July 13 2019 (first posted on Wordpress in 2018, and on Tumblr this past June, flagged)
I came to the conclusion that women are currently negotiating privileges against fundamental rights (to the advantage of a minority of people)…and this is a disaster for anyone not falling in the categories of “Historically victimized people” as described by ex-attorney general Eric Holder. It concerns the modern feminist culture of Empathy, Emotionalism, Intelligence, Rights, Delusion…
(Note: I Originally wrote this article in late November 2017…I tried to publish it many times on my Wordpress account, it would not work. This was on my original blog dethinkxify.wordpress.com. I was finally able to publish in March of 2018. But rapidly, hackers erased all the Bibliography, which I had to recreate. I hope this time around activist hackers leave it alone.)
This is a comment I formulated after reading an article in The Hill: “Trump risks hypocrisy charges with Franken attack
” by Jonathan Easley (November 18 2017):
I reprint here since my Wordpress accounts have never been indexed for purely political reasons and my Tumblr it account is being continuously flagged by feminists and is now restricted, which means blocked except for being harrased by Tumblr feminist employees… https://dethinkxify2.wordpress.com/2018/06/13/feminists-and-privilege-of-exceptions/ and https://dethinkxify.wordpress.com/about/
______________________________________________________________ “…Trump…Called a Hypocrite…
”. Who cares by now?
Our whole leadership, including the press, are a bunch of hypocrites by refusing to include regular folks in the reality of power discussions. Power discussions which concern future fundamental rights of men. But around the table sits Feminists, DC politicians, Main Stream Media, some Power Elites…and they prepare, again, to decide our diminishing fates with one-sided bias unconstitutional legislation. We are witnessing a battle for fake righteousness, with your regular insincere feminists at the front line of this “mobbish” crowd. The first debate we need to have is: When will women and feminists stop using sexual misconduct allegations as an extortion/coercion tool? When?
Not yet, obviously…because the inherent conflict of interest here in seeking the truth lies with an establishment of males (alpha males, bad expression, but I will clarify) being rewarded for continuously ceding status, rights, freedoms, liberties of regular males (beta males, idem as previously) of the middle and lower class…in exchange for getting bigger pay checks.
It is by no chance that for the past 30 years, the Establishment, and women of all income groups, have seen persistent gains in their incomes, while middle class and lower class men have seen an imploding of their purchasing power.
The Main Stream Media is so toxic…so hypocrite and so uneducated. Their only tool for convincing the audience of their project for which women are already sold, is the same old Emotional and Affective Empathy Propaganda where if you have “any sense of decency, you should be crying and repenting for all the horrible crimes men have committed against women for centuries..”. Yes, make me laugh…
The scientific truth is very different according to social science. Women are bullies too, they abuse their power, they are violent being…and when the task is too big, they delegate the dirty physical job to their close allied thugs.
Office work place is a competitive landscape. Yet women want to impose rules which will have the effect of constraining men in not being able to use competitive tools and skill in which they outperform.
Pauhlus and Williamson (2002) cornered a theory of personalities which compose people of leadership, men and women alike. This theory is called the Dark Triad of Personality Traits. These specific traits are sub-clinical Narcissism, Psychopathy and Machiavelism. These were, and still are, somewhat taboo traits, so much so that even the scientific literature fails to often understand the basic premise of the theory. The theory stands because of the interdependent nature of these 3 traits, while much of the literature feeding on this theory still analyses circumstances using these traits independently.
As independent traits, nothing is novel in understanding that someone showing a high score in one of these trait may be disagreeable, have shortcomings, be manipulative, etc…The Novelity of Pauhlus and Williamson was in describing these traits as interrelated.
With this, the authors also demonstrated a surprising observation, that people with leadership features scored higher, on average, in all 3 traits simultaneously. Which means that on average each of these traits where higher than the average observed in a control sample. This was puzzling indeed, because these traits had mostly been put on the margin by institutions of morality, such as monotheism; and could hardly be accepted as being the corner-stone of leadership. Yet, 15 years later, it appears that the theory stands solid, and dominant characters (which the alpha epithet only briefly captures) score higher, on average, than controls on the Traits of Narcissism, Psychopathy and Machiavelism simultaneouly.
Organizational hierarchies have been analyzed, been tested, with this filter, and it was observed that, effectively, the further you climb up the latter of authority, the higher you score on The Dark Triad Traits on average.
Since these trait are associated with many negative behaviors, such as vanity, self-promotion, callousness, cruelty, dishonesty, manipulation, etc…it came as quite a shock.
But even more interesting, is the fact that people high on Dark Triad traits score low on Emotional Empathy (Emotional or Affective Empathy are the same thing). And further, Dark Triad Traits have no correlation with Intelligence as captured by Intellectual Quotient (IQ). Which implies that dominant people need not have great IQs; and high IQs are not synonym of dominant personalities…
Surprisingly, leadership requires credibility, since it is expressed in a social context; therefore, social performance is of importance. Social Performance may be measured by a combination of Cognitive intellectual skills, and Personality Traits. Personality traits are observed through performance of Emotional and Social skills.
(I am abstaining, here, of using the expression Emotional Intelligence, because it is an inappropriate terminology. Emotional performance is part of the personality trait domain. The difficulty of, and inadequate terminology, in cornering a theory of Emotional Intelligence has had for result of creating an overly diversified incomplete curriculum on the subject with excessive feminist traps (matriarchal and communautarist propositions) and shortcomings. One of the principal trap is that of putting Agreeableness as a corner-stone of the theory.)
Now, for great leaders to persist and be appreciated, or feared, the Dark Triad must be tempered and modulated by other factors. True, yet definitive consensus has not been reached in this dimension.
Now, within the inventory of survival tools of evolved mammals, there is such a thing as Empathy. Its been the subject of much scientific research in the past 25 years, has been vulgarized, promoted but nevertheless still largely badly understood. Empathy must be understood as a genetically rooted endocrine reflex
. It has evolved over millions of years and is a very sophisticated mechanism.
