Why do women do it to each other?
Replies
-
Just because it's "natural" doesn't mean it's acceptable in a civilized society. You seem to be confusing those two things. It is also not true that all humans are predisposed to adopt the same strategy for cooperation, relationship types, dominant/submissive behavior, or mating strategies. Understanding that some men are naturally inclined to rape, or that we are naturally violent and racist, is the only way that we will overcome that nature and not act (so much) like a bunch of animals.There's also been books published about how men are naturally inclined to rape. I invite you to read "A natural history or rape." It is also sexist bull**** that I refuse to give any validity to.0 -
Or another good example - completely slam the **** out of a woman that they perceive as being 'slutty?'
http://www.uottawa.ca/media/media-release-2477.html
"Although it is well documented that males of different species, including humans, aggressively compete with one another for sexual access to females (intrasexual competition), far less is known about how females compete with one another for the attention of males. University of Ottawa professor Tracy Vaillancourt’s research supports the idea that women do engage in intrasexual competition through the use of aggression."
This study is saying that women are similar to men in this respect. That study actually support's BinaryPulsar's point that we are the same.0 -
None of my female friends act like that. I don't act like that. And we wouldn't tolerate it from male or female friends. Why does anyone choose to be mean? Because they can, and because others allow it.
I agree. I would never allow anyone to treat me this way, nor would it occur to me to treat someone else like that. I have close, genuine friendships with several women. I also work in an office that's primarily women and we all get along great. I think some of you need to hang out with a better class of people.
Yeah, I am a dancer and right now I dance almost primarily with women. None of them are mean.0 -
I don't think "most" women would act that way. None of my friends act that way. I'm part of a monthly challenge group where I know one person there and all of the women are extremely supportive of each other, as are the men in the group. If someone doesn't want any woman as a friend because they all behave a certain way, maybe attention should be paid to the one constant in that.0
-
That's pretty awesome that you managed to avoid those, but my last link was a rather scientific study with controls and all that good jazz.I've never experienced the things that were written in those silly, non-scientific books about teenage girls.
I recommend the book, "The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature" by Steven Pinker.
I mean, it's one example, but still.
That book sounds pretty interesting and I'll have to check it out, but I'm really not following what it has to do with the discussion at hand.
And I don't doubt for an instant that this isn't exactly the norm across all relationships. But these sorts of things are more likely to happen among women because of the terrible and sexist culture that stacks things against them, in my experience and from everything that I've read on the subject. I certainly don't think that it's anything that's worth slamming women over, of course, but I think that our culture encourages this sort of thing and is generally pretty sick in that way. 0 -
Sorry to generalize... but women are just mean, evil, manipulative, judgmental ... b****es. I know not ALL of us women are, but most are in some form. It seems to get better with age... for some. It's sad really, I don't know why we do these things to each other. Woman are always meaner to other women.
Probably why I don't really have any female friends. Because I am a b****.
this.
IMO, they don't tend to get much better with age.0 -
That's pretty awesome that you managed to avoid those, but my last link was a rather scientific study with controls and all that good jazz.I've never experienced the things that were written in those silly, non-scientific books about teenage girls.
I recommend the book, "The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature" by Steven Pinker. I mean, it's one example, but still.
That book sounds pretty interesting and I'll have to check it out, but I'm really not following what it has to do with the discussion at hand.
And I don't doubt for an instant that this isn't exactly the norm across all relationships. But these sorts of things are more likely to happen among women because of the terrible and sexist culture that stacks things against them, in my experience and from everything that I've read on the subject. I certainly don't think that it's anything that's worth slamming women over, of course, but I think that our culture encourages this sort of thing and is generally pretty sick in that way.
