Sadly, I see this in university classes year after year. My male students often report feeling bewildered and silenced by their female peers' relative intolerance, but only in confidence to me (their female professor).
It might be a hot take but I feel like a lot of left leaning or even slightly liberal guys are more in favour of free speech at college campuses than they might lead on in public to not upset girlfriends, wives or potential romantic partners.
In private? I’ve see a ton of guys admit they might agree with more controversial takes on political issues but they don’t want to say it in public. I’m a dude in college right now and I’ve felt the same and seen other young guys my age do it too.
Also, curious, what subject do you teach in? Is it a humanities subject?
Not to make assumptions based on your name, but some of the most disillusioned, confused guys willing to talk this way are non-white/not of European ancestry. I teach in health sciences—and one where these conversations are relevant.
It’s interesting to see that men who identify as being liberal or just even slightly democrat are still as in favour or just as likely to be free speech advocates as much as conservative women. It seems like democrat men appear to be more progressive to appease democrat women, not because they actually believe it. Like in these studies when these guys are asked in private what they actually think with no judgement, they tend to be more free speech absolutist than they lead on in public.
Also, it should be super concerning that women are more censorious of their own side, a lot of the purity testing you see on both sides of the political aisle are what’s destroying American politics.
My dad used to say his dad told him that men were better at getting along with each other than women were because they grew up having to be able to get together enough guys for a pickup baseball game, while women in that era didn't have that formative experience. At this point, though, I don't know how many kids of any gender are playing pickup sports games.
In terms of women feeling compelled to suppress offensive speech, I think women have a nurturing instinct, and sometimes we don't know when or how to turn it off. It can be painful for us when we believe, rightly or wrongly, that controversial speech is somehow putting a vulnerable victim in peril.
Really interesting read! I do think the “3.5 times more tolerant” stat sounds bigger than it is since both numbers are pretty small. Seems like the bigger takeaway is that most people aren’t very tolerant overall, no matter the group.
Yes, I wish the males were more tolerant, but since the numbers aren’t all down in the sub 15% range, “3.5 times more tolerant” is a pretty f-ing big deal.
A more sparse explanation that doesn’t need theories of gendered minds is that hostility to or tolerance of counter-zeitgeist speech follows from wherever a particular demographic is positioned wrt a culture’s power dynamics. Since the left generally, and females in particular, have been in charge of western culture -
publishing, academia, education generally, showbiz, msm, the electorate, dei - for 30 or 40 years, it makes sense for left and female to be more pro-conformism than right and male.
Theories of gendered minds are well-substantiated and should not be avoided. As James Damore correctly explained in his infamous memo… for which he was of course canceled, thereby proving his point and the point articulated in this article.
That may or may not be true. There may, or may not, be gendered minds. I may believe there are, or not believe there are. But my comment was not about any of that: it was simply the remark that the observed left/right male/female attitudes to conformism can also be explained prosaically just by noticing who is in charge: left/right, and male/female.
Needs fewer priors, more available to observation, and is more illuminating. Hence, I think, more useful, and persuasive to others, than theory of mind explanations.
James Damore being cancelled is not evidence against it, of course.
If a child is abandoned by a parent it is most likely to be by the father.
Perhaps females of every species are more attuned to danger than males are for this reason. And people with views that challenge us are innately perceived as more "dangerous."
I suspect it depends in part on what you mean by other side. Men against men, no problem, you know what you are up against. Anybody against women, totally terrifying.
This doesn't surprise me. Perhaps for the same reasons that I tend to gravitate toward males in conversation (and friendship) over women — men tend to not engage in drama and let things go.
“And while left-wing women are stereotypically seen as being uniquely censorial, the reality is that this tendency applies to all groups of women, regardless of ideology.”
*Very* interesting piece.
I’m curious whether you have data for your “all groups of women” strong claim made above, or if in fact you only mean college women.
I.e. have you confirmed that married women are much more censorial?
Or have you merely shown that young unmarried women who choose to go to college are?
In particular, the implicit claim that married women would be more censorial than single liberal men I find dubious. Possible, but dubious.
A thought experiment: Does this piece rise to the level of what James Damore did in his famous treatise that got him cancelled? Absolutely not saying anyone should be cancelled, but is this article as (perceivedly) biased as Damore was claimed to have been. I know it has lots of stats, but people say stats can be used to prove anything. Are its conclusions as toxic as Damore's were claimed to be?