But first, lets distinguish between two distinct forms of Empathy: Cognitive and Emotional (Affective) Empathy. While Emotional empathy has been largely described scientifically, cognitive empathy appears to suffer from a misunderstanding, and this may be due to the “empathy” epithet attached to it. Let the scientist describe both phenomenon: ” Purely cognitive empathy
, also referred to as perspective taking, mentalizing, or Theory of Mind, concerns the capacity to comprehend the viewpoint and/or state of knowledge of another individual, even if this differs from one’s own. Emotional empathy
concerns the emotional reactions of one individual to the observed experiences of another. Emotional empathy is a multifaceted and multilayered phenomenon which ranges from relatively simple processes such as emotional matching behaviour to more complex events which involve interaction between emotional and cognitive perspective taking systems.” (JL Edgar et al., 2012)
“Over millions of years of evolution, efficient and manifold neurobiological mechanisms have evolved for differentiating hostile from hospitable stimuli and for organizing adaptive responses to these stimuli (Decety, 2010). This integrated set of neural systems is genetically hardwired to enable animals to evaluate and readily respond to threatening or nurturing, unpleasant or pleasant, appetitive or aversive stimuli using specific response patterns that are most adaptive to the particular species and environmental condition.” Decety and Svetlova (2012):
Both systems are believed to be widely presents in mammals and are related to the complexity of organization which a family structure creates within life organism. In this context, males usually outperform females in cognitive empathy and females outperform males in emotional empathy. A parenthesis: – language is believed to be intimately tied to emotional empathy. And “baby-talk” (motherese, scientific term) is a universal language, it is present everywhere in the “human” kingdom. Motherese communicates in a manner where emotions are tuned with pitch, rhythm and tone instead of there usual evolved accent structure
. In motherese, what is communicated is not the significance of the word directly, but the effort to create a future association in the child’s brain, and this using one of the best learning tools possible, repetition. Children respond innately to pitch and tone. In the primitive man, language was mostly thought by the female…this is one skill where emotional performance was a competitive advantage. Further, this “Motherese” interaction is also responsible for developing the spectrum of emotion in the infant. Emotions need learning and training
, and biologically, the differentiation or specialization of sex re-leagued this role to females. This is why the female brain is preferentially wired, the connectome structure, for emotional empathy (Ingalhalikar et al., 2014). But recent changes in family organization tends to delegate emotional training in children to the pharmaceutical industry, school “law enforcement” and the internet, including video games…
Living creatures whom can express the hormones linked to the reflex of emotional empathy have higher tone.
“Oscillations of delta, theta, and alpha ranges could be found in all vertebrates but there is an important distinction between reptiles, lower mammals and humans in what frequency dominates in the scalp EEG. Alpha is the dominant frequency in adult humans
, while theta dominates in the EEG of lower mammals (Sainsbury, 1998) and delta in the reptilian EEG (Gaztelu et al., 1991; Gonzalez et al., 1999).”
As brain wave oscillations of the Beta frequency are highly active in mammals, they are very low in reptilian. Langard et al. (2006) explains, concerning an empathic test on mice: ‘”our findings are consistent with the perception-action model of empathy proposed by Preston and de Waal (1), both in the automatic priming of somatic responses in a state similar to that of the attended object and in the modulating effects of familiarity and similarity of experience between subject and object.” as observed under the following conditions: “…Mice tested in dyads and given an identical noxious stimulus displayed increased pain behaviors with statistically greater co-occurrence, effects dependent on visual observation. When familiar mice were given noxious stimuli of different intensities, their pain behavior was influenced by their neighbor’s status bidirectionally. Finally, observation of a cage-mate in pain altered pain sensitivity of an entirely different modality, suggesting that nociceptive mechanisms in general are sensitized.”
This was a step forward in debunking the pretentious belief that only humans, being God’s masterpiece according to Christians, had Empathy. And contrary to popular belief, Empathy is not a moral construct, but a biological survival reflex. In the fight or flight behavioral choice, cognitive empathy is the first mechanism to be neuro-alerted. It quickly determines if a new set of information possess a threat or opportunity
(e.g. for food) or necessitates an action of protection or collaboration
. It then either, respectively switches to either the cruel, sadistic, aggressive spectrum, or to the Emotional Empathy reflex. A problem with the recent societal culture of feminism
, the current “cultural revolution”, is the risky proposition of offering overly redundant experiences of Emotional Empathy to the general population through tools such as News Television media, where the audience is being continuously taxed along Emotional Reflexes, so as to effect Mass Emotional Empathy Training…it is destructive to the balance of the brain, it creates a state, which psychologists refer to as “heightened emotional instability
We are switching from a Cognitive IQ based civilization to an Emotional driven civilization.
Yet, abuse of the affective spectrum is very useful as a strategy of mind control. It is a preferred tool of female leadership, females whom outperforms males in the Emotional and Narcissistic spectrum. In a context of competition between women, a status challenge, women will rarely confront. Competition potential outcomes are usually quickly determined on site, and interaction avoided with females most often surrendering to the dominant female. Then, consensus is created by a repertoire of mimicry, which is related to emotionalism, mimicry, emotional empathy.