As I have said so many times, all I can ever take away from these 'culture made me do it' arguments, is that people believe women are mindless sheep who will follow any sort of subliminal instruction thrown at them.0 -
Why am I eating lamb all of a sudden? I don't even like lamb.0
-
-
Competition is one thing - this is about directly attacking someone based on their appearance immediately. If you have a study that says men do the same thing and try to undermine others via social manipulation rather than competing through other stupid means, I'll be glad to read it.Or another good example - completely slam the **** out of a woman that they perceive as being 'slutty?'
http://www.uottawa.ca/media/media-release-2477.html
"Although it is well documented that males of different species, including humans, aggressively compete with one another for sexual access to females (intrasexual competition), far less is known about how females compete with one another for the attention of males. University of Ottawa professor Tracy Vaillancourt’s research supports the idea that women do engage in intrasexual competition through the use of aggression."
This study is saying that women are similar to men in this respect. That study actually support's BinaryPulsar's point that we are the same.
The truth is that culture affects each of us. I don't believe in a tabula rasa situation where culture is the only thing that affects who we are, of course, but to pretend that it has no effect is easily as stupid. All of us carry around the burdens of our culture. That doesn't mean that we can't break those patterns, but when the culture around you rewards certain behaviors and punishes others, it's going to influence people's desire to effect those behaviors.As I have said so many times, all I can ever take away from these 'culture made me do it' arguments, is that people believe women are mindless sheep who will follow any sort of subliminal instruction thrown at them.0 -
I think young women behave that way because they are insecure. I read a post on here about women who have ugly or overweight friends and this post made me wonder if this girl was discouraging her because she didnt want her friend to look better than her or be the skinny one so to say. Girls are definately out to compete with eachother at that age, not all but a lot. Hopefully you run into that girl at class. Maybe you can be the motivation she needs to keep her going. Poor girl:(.0
-
That's pretty awesome that you managed to avoid those, but my last link was a rather scientific study with controls and all that good jazz.I've never experienced the things that were written in those silly, non-scientific books about teenage girls.
I recommend the book, "The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature" by Steven Pinker. I mean, it's one example, but still.
That book sounds pretty interesting and I'll have to check it out, but I'm really not following what it has to do with the discussion at hand.
And I don't doubt for an instant that this isn't exactly the norm across all relationships. But these sorts of things are more likely to happen among women because of the terrible and sexist culture that stacks things against them, in my experience and from everything that I've read on the subject. I certainly don't think that it's anything that's worth slamming women over, of course, but I think that our culture encourages this sort of thing and is generally pretty sick in that way.
Because the other poster that you quoted had referenced the book, "The Natural History of Rape". And the book, "The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature" by Steven Pinker talks specifically about that book and I think he does a better job explaining it.0 -
Ah, that makes sense, then.Because the other poster that you quoted had referenced the book, "The Natural History of Rape". And the book, "The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature" by Steven Pinker talks specifically about that book and I think he does a better job explaining it.
By just cruising the Wikipedia page, I definitely would say that I agree with the broad points being made (and think that The Natural History of Rape doesn't sound terrible appealing, though it's right insofar as readding the sexual component of rape back into the mix rather than pretending it's only about power) but that I think that going 100% in the opposite direction and pretending that culture doesn't shape us at all would be just as silly. In the case of both books, and most arguments in the social sciences really, the truth probably lies somewhere in between the two poles. Both nature and nurture effect our personalities.0 -
Competition is one thing - this is about directly attacking someone based on their appearance immediately. If you have a study that says men do the same thing and try to undermine others via social manipulation rather than competing through other stupid means, I'll be glad to read it.
The article you provided claims the behavior is already well documented in males. That article claims the study's conclusion is about sexual competition.
You are disagreeing with the article you are relying on.0 -
It says that competitive behavior over mates is already well documented in males. Not that they almost unilaterally attempt to socially attack anyone that they see as a competitor.Competition is one thing - this is about directly attacking someone based on their appearance immediately. If you have a study that says men do the same thing and try to undermine others via social manipulation rather than competing through other stupid means, I'll be glad to read it.
The article you provided claims the behavior is already well documented in males. That article claims the study's conclusion is about sexual competition.
You are disagreeing with the article you are relying on.
Again, if you have some studies that say that's the case, I'll gladly agree that I'm wrong on this one. But I already explained how that's different, so I'm not sure if you're trolling or just didn't understand my post. 0 -
Ah, that makes sense, then.Because the other poster that you quoted had referenced the book, "The Natural History of Rape". And the book, "The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature" by Steven Pinker talks specifically about that book and I think he does a better job explaining it.
