I really like this. It has always occured to me that women's entire psychology is oriented around interpersonal harmony. I think wokeism was in large part an extreme expression of this psychology; an attempt at reshaping society in terms that make sense within women's psychology.
Hate to plug my own shit, but check it out if you're looking for a ~short read
I agree that neither of our natures are inherently better than the others, and that we ought to develop an understanding of and respect for that. But at the same time I can't help but observe that certain approaches are more optimized for success in certain domains. Your psychology determines the approach you take to a given thing, and how closely that approach conforms to the nature of the problem at hand is largely what determines success. Like if a group of people trying to structure a large loan prioritize validating each other's emotions, it's going to be hard to reject bad approaches to structuring that loan; in that domain (loan structuring) emotional validation as a psychological imperative is going to produce a group ethos that struggles with rejecting inadequate ideas for how to structure the loan - because in this case, interpersonal harmony is not the objective.
A mundane example is when I'm out getting lost with my girl friends we tend to take turns on whose direction we follow and 9/10 that gets off even more confused and lost where as if we we're more comfortable with leadership hierarchy and putting respect on someone else's skill versus treating everybody the same we would end up at our destination quicker with less stress.
Btw, I should have included an example in which men's psychology operates in a domain that it is not optimized for. This is not something that is limited to women; it occurs with both genders. And the point is not, for instance, to suggest that women should not work in finance (in part because there are many women in finance who crush it). The point is to agnostically establish a truth and extrapolate out from there, wherever that leads us - accepting that there are always exceptions to the rule.
I will say this: I would much rather have my wife not criticize me for like X # of days than do something nice for me. I don't want anything nice. I'm fine without nice things. I'm self sufficient. I don't need anyone's help. Rather, I would just prefer not to be told by the most important person in the world that I am deficient (I am not talking about pointing out things I could do better, I am talking about the judgment that comes along with it). I am saying this just to corroborate gray's view of men here at least applies for me
I really like this. It has always occured to me that women's entire psychology is oriented around interpersonal harmony. I think wokeism was in large part an extreme expression of this psychology; an attempt at reshaping society in terms that make sense within women's psychology.
Hate to plug my own shit, but check it out if you're looking for a ~short read
https://substack.com/@messagesfrommars/p-157749150
I agree that neither of our natures are inherently better than the others, and that we ought to develop an understanding of and respect for that. But at the same time I can't help but observe that certain approaches are more optimized for success in certain domains. Your psychology determines the approach you take to a given thing, and how closely that approach conforms to the nature of the problem at hand is largely what determines success. Like if a group of people trying to structure a large loan prioritize validating each other's emotions, it's going to be hard to reject bad approaches to structuring that loan; in that domain (loan structuring) emotional validation as a psychological imperative is going to produce a group ethos that struggles with rejecting inadequate ideas for how to structure the loan - because in this case, interpersonal harmony is not the objective.
A mundane example is when I'm out getting lost with my girl friends we tend to take turns on whose direction we follow and 9/10 that gets off even more confused and lost where as if we we're more comfortable with leadership hierarchy and putting respect on someone else's skill versus treating everybody the same we would end up at our destination quicker with less stress.
That's a hilarious example.
Btw, I should have included an example in which men's psychology operates in a domain that it is not optimized for. This is not something that is limited to women; it occurs with both genders. And the point is not, for instance, to suggest that women should not work in finance (in part because there are many women in finance who crush it). The point is to agnostically establish a truth and extrapolate out from there, wherever that leads us - accepting that there are always exceptions to the rule.
I will say this: I would much rather have my wife not criticize me for like X # of days than do something nice for me. I don't want anything nice. I'm fine without nice things. I'm self sufficient. I don't need anyone's help. Rather, I would just prefer not to be told by the most important person in the world that I am deficient (I am not talking about pointing out things I could do better, I am talking about the judgment that comes along with it). I am saying this just to corroborate gray's view of men here at least applies for me