Women’s “status seeking competitive strategies” are mainly, according to Joyce F Benenson (2013)
: “From early childhood onward, girls compete using strategies that minimize the risk of retaliation and reduce the strength of other girls. Girls’ competitive strategies include avoiding direct interference with another girl’s goals, disguising competition, competing overtly only from a position of high status in the community, enforcing equality within the female community and socially excluding other girls
Further, Tracy Vaillancourt (2013)
: “Indirect aggression includes behaviours such as criticizing a competitor’s appearance, spreading rumours about a person’s sexual behaviour and social exclusion. Human females have a particular proclivity for using indirect aggression, which is typically directed at other females, especially attractive and sexually available females, in the context of intrasexual competition for mates. Indirect aggression is an effective intrasexual competition strategy. It is associated with a diminished willingness to compete on the part of victims and with greater dating and sexual behaviour among those who perpetrate the aggression
As for the kind of aggression women of higher sub-clinical psychopathic intensity such as females in positions of authority, Ana Seara-Cardoso, Helene Dolberg, Craig Neumann, Jonathan P. Roiser, Essi Viding (2013)
propose: "Research so far indicates that emotional and personality correlates of psychopathy such as glibness, grandiosity, lack of empathic concern are akin across genders, but similarities in behavioral correlates, such as criminal behavior and type of aggression, seem to be less consistent (see Verona & Vitale, 2006, for a review). It has been suggested that differences found across genders are mainly differential expressions of the same underlying construct (Nicholls & Petrila, 2005), and that the same personality traits may confer risk for different forms of behavior for women versus men (Verona, Sprague, & Javdani, 2012)"
Psychology has created two main sub-groups of psychopaths, those which are characterized as operating Instrumental Violence (Group 1) and those whom uses Reactive Violence (Group 2). Instrumental violence is manipulative and indirect, while reactive violence is obviously direct and confrontational. Women score higher at instrumental violence than men.
And, need I remind, people in positions of authority
, dominant characters, both females and males, score higher than average on The Dark Triad traits of personality.
Need I recall the reader of the Center for Disease Control (CDC) analysis, whose own data, determined, against popular beliefs, that women are violent in partner relationships, and that they are more often, than men, the first instigators of physical aggravated assault against their partner. That female bisexual persons are more violent in partner relationships than either heterosexual, or exclusively homosexual, men. Against the backdrop of the Main Stream Media and Washington DC attempting to portray females as inoffensive, peaceful, loving caring beings incapable of violence and never competitive but only cooperative…It should be difficult to ignore that the last few paragraphs, based on scientific literature, may bring down the Leadership proposed Em-pathetically forcefully induced naive conception of women as innocent beings in need of persistent protection…
for Feminists who pretend they want to destroy the condescending values of Patriarchy, it appears a Paradox to call for laws of exception for their sex all the time.
Lastly, one must make himself familiar, if at least it has not already intuitively been understood, that all status dominance challenge carry sexual connotations, or undertones, as indirect as they may be. Dominance in human relationships always has a sexual dominance/submission dimension…if this point is neglected in decision-making and analysis of the workplace environment, it is a great mistake.
Are all women leaders monsters? No, of course not. But nor are all men leaders. But Feminist (as a socio-political proposition) leadership is Toxic. And what about regular male employees who score average on psychological traits of the Dark Triad, males who don’t carry above normal dominant features but can be very competent in their field, are they also ALL monsters? So why address the problem of harassment, aggression in the office/work place as a prevalent and “male only” initiated model. Surprisingly, in reality, meaning out of the scope of the fictional construct of women on TV and other media, women are attracted preferably to men who are both more narcissistic and more dishonest than average…this is true when they either seek a mate, or someone to associate for other endeavors, such as business associations. Narcissism and dishonesty are characteristics where leaders, men and women, outperform the general population. This should assist in anticipating that the office will continue to have male leaders, or women leaders, who score high on the Dark Triad Traits. What are women teaching these latest generation of men leaders…how to better camouflage their personality traits. In the highly competitive field of finance, both women and men with strong dominant personality profiles excelled in deception during the 2000 decade of real estate and financial debacle. Therefore, in the Emotional Empathy Training movements they are two distinct yet complementary routes: one has as its principal goal to modify not the essence of male competitiveness, with its core in psychopathy, in terms of callousness, or glibness, etc…but to modify the appearance of this trait by expressing it in a more feminine way, meaning indirectly. This is easy, since people with higher Emotional/social skills are better actors…that is they can more easily fake emotions. So, in fact, these are just acting classes, which the new generation of male leaders are happy to participate in. Secondly, for non-leader males, the somewhat “beta” non-dominant profile males, Emotional Empathy Training is simply classes in total submissiveness, where anything which could be disagreeably perceived by any women, in or out of context, must be censured so “beta” females can increase their level of abusive narcissistic delusional elation and over-confidence in the work place.
Because feminists are not revolutionaries, as they often promote themselves, but encrusted in the leadership, and submit to authority more easily then men,…they are the best tool for the upper class, establishment and leadership to maintain and consolidate their position of hegemony.
Because I, for one, know very well that the current spectacle is of the same infected breed as that of “Hate laws”…where, in this case, the target of constraining behavioral laws that will be abusive will not really be aimed at the high hierarchical individuals who could abuse their power, but the regular male employee who has never bothered anyone, but will now be obligated to demonstrate absolute submissiveness to the Office PC Police…that is the reality, this is what awaits us, yet again.
Paradoxically, women in the hierarchy will often tolerate sexual misconduct in the office from dominant males in the organization as long as it benefits them and the organization…even if there is an innocent victim (male or female), call it collateral damage, once in a while…that is the “pragmatism” of female leadership…as is Feminist Mob Justice.
And, incredibly, in this whole discourse, not one bit of attention was given to women aggressors
, whether their victims were males or females…yes, incredible. But it’s not the first time that the Main Stream Media and Washington DC betrays us males.
All of you should read the Canadian Judge’s ruling in a recent Canadian case, COURT FILE No.: Toronto 4817 998 15-75006437 : Her Majesty The Queen Vs Jian Ghomeshi. In front of the worst of accusations, Ghomeshi was hanged in public, with women newscasters vomiting righteousness over Canadian Television programming for hours on end. Yet, the conclusion of the Trial judge was that, in the end, the witnesses had no credibility. Yet, feminists went on saying it was again an injustice and they stood by for all the “women victims of male sexual violence…”. In the debate of sexual misconduct, feminists have lost all credibility, and no one in our leadership is making any intelligent contribution in this exchange either. Women have to start understanding who they really are, and how they evolve in social contexts; male leadership has to stop trying to please feminists by surrendering fundamental rights of men and spoiling women with unjust legislation, and financial bubbles, bias against men
In Canada, the justice system was demonstrated, by a scientific research, to show a 98% positive bias towards women (a sample of research had a window of 65 to 98% bias towards women), yet, to feminists, this is not enough, they want more for women…What does this tell you in terms of genetically rooted delusional intensity, of psychological balance, in terms of judgement and fairness of women…
In the current political “debate” over the allegations of sexual “misconduct” of a Federal Senate seat, the most zealous critics have expressed that “…the allegations alone are serious enough that the Candidate should never be allowed to be a servant of the “People”…”…This is the new Feminist Mob Justice at its best…is this where President Trump wants to lead us?…satisfy feminists so he can get all the goodies he wants, like his irresponsible tax bill, passed?