By just cruising the Wikipedia page, I definitely would say that I agree with the broad points being made (and think that The Natural History of Rape doesn't sound terrible appealing, though it's right insofar as readding the sexual component of rape back into the mix rather than pretending it's only about power) but that I think that going 100% in the opposite direction and pretending that culture doesn't shape us at all would be just as silly. In the case of both books, and most arguments in the social sciences really, the truth probably lies somewhere in between the two poles. Both nature and nurture effect our personalities.
There were some aspects of the book "The Natural History of Rape" that I did not like because they were trying to quantify trauma in a way that was impossible and inaccurate. And the book by Steven Pinker does not say it is only nature, that is a common misunderstanding by people that have not read the book. I'm not saying I agree 100% with everything in the book anyway (that's impossible), but it's a good book and actually addresses many different subjects.0 -
Just because it's "natural" doesn't mean it's acceptable in a civilized society. You seem to be confusing those two things. It is also not true that all humans are predisposed to adopt the same strategy for cooperation, relationship types, dominant/submissive behavior, or mating strategies. Understanding that some men are naturally inclined to rape, or that we are naturally violent and racist, is the only way that we will overcome that nature and not act (so much) like a bunch of animals.There's also been books published about how men are naturally inclined to rape. I invite you to read "A natural history or rape." It is also sexist bull**** that I refuse to give any validity to.
Um. No. That is not what I am saying. I am not saying any such thing. I am presenting a book that claims to be scientific explaining behaviors that I believe is sexist hoopla, in the same way I think any book arguing it is some scientific fact that women are petty/jealous/any of the other crap people are saying here is also sexist hoopla masquerading as science. It only takes a little bit of intelligence to understand that correlation is not causation.0 -
Oh yeah, my apologies. I wasn't so much saying that I thought the book discounted culture entirely as I had thought I had picked up that vibe from you somewhere along the line, so I was basically taking a go at a straw man on that one. My mistake, and I really do apologize.There were some aspects of the book "The Natural History of Rape" that I did not like because they were trying to quantify trauma in a way that was impossible and inaccurate. And the book by Steven Pinker does not say it is only nature, that is a common misunderstanding by people that have not read the book. I'm not saying I agree 100% with everything in the book anyway (that's impossible), but it's a good book and actually addresses many different subjects.
The idea of trying to quantify the trauma of rape sounds like perhaps the dumbest thing I have heard in quite some time. That said, I think that the general core 'dumbed down' Wiki idea of The Natural History of Rape (TNHoR from now on, just coz I'm sick of typing it) that rape isn't all about power and has to do with sex isn't really a terrible one when it comes to the idea of studying rape and doing our best to try to defuse the rape culture that I believe we sadly live in.
What you're saying is "I read one thing that was sexist and dumb, therefore I can dismiss something else as being sexist and dumb."Um. No. That is not what I am saying. I am not saying any such thing. I am presenting a book that claims to be scientific explaining behaviors that I believe is sexist hoopla, in the same way I think any book arguing it is some scientific fact that women are petty/jealous/any of the other crap people are saying here is also sexist hoopla masquerading as science. It only takes a little bit of intelligence to understand that correlation is not causation.
Which, uh... isn't very good argumentation, to be polite about it. I mean, you can disagree with it if you like, but the fact that there's also another book you disagree with doesn't really help your case at all.0 -
Oh yeah, my apologies. I wasn't so much saying that I thought the book discounted culture entirely as I had thought I had picked up that vibe from you somewhere along the line, so I was basically taking a go at a straw man on that one. My mistake, and I really do apologize.There were some aspects of the book "The Natural History of Rape" that I did not like because they were trying to quantify trauma in a way that was impossible and inaccurate. And the book by Steven Pinker does not say it is only nature, that is a common misunderstanding by people that have not read the book. I'm not saying I agree 100% with everything in the book anyway (that's impossible), but it's a good book and actually addresses many different subjects.
