse of complex systems gets to and how nasty the patriarchal backlash becomes.
The shrieking can now begin.