Laws meant to castrate men who have done nothing wrong, and won’t, by incompetent, unconstitutional laws that will regulate work place dynamics with a 100% positive bias towards women, because, in some cases, some men have acted irresponsibly, or sometimes illegally, abused their power. What about women? They never commit aggression, they never abuse their power, they never bully in a work environment…? I am sure of that, as they are no female pedophiles, I guess, and no maternal infanticides, and no Female pimps, rapists, criminal offenders…no women involved in child pornography rings…No, not in our world…Not in America, Not in the great insightful eyes of the Main Stream Media…women are all “Good, naive and innocent…and need Super Males, Super Cops, to protect them…”.
Once in a while, one comes across a small jewel in Academia, and if Paulhus and Williams work is Monumental, Isabelle Engeler and Priya Raghubir piece in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology: Do men Overestimate or Women under-report Their Sexual Intentions? (2017) is a must, and unavoidable if one has the ambition to reform the workplace. It will help understand miscommunications, mis-signalling, miscues and mis-interpretation between the sexes in the context of workplace sexual misconduct and sexual interpersonal interactions. This text unveils some core mechanisms and informs anyone with the goal to modify the work environment in a manner fair to all.The text comes to the conclusion, amongst other observations, that under their testing conditions, that both men and women underreport their own sexual intentions, that men overestimate women’s sexual intentions and women underestimate men’s sexual intentions…this alone is enough to warrant work place “reformers” attention. Is this due to delusional mechanisms, social desirability bias, or brain structures misaligned communication features…the door is open. But, in this context, an intelligent behaviour is not blaming the other party for misgivings and shortcomings, finger pointing and all; but rather trying to understand more deeply what could be at the source of frequent “misfiring” social performance, since in ideal world, communication should have no frictional bias.Let’s make a short example, without blaming one party over the other, without pushing responsibility on one side more than on the other.Two co-workers, one man and one woman, are sent on a project abroad. They only know each other superficially, have not had the opportunity to really work together except for short group meetings, etc…they know each other from a distance, but have had an effect on each other. He has found he appealing, intelligent , witty, etc…she has found he presents himself well, looks serious, responsible, dedicated, maybe ambitious, but in a good way.Now, during their travel, one night after work, to celebrate their on-going business success, which got them to develop quickly a good complicity, trusty relationship, they are efficient and complementary. They decide to go to a nice restaurant with a very relaxed atmosphere, a beautiful terrace with a beautiful view, they drink a little bit, and she starts to confide on her personal life. She is more telling than inquisitive, already knows he is single, while she is married. She believe this guy is a great candidate for a business friendship. She starts to elaborate about her own marriage difficulties, though she doesn’t have children yet, the discussion starts with humour and slips in more confident terms…and then “woops”, out of nowhere, in a moment of laughter, she confides she has not had sex with her husband for two months… That something is not going right with her husband. Her only intention is to have a good hearing ear, to relax and this guy looks trustworthy, etc…But he may well interpret this intimate comment as something else, especially since he did find her attractive.And now, let’s imagine, that when they leave the restaurant, she helps him put his coat on, and as he slips his arms into the sleeves, she gives him a warm and affectionate tap on the arms while she is behind him. Nothing more…just a sign she feels good, relax…Yet, they have drank a bit , he feels good also, and has liked his evening, is being increasingly seduced by this women, who has done nothing else but treat him as a friend…They go to the hotel, and doing so, they go on talking, confiding…and she increasingly looks at him in the eyes, as to get affirmation of their new found complicity, their new friendship, she feels she has established trust. Then, at the door of her room, they go on talking a bit…and as they get ready to go there on way, to say goodnight, he just gets closer and kiss her on the mouth. Then the nightmare begins, she freezes, is shocked, surprised, says nothing…gets into her room, closes the door and suddenly feels betrayed…READ THE ARTICLE.
The work place backlash, which also affects negatively a majority of men, and creates negative spillover’s over all of society is principally due to “Emotional Intelligence”, an inadequate scientific theory with misleading terminology, has been increasingly and dominantly used as the main hiring candidate criteria for employment. While this may create a more “Agreeable” work environment for women, it is at the source of increasing fraudulent and toxic activity and behavior in the workplace.
Here, take the time to read : “Will get fooled again: Emotionally intelligent people are easily duped by high-stakes deceivers
”; by Alysha Baker, Leanne ten Brinke and Stephen Porter (2012);Legal and Criminological Psychology.
The most intriguing conclusion of this work, is that people with Higher Emotional/social skills as captured by an Social Ability psychological test have demonstrated a very poor capacity to detect deceit, yet have a greater ability to deceive…Most feminists would either refute this scientific affirmation, and others may call it a paradox; yet when one knows women, this makes perfect sense, it is self-evident. May I remind you, if you suffer from some kind of personality trait naiveté, that women, on average, score higher than men in Emotional skill/ability.