The idea of trying to quantify the trauma of rape sounds like perhaps the dumbest thing I have heard in quite some time. That said, I think that the general core 'dumbed down' Wiki idea of The Natural History of Rape (TNHoR from now on, just coz I'm sick of typing it) that rape isn't all about power and has to do with sex isn't really a terrible one when it comes to the idea of studying rape and doing our best to try to defuse the rape culture that I believe we sadly live in.
What you're saying is "I read one thing that was sexist and dumb, therefore I can dismiss something else as being sexist and dumb."Um. No. That is not what I am saying. I am not saying any such thing. I am presenting a book that claims to be scientific explaining behaviors that I believe is sexist hoopla, in the same way I think any book arguing it is some scientific fact that women are petty/jealous/any of the other crap people are saying here is also sexist hoopla masquerading as science. It only takes a little bit of intelligence to understand that correlation is not causation.
Which, uh... isn't very good argumentation, to be polite about it. I mean, you can disagree with it if you like, but the fact that there's also another book you disagree with doesn't really help your case at all.
Oh, I do understand about nature and nurture both being factors in many things.
As far as trying to quantify trauma, I understand the reasoning in attempting to do that. I just disagreed with the conclusions they came to and do not see any evidence supporting that aspect of the book.0 -
No that is not what I am saying. But apparently you don't understand what sexism is, and how both books are good examples of it.0
-
Yeah, I can see it. And I mean, there are layers to this sort of thing, but really, it's so damned subjective that I can't even think of how to make a scale that's anywhere near useful.Oh, I do understand about nature and nurture both being factors in many things.
As far as trying to quantify trauma, I understand the reasoning in attempting to do that. I just disagreed with the conclusions they came to and do not see any evidence supporting that aspect of the book.
That said, I was molested for about three years as a kid and I think that sex definitely had a fair bit to do with the 'why' on that one, though I don't deny that there was a power aspect. And I'd say that it cause me about 2.6 Megatraumas. :P
Yes, I'm definitely not a strident feminist who studies sexism at great length, and I have no idea what a sexism is. Plz tell me moar about these sexisms I keep hearing so much about.No that is not what I am saying. But apparently you don't understand what sexism is, and how both books are good examples of it.
The fact is that you're making a really terrible argument that isn't even an argument. It's just an assertion. You haven't provided any facts, you've just screamed "THAT BOOK'S HELLA SEXISTS" without providing any reason why, other than you not liking it. 0 -
The teenage years are hell. Especially if you are different and who isn't?
I used to swim competitively as kid and a pre-teen before the other girls got too fast. I rediscovered lap swimming and master's training swimming as an adult. It used to pain me as I changing to go into pool the teen swim would be finishing and the girls would be coming into the change rooms. They were toxic to be around. Fighting to change in private, constantly being overly critical of themselves and other girls.
All I could ever think was that I don't miss being that age and that insecure about my body at all. You wish you transmit the knowledge you have now to your teenage self and every girl in the change room. Sadly, these are lessons you have to learn for yourself and usually the hard way.0 -
Yeah, I can see it. And I mean, there are layers to this sort of thing, but really, it's so damned subjective that I can't even think of how to make a scale that's anywhere near useful.Oh, I do understand about nature and nurture both being factors in many things.
As far as trying to quantify trauma, I understand the reasoning in attempting to do that. I just disagreed with the conclusions they came to and do not see any evidence supporting that aspect of the book.
That said, I was molested for about three years as a kid and I think that sex definitely had a fair bit to do with the 'why' on that one, though I don't deny that there was a power aspect. And I'd say that it cause me about 2.6 Megatraumas. :P
Yes, I'm definitely not a strident feminist who studies sexism at great length, and I have no idea what a sexism is. Plz tell me moar about these sexisms I keep hearing so much about.No that is not what I am saying. But apparently you don't understand what sexism is, and how both books are good examples of it.
The fact is that you're making a really terrible argument that isn't even an argument. It's just an assertion. You haven't provided any facts, you've just screamed "THAT BOOK'S HELLA SEXISTS" without providing any reason why, other than you not liking it.
