In a previous post, we explored why men often choose not to fight back against women. Many reasons tie back to their biologically and socially driven desire for social status. Men tend to carefully assess conflicts, aiming to maximize gains while minimizing losses. Maintaining high status, especially within hierarchical structures, requires significant effort. These dynamics—marked by unexpected rises and falls—have shaped men’s behavior for generations.
This is a valuable contribution. There is another term for the adult version of mean girls...Feminazis. If you examine their relational aggression tactics, they are very similar to the manner the Nazis used to demonize the Jews of Europe. What is the solution? As with the Nazis...sometimes you have to return hatred and warfare with the same and strip the offenders of ALL voice and power. Since so many woman are either mean girls, enablers of mean girls...or at unwilling to stand up against mean girls, it makes it very hard to defend society from mean girls while also protecting innocent women. Perhaps we should stop trying until women as a group demonstrate they are willing to be part of the solution instead of enabling the problem.
From early on, I was told the difference of critique that could be categorized in 2 sides: One is critique on actions, the other on beings or essence. Usually, critique on actions is the man's way: 'you shall not [steal/kill/envy/etc]'. So the one criticized can think and reconsider his actions.
But what do you do when you are attacked as a person, the second category? Being called 'a failure', a 'pig' ? Feminists use these words alot. Same with shaming. Shaming means 'you are a mistake'.
Just to add: the mean girl did not address Emma and told her what she disliked whatever Emma supposedly did. No, the mean girls wanted to destroy her (reputation) and mark Emma as a persona non-grata.
Children in general can be mean spirited. Playgrounds have always been places where popular kids picked at and on unpopular kids. And popularity/unpopularity is almost always based on looks, sporting ability, gracefulness, size, and smarts, which things are gotten or lacking from birth and generally last a lifetime. The inability to identify such traits as unearned also lasts a lifetime. We all have preferences and rarely are aware of them, and, just as rarely do we seek to rise above them. The exceptions to that are the various levels of sociopathy.
Mean children generally grow into mean adults. Sociopathology is by far more prevalent among those who are more gifted, especially in looks and smartness, although brilliance is often seen as a social negative. Good looks are almost universally seen as a plus. Smartness--and dumbness--are the most rare and obvious markers of difference, with increasing rarity at the extremes. Measured on the most cruel scale of IQ, those having scores exceeding 150 often exhibit odd behavior, and everyone dislikes odd behavior.
Meanness is most prevalent among the good looking, where it is easily overlooked because most people prefer to be around good looking people. However, many of us feel distant from truly beautiful people. They attract our attention, but many of us consider them as beyond our reach. Generally, we think that they would only be interested in the very rich--also usually beautiful.
Your theory makes sense, Jesse, and might be true in some cases. But not in all cases. I was bullied relentlessly in school by both boys and girls. Ariella, a very mean girl, was also beautiful and even somewhat glamorous. But Susan, the worst girl, was neither beautiful nor intelligent and certainly not glamorous. Ditto for Gerald, the worst boy. Though physically attractive, he was stupid in class. Somehow, he had an entourage of boys who were both stupid and ugly. Not one of them was popular. And yet, I noticed, a few of the most popular boys were also the friendliest toward me. They were handsome, intelligent and sometimes athletic but without being arrogant or threatening. I often wondered about that and came to the conclusion that were self-confident enough not to worry about the social price (losing status) for refusing to ridicule an outcast. They didn't exactly become my friends, but they were always gracious, encouraging or at least civil. This phenomenon was known historically as "noblesse oblige."
Terrific piece Tom. This brilliantly illustrates the bind we are in as men, in defending ourselves as men. It also made me wonder; in the general scheme of things, going back to the beginnings of the feminist movement, or even back in the 70's - what was the action, or incident, or policy that set feminists on their course of retribution, that would mirror the innocent incident that set the "hive queen" in the mean girl story on her rampage?
Yes. But mine isn't a feminist demon though. It's a mixture of pride, lust, comfort and fearfulness. Without my Lord's grace I wouldn't know it and would be victim to it.
It's important to know thyself.
I can recognize sin because I'm a sinner. I used to be in love with sin. That's why I hated if someone told me what I was doing was sinful or wrong. I never suggested I'm better than anyone else. I'm as bad as them and as fallen as them. It's by grace I'm offered forgiveness and saving and I want others to know the truth. The truth is what sets you free. The truth will lead you to Christ.
Yes. Glad you can see your own. The world is filled with those who are keen to see the demon in others but lacks folks who can see their own. Christ said it best when he spoke of seeing the log in the other's eye. We all have demons. The difference is that some simply can't see their own and instead get stuck in seeing others'.
Feminists are a toxic case of this where they project their own demons onto men.
Every women is a feminist and every feminist is mean. If you don't think so it's because it has been hidden from you or you're naive. They can't help it. They're wired to the sisterhood and the hatred of obedience. The patriarchy is Christianity and the calling of everyone to submit themselves to God. They hate that because God instructs them to obey and respect their own husband. That's the antithesis to feminism.
If the women isn't in Christ, then she defaults to feminist.
The trad girls that aren't in Christ and haven't submitted themselves to their own husbands are just playing Barbie. They divorce their husbands just as fast because of "feelings" as the blue hair, nose ring woman. These Trad women are just feminist chameleons because it's currently advantageous to be. If that situation changes, you'll witness the feminist within. Only by a strong Father and the grace of Jesus can a daughter avoid her feminist, anti Christ behavior.
It's a women's default. It has to be contained by an awaken spirit and or a strong man.. If a women is ever out of control in anger or frustration, you'll see her default to feminist if she wasn't already manifesting it.
If you have ever witnessed a "good" women try to change her man or control him, you are witnessing the feminist inside.
If she hasn't submitted herself to her husband, she's still in the feminist state.
Janice Flamingo is awesome. She's doing good work. She is containing the beast inside her. The feminist, jezabel spirit. Without her being aware of her nature, she wouldn't be able to control it. By knowing the beast intimately,she is able to speak and write about it so well. She can recognize it from a mile away. Ask yourself why she can? It's because she knows that demon.
I can see men not understanding this. We as a group have a blind spot to women. But every women knows it. You just don't have enough of them willing to admit it theirs nature. But that's why we as men need to observe female behavior and not be deceived by what they say. They don't even believe what they say.
This is a valuable contribution. There is another term for the adult version of mean girls...Feminazis. If you examine their relational aggression tactics, they are very similar to the manner the Nazis used to demonize the Jews of Europe. What is the solution? As with the Nazis...sometimes you have to return hatred and warfare with the same and strip the offenders of ALL voice and power. Since so many woman are either mean girls, enablers of mean girls...or at unwilling to stand up against mean girls, it makes it very hard to defend society from mean girls while also protecting innocent women. Perhaps we should stop trying until women as a group demonstrate they are willing to be part of the solution instead of enabling the problem.
Thank you, Tom. I don't see any difference between mean girls and feminists.
Me either.
It's me *neither*, Tom. Hey! This relational aggression is pretty easy.
From early on, I was told the difference of critique that could be categorized in 2 sides: One is critique on actions, the other on beings or essence. Usually, critique on actions is the man's way: 'you shall not [steal/kill/envy/etc]'. So the one criticized can think and reconsider his actions.
But what do you do when you are attacked as a person, the second category? Being called 'a failure', a 'pig' ? Feminists use these words alot. Same with shaming. Shaming means 'you are a mistake'.
Just to add: the mean girl did not address Emma and told her what she disliked whatever Emma supposedly did. No, the mean girls wanted to destroy her (reputation) and mark Emma as a persona non-grata.
Yup.
Interestingly, George the Tinmen, on Instagram, conducted a survey, and more than 80% of male respondents said they would not share his information.
Comparing the tactics used by mean girls/feminists, the Stasi also used almost the same tactics.
Sadly, there is no easy legal course a person can take against such tactics; plausible deniability is the aim of covert tactics.
Well written Tom.
Exactly Phillip, no easy legal recourse. They literally get away with murder in the crazy DV battered wife syndrome. Thanks, glad you liked it.
Children in general can be mean spirited. Playgrounds have always been places where popular kids picked at and on unpopular kids. And popularity/unpopularity is almost always based on looks, sporting ability, gracefulness, size, and smarts, which things are gotten or lacking from birth and generally last a lifetime. The inability to identify such traits as unearned also lasts a lifetime. We all have preferences and rarely are aware of them, and, just as rarely do we seek to rise above them. The exceptions to that are the various levels of sociopathy.
Mean children generally grow into mean adults. Sociopathology is by far more prevalent among those who are more gifted, especially in looks and smartness, although brilliance is often seen as a social negative. Good looks are almost universally seen as a plus. Smartness--and dumbness--are the most rare and obvious markers of difference, with increasing rarity at the extremes. Measured on the most cruel scale of IQ, those having scores exceeding 150 often exhibit odd behavior, and everyone dislikes odd behavior.
Meanness is most prevalent among the good looking, where it is easily overlooked because most people prefer to be around good looking people. However, many of us feel distant from truly beautiful people. They attract our attention, but many of us consider them as beyond our reach. Generally, we think that they would only be interested in the very rich--also usually beautiful.
Thanks Jesse. Very interesting comment!
Your theory makes sense, Jesse, and might be true in some cases. But not in all cases. I was bullied relentlessly in school by both boys and girls. Ariella, a very mean girl, was also beautiful and even somewhat glamorous. But Susan, the worst girl, was neither beautiful nor intelligent and certainly not glamorous. Ditto for Gerald, the worst boy. Though physically attractive, he was stupid in class. Somehow, he had an entourage of boys who were both stupid and ugly. Not one of them was popular. And yet, I noticed, a few of the most popular boys were also the friendliest toward me. They were handsome, intelligent and sometimes athletic but without being arrogant or threatening. I often wondered about that and came to the conclusion that were self-confident enough not to worry about the social price (losing status) for refusing to ridicule an outcast. They didn't exactly become my friends, but they were always gracious, encouraging or at least civil. This phenomenon was known historically as "noblesse oblige."
You're right, but only slightly. Both nobles and oblige are rare. Much rarer than back then.
Fascinating and oh so true.
False accusations are still rampant… thick in the middle of it
Terrific piece Tom. This brilliantly illustrates the bind we are in as men, in defending ourselves as men. It also made me wonder; in the general scheme of things, going back to the beginnings of the feminist movement, or even back in the 70's - what was the action, or incident, or policy that set feminists on their course of retribution, that would mirror the innocent incident that set the "hive queen" in the mean girl story on her rampage?
Yes. But mine isn't a feminist demon though. It's a mixture of pride, lust, comfort and fearfulness. Without my Lord's grace I wouldn't know it and would be victim to it.
It's important to know thyself.
I can recognize sin because I'm a sinner. I used to be in love with sin. That's why I hated if someone told me what I was doing was sinful or wrong. I never suggested I'm better than anyone else. I'm as bad as them and as fallen as them. It's by grace I'm offered forgiveness and saving and I want others to know the truth. The truth is what sets you free. The truth will lead you to Christ.
Yes. Glad you can see your own. The world is filled with those who are keen to see the demon in others but lacks folks who can see their own. Christ said it best when he spoke of seeing the log in the other's eye. We all have demons. The difference is that some simply can't see their own and instead get stuck in seeing others'.
Feminists are a toxic case of this where they project their own demons onto men.
Every women is a feminist and every feminist is mean. If you don't think so it's because it has been hidden from you or you're naive. They can't help it. They're wired to the sisterhood and the hatred of obedience. The patriarchy is Christianity and the calling of everyone to submit themselves to God. They hate that because God instructs them to obey and respect their own husband. That's the antithesis to feminism.
If the women isn't in Christ, then she defaults to feminist.
The trad girls that aren't in Christ and haven't submitted themselves to their own husbands are just playing Barbie. They divorce their husbands just as fast because of "feelings" as the blue hair, nose ring woman. These Trad women are just feminist chameleons because it's currently advantageous to be. If that situation changes, you'll witness the feminist within. Only by a strong Father and the grace of Jesus can a daughter avoid her feminist, anti Christ behavior.
I wouldn't say "every" woman is a feminist. Janice Fiamengo easily negates that claim and I know others.
It's a women's default. It has to be contained by an awaken spirit and or a strong man.. If a women is ever out of control in anger or frustration, you'll see her default to feminist if she wasn't already manifesting it.
If you have ever witnessed a "good" women try to change her man or control him, you are witnessing the feminist inside.
If she hasn't submitted herself to her husband, she's still in the feminist state.
Janice Flamingo is awesome. She's doing good work. She is containing the beast inside her. The feminist, jezabel spirit. Without her being aware of her nature, she wouldn't be able to control it. By knowing the beast intimately,she is able to speak and write about it so well. She can recognize it from a mile away. Ask yourself why she can? It's because she knows that demon.
I can see men not understanding this. We as a group have a blind spot to women. But every women knows it. You just don't have enough of them willing to admit it theirs nature. But that's why we as men need to observe female behavior and not be deceived by what they say. They don't even believe what they say.
Do you know your own demon Matthew?
It's irregular singular and plural nouns.