You want to really talk about these matters, I am up to the challenge. You want to get ready…go to social science class, but avoid anything which is written by either a female or male feminist, because it is not science, nor is the theory of Emotional intelligence. Read about status seeking, psychological personality traits (especially the work of L. Paulhus: The Dark Triad Traits, The Dark Tetrad Traits)
. Debunk the Emotional Intelligence crap. Emotions are an endocrine evolution system. They give tone to actions and metabolisms. They are tied to personality traits. They do affect performance, and some people do show greater skills at controlling, moderating, utilizing their own emotions and those of others, but this is a skill, it is not intelligence. Performance is the result of a set of Intellectual factors captured by IQ and emotional and social skills captured by personality traits. Strong leaders are characterized by high performance in taboo personality traits such as sub-clinical Narcissism, Psychopathy, Machiavelism and even Sadism…leaders, male and female alike, have a good look at yourselves in the mirror before climbing on the moral bandwagon! Debunk this view that women are always victims and men always predators…it’s the biggest of lies…stop being retarded
And don’t pass corrupted unjust new laws (to manage the work space) for a subject your delusional reflexes prevents you from understanding at all, but your political ambitions guides you to.
Bibliography : The Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy
; Delroy L. Paulhus * and Kevin M. Williams – Journal of Research in Personality (2002) The Dark Triad of Personality: A 10 Year Review
; Adrian Furnham1, Steven C. Richards, and Delroy L. Paulhus; Social and Personality Psychology Compass 7/3 (2013): 199–216, 10.1111/spc3.12018 Hippocampal Theta: a Sensory-inhibition Theory of Function
; Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, Vol: 22, Issue: 2, Page: 237-241; (1998) Robert S. Saisbury Motivation, emotion, and their inhibitory control mirrored in brain oscillations
; Gennady G. Knyazev – Neuroscience and Behavioral Reviews (2006) EEG delta oscillations as a correlate of basic homeostatic and motivational processes
; Gennady G. Knyazev – Neuroscience and Behavioral Reviews, (2011) Social Desirability Bias: A Neglected Aspect of Validity Testing
; Maryon F. King and Gordon C. Bruner; Psychology & Marketing Vol. 17(2):79–103 (February 2000) Staying alive: Evolution, culture, and women’s intrasexual aggression
; Anne Campbell, BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES (1999) 22, 203–252 Status-Driven Risk Taking: Another “Dark” Personality?
; Beth A. Visser, Julie A. Pozzebon and Andrea M. Reina-Tamayo; Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science / Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement; (2014), Vol. 46, No. 4, 485–496 Minimization of Male Suffering: Social Perception of Victims and Perpetrators of Opposite-Sex Sexual Coercion
; Sexuality Research and Social Policy, Anna Magda Studzinska1,2 & Denis Hilton (2016) Emotional intelligence, Machiavellianism and emotional manipulation: Does EI have a dark side?
; Elizabeth J. Austin, Daniel Farrelly , Carolyn Black, Helen Moore; Personal and Individual Differences (2007) The Fight for the Alpha Position: Channeling Status Competition in Organisation
s; by C. H. LOCH, M. YAZIJI and C. LANGEN (2000), INSEAD R&D The affective and cognitive empathic nature of the dark triad of personality
, Michael Wai & Niko Tiliopoulos; Personality and Individual Differences (2012) A meta-analytic review of the Dark Triad–intelligence connection
; Ernest H. O’Boyle, Donelson Forsyth, George C. Banks, Paul A. Story; Journal of Research in Personality (2013) The Dark Triad of personality and unethical behavior at different times of day
; Karolin Roeser, Victoria E. McGregor, Sophia Stegmaier, Johanna Mathew, Andrea Kübler & Adrian Meule; Personality and Individual Differences (2016) Different routes to limited empathy in the sexes: Examining the links between the Dark Triad and empathy
; Peter K. Jonason, Minna Lyons, Emily J. Bethell & Rahael Ross; Personality and Individual Differences (2013) The Dark Triad at work: How toxic employees get their way
; Peter K. Jonason, Sarah Slomski & Jamie Partyka; Personality and Individual Differences (2012) Will get fooled again: Emotionally intelligent people are easily duped by high-stakes deceivers
; by Alysha Baker, Leanne ten Brinke and Stephen Porter; (2012) Legal and Criminological Psychology Do human females use aggression as an intrasexual competition strategy?
; Tracy Vaillancourt; Philosopic Transactions of the British Society B (2013) Empathy, morality and psychopathic traits in women
; Ana Seara-Cardoso, Helene Dolberg, Craig Neumann, Jonathan P. Roiser, Essi Viding; Personality and Individual Differences, 55 (3) pp. 328-333 (2013) Psychopathy in Women: Assessment, Manifestations, and Etiology
; Verona, E., & Vitale, J. ; (2006) – In C. J. Patrick (Ed.), Handbook of psychopath (pp. 415-436). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press Gender and psychopathy: an overview of important issues and introduction to the special issue ; Nicholls, T. L. and Petrila, J. ; (2005), Behavioral Science and the Law, 23: 729-741 Gender and factor-level interactions in psychopathy: Implications for self-directed violence risk and borderline personality disorder symptoms
;By Verona, Edelyn,Sprague, Jenessa,Javdani, Shabnam; Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, Vol 3(3), Jul (2012), 247-262 Putting together phylogenetic and ontogenetic perspectives on empathy
; Jean Decetya & Margarita Svetlova; Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience (2012) The neuroevolution of empathy ; Jean Decety ; The Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (2011) Different routes to limited empathy in the sexes: Examining the links between the Dark Triad and empathy
; Peter K. Jonason, Minna Lyons , Emily J. Bethell & Rahael Ross; Personal and Individual Differences (2013) Towards a neuroscience of empathy: Ontogeny, phylogeny, brain mechanisms, context and psychopathology
; Cristina Gonzalez-Liencres, Simone G. Shamay-Tsooryc, Martin Brünea; Neuroscience and Behavioral Science (2013) Two systems for empathy: a double dissociation between emotional and cognitive empathy in inferior frontal gyrus versus ventromedial prefrontal lesions
; Simone G. Shamay-Tsoory, Judith Aharon-Peretz and Daniella Perry ; Brain – A Journal of Neurology (2009) No Evidence for Emotional Empathy in Chickens Observing Familiar Adult Conspecifics
; Joanne L. Edgar, Elizabeth S. Paul, Lauren Harris, Sarah Penturn & Christine J. Nicol ; PLoS ONE (2012) 7(2): e31542. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031542 Sex differences in the structural connectome of the human brain
; Madhura Ingalhalikara, Alex Smitha, Drew Parkera, Theodore D. Satterthwaiteb, Mark A. Elliottc, Kosha Ruparelb, Hakon Hakonarsond, Raquel E. Gurb, Ruben C. Gurb, and Ragini Vermaa; PNAS (2014)
Even as I feel deep remorse about how I treated some people in my life, I cannot confess to the accusations that are inaccurate. What I do confess is that I was emotionally thoughtless in the way I treated those I dated and tried to date.