I also have that history. Knowing you have that history I think you would dislike that aspect of the book also for very similar reasons as why I disagreed with it. He seemed to want to support that the depth of the trauma was only in correlation with the risk of pregnancy from the rape. Clearly, the authors do not actually understand the nature of sexual trauma (especially in children and men), and how many factors there actually are in the traumatic impact it has.0 -
You said that the statement, "men are naturally inclined to rape," is sexist bs. I'm telling you that it isn't bs and that rape sucks, but some men are naturally inclined to it, and it has no place in a civilized society. Has nothing to do with whether or not it's in a book. I don't know what correlation you are even talking about nor do I care.
Just because it's "natural" doesn't mean it's acceptable in a civilized society. You seem to be confusing those two things. It is also not true that all humans are predisposed to adopt the same strategy for cooperation, relationship types, dominant/submissive behavior, or mating strategies. Understanding that some men are naturally inclined to rape, or that we are naturally violent and racist, is the only way that we will overcome that nature and not act (so much) like a bunch of animals.There's also been books published about how men are naturally inclined to rape. I invite you to read "A natural history or rape." It is also sexist bull**** that I refuse to give any validity to.
Um. No. That is not what I am saying. I am not saying any such thing. I am presenting a book that claims to be scientific explaining behaviors that I believe is sexist hoopla, in the same way I think any book arguing it is some scientific fact that women are petty/jealous/any of the other crap people are saying here is also sexist hoopla masquerading as science. It only takes a little bit of intelligence to understand that correlation is not causation.
It has everything to do with the fact that it is a strategy used by genes to get themselves replicated, and it happens to work often enough in human societies for it to have a niche within a polymorphic population capable of supporting multiple evolutionarily stable strategies. Trying to apply "causation" to the results of evolutionary algorithms is rather pointless anyway. About as pointless as trying to apply value judgements to the results.0 -
Wait, I wasn't traumatized because I couldn't get pregnant? Man, THAT'S a relief. *wipes brow* :PI also have that history. Knowing you have that history I think you would dislike that aspect of the book also for very similar reasons as why I disagreed with it. He seemed to want to support that the depth of the trauma was only in correlation with the risk of pregnancy from the rape. Clearly, the authors do not actually understand the nature of sexual trauma (especially in children and men), and how many factors there actually are in the traumatic impact it has.0 -
It says that competitive behavior over mates is already well documented in males. Not that they almost unilaterally attempt to socially attack anyone that they see as a competitor.
Again, if you have some studies that say that's the case, I'll gladly agree that I'm wrong on this one. But I already explained how that's different, so I'm not sure if you're trolling or just didn't understand my post.
It says it is well documented that men aggressively compete. They use aggression. In behavioral sciences, that means an intention to cause harm or an act intended to increase relative social dominance.
I am not trolling. I genuinely believe the study you provided does not support your argument.
Also, please notice that that is all I am saying. I've not contended anything else. I am not telling you that you are wrong or that I can disprove you. I am simply saying that I don't think the study you provided says what you think it says.0 -
If they are supposed to be friends, that seems like weird behavior to me.0
-
Health is no laughing matter. Though, obesity can be overcome by healthy habits, good luck exercising that narrow-mind.0
-
Being aggressive and socially attacking someone directly as well as tearing down their worth in the eyes of others are still very different things, imo. Again, if you have something that says that guys attack each other socially in a manner that's remotely similar, I'll be happy to listen.It says it is well documented that men aggressively compete. They use aggression. In behavioral sciences, that means an intention to cause harm or an act intended to increase relative social dominance.
I am not trolling. I genuinely believe the study you provided does not support your argument.
Also, please notice that that is all I am saying. I've not contended anything else. I am not telling you that you are wrong or that I can disprove you. I am simply saying that I don't think the study you provided says what you think it says.
Guys certainly compete in an aggressive way over mates, but that's very different from using snark and social attacks and body language to attempt to undermine and tear down others, which is what I was going for. 0 -
Guys certainly compete in an aggressive way over mates
Could you explain what you mean by this, specifically. You are specific about what women do. Describe the male behavior you are thinking of, if you don't mind.
Are you saying that men are assertive when competing sexually?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions