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.
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.
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.
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.
I'm all with FIRE, that free speech is of paramount importance. I even consider it as important as oxygen. Free speech is what keeps psychopathy at bay. Nobody needs to get hurt, we simply need to make the conditions unfavorable for psychopaths. And that would be a free speech society. All speech must be free. Even at the expense of people crying "fire" in a crowded cinema, even at the expense of butt hurting someone, all speech must be free. We can agree to that as individual sovereigns, when we declare that status.
I could say this whole thing is true for everything but gun rights. I find gun rights activist to be highly intolerant of different points view and often its biggest adherence are men. But I have also noticed this tendency to say males in general becoming the alpha because they dominate the group whereas alpha females often are the ones who create a judgment that other people then have to live by. So for the men it is who’s the toughest, but for the women, it is about applying a right and wrong and compelling people to follow it and judging them harshly if they do not.
Obviously, this does not hold for everyone as I am a woman, and I tend to think more like a man and I love hearing people who have different points of view, and I am not fond of judging people at all. In fact, I found it hard when younger to be in groups that were just a bunch of women because I don’t understand the dynamics very well since I don’t think that way myself. Luckily most of the women I know today are not like that, but I have observed that pattern.
To summarize, though, I think what we are seeing is there are masculine and feminine characteristics that both sexes can have. And both the needing to be the toughest to dominate and being the most judgmental to dominate are both toxic masculine and feminine traits. There are also masculine and feminine traits that we can all have that are powerful without the harshness of judgment and condemnation or needing to be the tough guy.
The thing about gun rights people is that every single "common sense" gun control proposal involves arresting tens of millions of people who haven't actually harmed anyone, and imprisoning them all for at least ten years each. So, yes, it's perhaps understandable that gun rights people find most gun control discourse unacceptable.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I'm all with FIRE, that free speech is of paramount importance. I even consider it as important as oxygen. Free speech is what keeps psychopathy at bay. Nobody needs to get hurt, we simply need to make the conditions unfavorable for psychopaths. And that would be a free speech society. All speech must be free. Even at the expense of people crying "fire" in a crowded cinema, even at the expense of butt hurting someone, all speech must be free. We can agree to that as individual sovereigns, when we declare that status.
I could say this whole thing is true for everything but gun rights. I find gun rights activist to be highly intolerant of different points view and often its biggest adherence are men. But I have also noticed this tendency to say males in general becoming the alpha because they dominate the group whereas alpha females often are the ones who create a judgment that other people then have to live by. So for the men it is who’s the toughest, but for the women, it is about applying a right and wrong and compelling people to follow it and judging them harshly if they do not.
Obviously, this does not hold for everyone as I am a woman, and I tend to think more like a man and I love hearing people who have different points of view, and I am not fond of judging people at all. In fact, I found it hard when younger to be in groups that were just a bunch of women because I don’t understand the dynamics very well since I don’t think that way myself. Luckily most of the women I know today are not like that, but I have observed that pattern.
To summarize, though, I think what we are seeing is there are masculine and feminine characteristics that both sexes can have. And both the needing to be the toughest to dominate and being the most judgmental to dominate are both toxic masculine and feminine traits. There are also masculine and feminine traits that we can all have that are powerful without the harshness of judgment and condemnation or needing to be the tough guy.
The thing about gun rights people is that every single "common sense" gun control proposal involves arresting tens of millions of people who haven't actually harmed anyone, and imprisoning them all for at least ten years each. So, yes, it's perhaps understandable that gun rights people find most gun control discourse unacceptable.