I was demanding on dates and in personal affairs. I would keep lobbying for what I wanted. I was critical and dismissive. Some [people] I cared about went along with things I wanted to avoid my disappointment or moods. I ought to have been more respectful and responsive with the [people] in my life. To them I say, you deserved much better from me.
Okay, I have been debating posting this here for a few months because it is a complicated story and a friend who uses this sub is involved in the story. Pal, if you find this: I’m so sorry. I don’t know what else to do. I’m having such a hard time.
Me: I have social anxiety, depression, a chronic illness and I am queer and a vegetarian feminist (the horror!!)
This takes place over about 3 – 4 years. I’m sorry if the timeline isn’t totally clear.
I have been with my boyfriend for almost three years now. Our relationship is pretty solid but we have had a few “big fights” and hiccups. He is friends with this group of people who’ve known each other for years and years. For the most part, they were all “gifted students” and placed in special classes in high school. When I met my boyfriends friends I was nervous and they were not very accepting of me to be honest. It took my forever to make a space for myself in their friend group, but I will admit I don’t make it easy. One of the first times I met one guy, who we will call Raymond (M25) (the source of most of the problems in this post) I straight up asked him if he is a misogynist. NOW, in my defense I was really drunk, and nervous and my boyfriend, Jake, had told me that Raymond was a misogynist. Anyways, we kind of blew by it and things seemed okay with the group but things weren’t perfect. For example, the first time I hung out with them without my boyfriend they wouldn’t make room for me to sit in the circle where they were playing games even though I had tapped on their shoulders and asked them to move politely. They didn’t even look at me. I had to go and sit on the outside by myself until my boyfriend got there. Cried my eyes out on the ride home.
So, there is a girl named Abigail (F26) who my boyfriend briefly had a thing with a few months before we dated. He invited her to a party and didn’t really spend time with her (which was obviously bad of him) and that was the extent of their relationship. When Jake and I started, dating, Abigail started dating Raymond. There was always some weird tension between the four of us, and I caught Abigail staring at me a lot. About a year and a half ago there was this party and I stayed home and I found out that at the party my boyfriend told one of his guy friends not to lead on a girl he was seeing. Abigail was there and heard this and suddenly implied that Jake led her on – in front of everyone. When I heard about that the next day I texted her and said we should probably talk about this because it makes me uncomfortable. I told her I wasn’t mad but I just thought it would be better for everyone, including Raymond, to talk it out. At first she didn’t respond but I texted her again re-explaining that I just wanted to clear the air and make nice and she agreed to go for coffee. We met the same day and had a great talk! We cleared the air and she explained she had never had feelings for Jake and that she just met that he hurt her as a friend. I still felt a bit weird but I figured I was being silly and she was with Raymond so whatever. We spent the next few hours talking about other things and got along really well. For the next few months we hung out a lot – went shopping, did crafts together, ect. It was great.
Okay, now for the meat the problem. Raymond (who is Asian) has some pretty controversial views…some examples: 1. Black women repulse him 2. Black people are biologically inferior 3. Jewish people don’t chose whether or not they are Jewish and some Jewish groups are just genetically more intelligent and a superior race of humans 4. Women should have sex with men who cat call them because it would prevent less rape 5. Has openly said that he believes women should not be in the workforce and should be at home tending to family and children
Now, my boyfriends friends have this word that sounds and looks like the word “fag” but they say they aren’t saying “fag” because it isn’t actually “fag”. Think of how kids will say “frick” or “fudge” when they want to say “fuck”. They do not know that I am queer but I had expressed MANY times that this upset me and I wasn’t comfortable with it but they insisted that it was no biggie. A bunch of them stopped but Raymond didn’t. We have this group chat of about 25 people and one day he used it in the group chat and my boyfriend insisted I say in the group chat that it made me uncomfortable and so I did, and Jake had my back. Raymond then called me that name. I had a panic attack. I went to Europe that summer and got some gifts for two of my closer girlfriends from that group and looked for something for Abigail but couldn’t find anything I felt was right. When I came back from Europe Abigail was so fucking cold to me and my boyfriend. She would mutter under her breath about us when we talked about school projects we were excited about, roll her eyes a lot and one time Raymond and Jake got in a fight and she mouthed “HA!” To Jake afterwards. In the last two years I have asked her to get coffee with me dozens of times and she just never answers my texts. She has been so mean and I didn’t understand why. Anyways, the tension in the group was mounting – Raymond stopped using the word for a while but I found out that people in the group kept discussing how I was “censoring” him. This is probably the biggest point of tension in my relationship with Jake. I’m not the fucking government censoring him – I ASKED him to stop saying it because I THOUGHT I was a friend who they respected. About six months later Jake insisted I apologize to Raymond and for some reason I also had to apologize to his best friend of 20 years, Cam. I sent Raymond this apology letter, basically saying I’m sorry that I brought it up the way I did and had I known that it would be this big a deal I would have done it more personally but I still stand by my convictions. He accepted the apology – sort of. He said I didn’t have a right to say that because I “haven’t been a member of the group long enough to get to have a say”. I just ignored that and asked him about Abigail and he says she’s just busy and that she isn’t mad. She still ignores my texts.