One interesting question is whether women censor more than men, or if genders have different styles of censorship. For example, when it comes to other forms of censorship, such as shouting down speakers or using violence to stop a speaker, are men more likely to censor than women? It's possible that men prefer to censor you personally by punching you in the face, and women prefer to have the government censor you. What does the data show?
Not surprising. I, a lifelong liberal, now find myself quite distrustful of liberals overall. I find them disloyal. That's a blanket statement, because it's the wokes that drove this, but the mindvirus induced good liberals to succumb. I have ex-friends I've known for years who are exes not because I defriended them, but because they defriended me. I'm looking for a long-term partner and have begun to think maybe I would be better off with a conservative man (not *too conservative, I would not be compatible with a Trump fan) because they'll be less likely to blow off a budding relationship over some stupid political point.
It is sexist of you to publish this piece claiming that women are more censorious than men!
You don’t have the lived experience of women, especially LGBTQ++ women or women of color, to be able to make a truthful claim here.
The fact that you consider gender a *binary* and only plot two choices confirms your unacceptable bias here (and you did indeed refer to these as genders, not sexes. For shame, for shame…).
.
.
.
[But I guess for those of us curious about reality and supportive of free speech that it’s a good thing that FIRE was founded by and led by men…]
Without intending to be too simplistic, because the answer is likely complex, I think the reason for the difference may be grounded in physical differences. Historically, men being physically stronger, have enjoyed greater freedom of movement (or less need to be fearful), which translates into a greater desire for liberty, whereas for women, physical safety was paramount, which translates into a preference for security over liberty. I know this is rough, but it’s a starting point for thinking this through.
When I was in college from 2000-2005, I didn’t notice a difference in censoriousness between my male and female peers. Does FIRE have longitudinal data on this?
Also, Cory Clark (psychologist) has done amazing work on this. You guys should consider collaborating with her on this topic, she’d have really good insights. It’d be great to see.
Sadly, I see this in university classes year after year. My male students often report feeling bewildered and silenced by their female peers' relative intolerance, but only in confidence to me (their female professor).
It might be a hot take but I feel like a lot of left leaning or even slightly liberal guys are more in favour of free speech at college campuses than they might lead on in public to not upset girlfriends, wives or potential romantic partners.
In private? I’ve see a ton of guys admit they might agree with more controversial takes on political issues but they don’t want to say it in public. I’m a dude in college right now and I’ve felt the same and seen other young guys my age do it too.
Also, curious, what subject do you teach in? Is it a humanities subject?
100% agree with you.
Not to make assumptions based on your name, but some of the most disillusioned, confused guys willing to talk this way are non-white/not of European ancestry. I teach in health sciences—and one where these conversations are relevant.
It’s interesting to see that men who identify as being liberal or just even slightly democrat are still as in favour or just as likely to be free speech advocates as much as conservative women. It seems like democrat men appear to be more progressive to appease democrat women, not because they actually believe it. Like in these studies when these guys are asked in private what they actually think with no judgement, they tend to be more free speech absolutist than they lead on in public.
Also, it should be super concerning that women are more censorious of their own side, a lot of the purity testing you see on both sides of the political aisle are what’s destroying American politics.
My dad used to say his dad told him that men were better at getting along with each other than women were because they grew up having to be able to get together enough guys for a pickup baseball game, while women in that era didn't have that formative experience. At this point, though, I don't know how many kids of any gender are playing pickup sports games.
In terms of women feeling compelled to suppress offensive speech, I think women have a nurturing instinct, and sometimes we don't know when or how to turn it off. It can be painful for us when we believe, rightly or wrongly, that controversial speech is somehow putting a vulnerable victim in peril.
Really interesting read! I do think the “3.5 times more tolerant” stat sounds bigger than it is since both numbers are pretty small. Seems like the bigger takeaway is that most people aren’t very tolerant overall, no matter the group.
They are at least equal takeaways.
Yes, I wish the males were more tolerant, but since the numbers aren’t all down in the sub 15% range, “3.5 times more tolerant” is a pretty f-ing big deal.
Even 2x is a pretty big deal.