Fast-forward about nine months. I am sitting with two friends, Ashley and her boyfriend Mark (originally friends with Jake from high school). I explain to them what happened with Abigail (not everything with Raymond though) and they can barley believe it. They both think Abigail is really nice, sweet and friendly and basically a saint. They believe that I wouldn’t lie about that but also are shocked to hear it. Suddenly, Abigail does like this 180 and is SO chummy with me! For example, I got in a fight with Jake when we all went out to eat one night (about 20 of us). I had been drinking and Ashley and Mark drove me home. Abigail insisted on driving with us and gave me a long, tight hug when they dropped me off, and rubbed my back. She texted me most of the night, trying to cheer me up. For the most part, she has been good but its mostly around other people. We still haven’t hung out one on one since before I went to Europe, almost 2 years ago. I asked Ashley and Mark if they mentioned it to her and they said no. I have no idea wtf happened.
Okay, fast forward to NOW. Raymond has been using his cute little “fag” word a lot again, and antagonizes me about being a vegetarian; which never used to be an issue. For example, we had a big group potluck and I wasn’t sure was vegetarian and I pointed to baked mac and cheese and said “do you know what is in this?” And he snorted and said: “I think its grated dog liver.” I just wanted to know if they had added bacon bits or not. The big problem is he sometimes does this in front of other people and no one mentions it. At Xmas he was being critical of our friends, sisters boyfriend and he said in front of everyone: “I know what I want to call him, but the word makes Robyn uncomfortable”. Everyone went silent as I sat there and one girl giggled uncontrollably and kept saying “awkward laughter, awkward laughter.” Things like this have happened often enough for it to not be a one off, he makes many comments in the group chat (jokes about rape, mocks me for being a vegetarian). He went on a rant about how Rey (Starwars) is bullshit and that they added her just to appease feminists...everyone just puts up with it. A few people have said they think its a phase.
So, after the Jian Ghomeshi trial I posted about it on Facebook and a bunch of my boyfriends friends commented on it, saying that I didn’t know the article I had posted satire (I did know it was satire, I’m not a fucking idiot….) and then one of his friends, who lives in a different province, posted a huge comment saying that what I had posted was completely ignorant. THEN he messaged me on Facebook basically telling me that I had no idea how the legal system works and that I didn’t know what I was talking about and didn’t understand feminism and all this stuff. I totally lost and I FINALLY left that big group chat I mentioned earlier. Well, after I left one of the girls I am friends with added me back because she says that I “post lots of good things”. Well, in the time I was gone Raymond had used his special little “fag” word again. Called me it. I ignored it. Everyone else ignored it. Jake did not. He kicked everyone else out of the chat except for me and him and Raymond later said “that’s what we get for letting a Jew infiltrate our infrastructure.” No one said anything.
It is also vital that I mention Cam. Cam is my boyfriends best friend of about 20 years, as I mentioned before. Cam is pretty hot and cold with this group and does have a good heart. He doesn’t have a filter though, and often said things pretty rude to me. For example, one time we were all talking about young actresses and I went to mention that Kiera Knightly was only 18 in Pride and Prejudice. Cam immediately went: “HA! Cause that’s a good movie!” In the most dismissive, condescending way I have ever heard. Another example, a friend of mine went to LA and she happen to get stoned with Miley Cyrus! I am telling the group this one night, and Cam literally interrupts me and goes “OR we could talk about something that is actually interesting.” I went silent and tried not to cry while everyone else laughed. One of my girlfriends from that group just looked at me sympathetically. A few weeks later (in the summer) this all came to ahead with Cam and some people who felt Cam was being unfair to me were drunk and insisted we talk. I didn’t want to when we were drunk and started crying. Jake and I left and the other apologized for forcing it. A few days later Cam and I met up and talked things out. It wasn’t fantastic but now I feel comfortable enough with him to call him out when he dismisses me but he has been a lot better to me with the exception of one instant:
At Halloween I was upstairs at a house party, alone, and drunk. There was one guy up there who I was talking to VERY briefly. This guy all of a sudden reaches out and grabs my butt. I push him off and say “don’t touch me!” He laughs and shakes his head and pushes me up against the wall, trying to kiss me. No fucking idea who this guy is. Fortunately, I push him off and go get Jake. Jake flips out but this random guys friends say that he was really drunk and on LSD so we had to let to go. I did push him off a stool later on though….Cam asks whats going on and Jake tells him. Cam says that it couldn’t be true because the guy was too out of it do that. Jake asks if Cam thinks I’m making it up and he says no but he also doesn’t think it happened???? I’m pissed obviously. In the morning, Cam texts Jake and apologizes but never apologizes to me.
This group in general is not super feminist. A lot of the girls are, and some have reached out to me for information, or to give me support if one of the guys attack me online. A lot of the guys agree with my feminist views but won’t call themselves feminist. Anyways, all of this wouldn’t be such a big deal if wasn’t for the fact that the guys routinely talk about feminism but refuse to include me in the conversation. Maybe I’m too aggressive, or something but whenever I bring up anything sort of feminist people leave the room. This does not happen with other groups of people. And this group loves talking about politics and social issues….not sure what is happening there. I mean, if you want to talk about feminism why not talk to your friend who is a pretty nice person who also is a feminist…?
I had pretty much not hung out with this group this last month and I can tell they’ve noticed. I’ve been silent in the group chat. I posted twice in a Facebook group we have were we post deals around the city and when I did Raymond remarked on my absence. I came out as queer to two friends in that group and explained what whats about Raymond and the fact this group often uses “gay” as an insult. One of them (the same one who was sympathetic in the Cam/Miley Cyrus situation) was super sympathetic and said she also dislikes Raymond and the other one said it was just a joke and not to worry. Well, I am worried. And I’m fucking PISSED. I want to stay friends with the people I love in this group but I am tired of being treated like I’m not really a part of the group. A few weeks ago we had a party and Jake had to leave early so I left with him even though he said I could stay. As we were leaving many of ouhis friends from this group came up and asked me to stay and even when I was getting in my car to leave they came out and asked me to stay. When Jake and I had a big fight (the night Abigail drove me home with Ashley and Mark) a bunch of the girls (not including Abigail) told me that I am a part of this group and if Jake and I broke up they would keep me around. They said I’m not “just a girlfriend” but that I’m a friend. When I left the group chat a bunch sent me messages asking for my phone number so that they could reach me if I deactivated facebook. I don’t have a ton of friends outside this group but I still feel so resentful that no one cares that Raymond is such a bastard. It breaks my heart that he can talk to me, and to others this way and that no one cares. I was also in the hospital about a year and a half ago, around xmas time. I had posted in that group chat that I was going to be in for a few days while I waited for a minor surgery and if they wanted to visit I would that. Not one did. Now, maybe it was because of Xmas but I had other friends who I didn’t invite come see me and they even brought gifts…I really love some of these people but this is killing me. I’m going crazy with anxiety, not sure what to do. Do I cut them all out?? Do I just let it all go? Am I being overly sensitive? I am letting myself be the victim?
I should mention that most of the people Jake has spoken to about this agree with him and think Raymond is an asshole yet they all tolerate him because they have been friends for so long. I hope this makes some sense. Please ask questions if you need clarification on anything.
TL;DR: Boyfriends friend is not very nice to me. Makes many snide comments and uses offensive language and has controversial (read: sexist and racist) ideas. Not sure if I am an over sensitive baby or if this is reason to stop spending time with these people?
This post is inspired by the online response to the Jian Ghomeshi case recently. When the ruling first came out (which was the first time I even heard of the case lol) I was expecting the SJW/radfem crowd to clam up and just staunchly claim that he did it anyway. That didn't happen.
What really shocked me was the response that seemed to come from everyone - not just the SJW camp. I saw a huge number of comments online basically agreeing that Ghomeshi is an asshole to his women, and thus deserves punishment, but legally he is in the clear.
That got me wondering - why is it such a terrible thing to be an asshole towards a woman who likes you? Especially if we're talking about a man who is an asshole in general. No one is forcing the woman to suck up whatever abuse he throws her way. No one is forcing her to stay with him. She stays because she is attracted to him.
So, I propose that when someone is criticizing a man for being an asshole to his date, his girlfriend, his ONS, whatever, that person is engaging in sexism against men. Here's why.
When someone is an asshole, that's just what they are. That's their personality, and people who hang out with them are probably aware of it. So when he acts like an asshole towards an SO and that SO feels wronged, isn't she essentially demanding a different man in the same man's body? If she doesn't like his personality, she shouldn't date him, and if she likes his body enough to overlook the bad personality, isn't it her personal choice and personal responsibility when he acts in ways she doesn't like? Either situation leaves no room for complaint, let alone some kind of social activism.
It's sexist to demand that a man act a certain way just because of how he looks. It's also sexist to demand that men take responsibility for the attraction that women feel for them. Thus, it's sexist, misandrist, to criticize Chads who cheat on, overlook and otherwise mistreat the women that willingly stay and try to build relationships with them.
CMV. I especially would like the blue pill crowd to give their take on this.
I wasn't sure where to post this, but I thought this would be a good place...
Several years ago, I befriended a nice man. He was kind and considerate. He smiled and said nice things. He dressed well; he was a professional. He was 16 years older than me, but we had mutual friends.
We began "to date," (which meant I would trek to his house for a weekend, and we'd have sex) and within the span of six weeks, the nice man I thought I knew was gone, and in his place was a dark-eyed, cold, sexually abusive, and odd loner. It was all a front. He lived in a hovel, but he always made sure his clothes were ironed. He knew lots of people, but he was not close with anyone. He had fantasies that included BDSM, incest and violence and rape.
I gave my consent for some of it. But not all of it. I didn't want to choke on his penis and vomit. I didn't want the bruises he left on my breasts, neck, and arms. I didn't want to call him "Daddy," and be mocked for it. He made accusations of my character. He berated me. He alternately ran hot and cold, and he befuddled me. We had a safe word, but he didn't listen.
It happened so slowly, so insidiously, and he was very good at turning things around to make me feel like, "Did that just happen? Am I imagining things? I must be the crazy one."
Where did the nice man go? Surely, if he were that kind before, I must be doing something wrong to incur his wrath. If only I could figure out where I had gone wrong, we could fix this. Granted, at the time, I was in an especially emotionally vulnerable state - I had recently broken up with a man I considered the love of my life, I had no where to go, and I was a wreck. I sought solace, and I thought he offered some.
But he knew this, he knew I was vulnerable for he had circled my decaying relationship like a vulture. He waited for the right moment to make his move, and I accepted it. I accepted it. I chose it. I am not his victim, but towards the end, it certainly felt like I was. He was extremely abusive - physically, emotionally, and sexually - and I took it, and then it was like a light bulb turned on, and I left it.
I have no doubt had I gone to the authorities with my injuries and stories, I would have had a case for assault. But I just wanted to get away from him, I didn't want to explain why I'd gotten into the situation. I didn't want to explain my own sexual proclivities or defend myself. I didn't want our mutual friends to know what was happening. I was embarrassed for having fallen for his facade.
I write this to semi-explain why I believe Jian Ghomeshi's alleged victims. I understand the self-doubt and fear that they surely experienced. And the man I was with was a nobody, I can't imagine if he were a nationally beloved radio host with legions of fans who write things like "hell hath no fury...lol" and "fucking cunts only want easy money," as if it is just so easy to come forward with sexual violence allegations. As if it is some get-rich-quick scheme that women do.
I'm sure in the mind of the man I "dated," I am a crazy psycho bitch. He probably has his version of the truth in which I am an idiot or weak or whatever he wants to call me to justify his appallingly poor treatment of me. Just as Jian has his "jilted ex-girlfriend," I am just a caricature of a woman out to ruin a man.
I haven't seen or spoken to him since we broke up, but a few weeks ago, I saw his car in my parking garage at work. Turns out he is working in the building next door. It made my stomach lurge to realize this. I'm just glad I don't have to see his face or hear his words on CBC on a daily basis.
Thanks for reading.