A more sparse explanation that doesn’t need theories of gendered minds is that hostility to or tolerance of counter-zeitgeist speech follows from wherever a particular demographic is positioned wrt a culture’s power dynamics. Since the left generally, and females in particular, have been in charge of western culture -
publishing, academia, education generally, showbiz, msm, the electorate, dei - for 30 or 40 years, it makes sense for left and female to be more pro-conformism than right and male.
Theories of gendered minds are well-substantiated and should not be avoided. As James Damore correctly explained in his infamous memo… for which he was of course canceled, thereby proving his point and the point articulated in this article.
That may or may not be true. There may, or may not, be gendered minds. I may believe there are, or not believe there are. But my comment was not about any of that: it was simply the remark that the observed left/right male/female attitudes to conformism can also be explained prosaically just by noticing who is in charge: left/right, and male/female.
Needs fewer priors, more available to observation, and is more illuminating. Hence, I think, more useful, and persuasive to others, than theory of mind explanations.
James Damore being cancelled is not evidence against it, of course.
Why women more than men?
Maybe look to biology and other animals.
Mama Bears.
If a child is abandoned by a parent it is most likely to be by the father.
Perhaps females of every species are more attuned to danger than males are for this reason. And people with views that challenge us are innately perceived as more "dangerous."
It's instinctual.
Social instinct? Uh-oh...
I suspect it depends in part on what you mean by other side. Men against men, no problem, you know what you are up against. Anybody against women, totally terrifying.
This doesn't surprise me. Perhaps for the same reasons that I tend to gravitate toward males in conversation (and friendship) over women — men tend to not engage in drama and let things go.
“And while left-wing women are stereotypically seen as being uniquely censorial, the reality is that this tendency applies to all groups of women, regardless of ideology.”
*Very* interesting piece.
I’m curious whether you have data for your “all groups of women” strong claim made above, or if in fact you only mean college women.
I.e. have you confirmed that married women are much more censorial?
Or have you merely shown that young unmarried women who choose to go to college are?
In particular, the implicit claim that married women would be more censorial than single liberal men I find dubious. Possible, but dubious.
A thought experiment: Does this piece rise to the level of what James Damore did in his famous treatise that got him cancelled? Absolutely not saying anyone should be cancelled, but is this article as (perceivedly) biased as Damore was claimed to have been. I know it has lots of stats, but people say stats can be used to prove anything. Are its conclusions as toxic as Damore's were claimed to be?
One interesting question is whether women censor more than men, or if genders have different styles of censorship. For example, when it comes to other forms of censorship, such as shouting down speakers or using violence to stop a speaker, are men more likely to censor than women? It's possible that men prefer to censor you personally by punching you in the face, and women prefer to have the government censor you. What does the data show?
Not surprising. I, a lifelong liberal, now find myself quite distrustful of liberals overall. I find them disloyal. That's a blanket statement, because it's the wokes that drove this, but the mindvirus induced good liberals to succumb. I have ex-friends I've known for years who are exes not because I defriended them, but because they defriended me. I'm looking for a long-term partner and have begun to think maybe I would be better off with a conservative man (not *too conservative, I would not be compatible with a Trump fan) because they'll be less likely to blow off a budding relationship over some stupid political point.
It is sexist of you to publish this piece claiming that women are more censorious than men!
You don’t have the lived experience of women, especially LGBTQ++ women or women of color, to be able to make a truthful claim here.
The fact that you consider gender a *binary* and only plot two choices confirms your unacceptable bias here (and you did indeed refer to these as genders, not sexes. For shame, for shame…).
.
.
.
[But I guess for those of us curious about reality and supportive of free speech that it’s a good thing that FIRE was founded by and led by men…]
Without intending to be too simplistic, because the answer is likely complex, I think the reason for the difference may be grounded in physical differences. Historically, men being physically stronger, have enjoyed greater freedom of movement (or less need to be fearful), which translates into a greater desire for liberty, whereas for women, physical safety was paramount, which translates into a preference for security over liberty. I know this is rough, but it’s a starting point for thinking this through.
Simpler than that. Cheap sperm, expensive eggs. Basics, always the basics.
When I was in college from 2000-2005, I didn’t notice a difference in censoriousness between my male and female peers. Does FIRE have longitudinal data on this?
Also, Cory Clark (psychologist) has done amazing work on this. You guys should consider collaborating with her on this topic, she’d have really good insights. It’d be great to see.