Mean Girls and Feminists: Is There a Difference?

​

​
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.

However, beginning in the 1970s, feminists began weaponizing gynocentrism, using it as a protective shield while directing hateful accusations at men. If men were to treat women similarly, they would face immediate chastisement and punishment. Instead, feminists exploited their societal gynocentric privilege destructively, prioritizing their own agendas.

Initially, this hostility manifested in labels like "chauvinists" or "pigs." Over time, unchecked accusations escalated, with men increasingly blamed for nearly every difficulty feminists perceived. Consider the many labels feminists have used to describe men over the years:

• Chauvinists

• Oppressors

• Patriarchs

• Privileged

• Deadbeat dads

• Pigs

• Misogynists

• Rapists

• Abusers

• Incels

• Toxic

Now, imagine if men’s groups conjured similar names for women. How long would such groups last? Would they garner media support? Not a chance. Gynocentrism allows feminists to spew hatred without consequence, often gaining widespread backing.

This vilification peaked during movements like #MeToo, where accusations became normalized and widespread. While some aimed to hold individuals accountable for genuine misconduct, there were undeniable instances of false accusations. These crusades embraced slogans like "Believe the woman," abandoning the presumption of innocence. Many accused men faced reputational destruction, as the rhetoric often shifted from accountability to the ruination of their lives, careers,​ families, and social standing.

The media amplified feminist narratives, treating accusations as truths. Meanwhile, the judiciary and legislative branches played their part. Courts enabled anonymity for accusers and allowed victim advocates to influence trials. Legislators extended statutes of limitations and passed laws like the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Harassment Act and the Speak Out Act (both in 2022), streamlining the #MeToo movement’s reach. Federal workplace policies also expanded protections against harassment. These efforts created a hostile environment for men, making resistance seem futile.

Men had already learned harsh lessons from earlier feminist campaigns: the deadbeat dad crusades, domestic violence rhetoric, and family court biases. During the deadbeat dad campaign, media displayed the names and faces of accused men on billboards and even milk cartons. In family courts, men were often removed from their homes and children without evidence of wrongdoing, then expected to pay for it all. Some lawyers even encouraged false accusations of abuse to secure custody for mothers. From the deadbeat dad crusade to biases in family courts, domestic violence narratives, and ultimately the #MeToo movement, men had become acutely aware of the immense power being wielded against them. Fighting back seemed foolish; avoiding notice became a survival strategy.

These dynamics raise an unsettling question: what kind of person repeatedly name-calls, shames, and falsely accuses others? Some accused men were undoubtedly guilty, but many were not. Feminist tactics echo a behavior long observed in younger women: relational aggression.

It Starts Early

Research from elementary schools reveals that boys tend to use overt physical aggression, which is easily recognized and punished. Girls, however, often employ relational aggression—stealthy but equally harmful techniques like gossip, false accusations, and social exclusion. Even girls as young as two years old use relational aggression, escalating by middle school into "mean girl" behavior that prioritizes reputational destruction.

Relational aggression is bullying without physical violence. Yet, it remains largely invisible and rarely punished, partly due to gynocentrism. According to moral typecasting research, gynocentrism creates a protective bubble around women, making them more likely to be forgiven, perceived as victims, and less often held accountable. In the 1970s, adult women began exploiting this societal privilege, directing blame and insults at men while shielding themselves from consequences.

​

I was trying to think of a way to explain the devastating power of relational aggression under the cover of gynocentrism and decided to ask ChatGPT to write a story about mean girls in middle school who were trying to ruin the reputation of another student. The story it wrote perfectly described that horrible scenario. Then I asked it to create a story about feminists confronting someone accused in the #MeToo movement. Again, it did a credible job in capturing how they used relational aggression in their crusade. I will post those stories here and then we will have a look at how the tactics are similar and the outcomes devastating. The bottom line is that feminists are mean girls. Most will shriek and say they are not anything like that but the deniers are simply the enablers who either cheerlead or say nothing. Very similar to the dynamics we see with the middle school mean girls. Only a couple do the dirty work and the others offer support and don't dare to question. The enablers simply stay quiet. Here are the stories.

_________________​Begin ChatGPT_________________

The Queen Bee and Her Hive

Emma had always been a quiet but cheerful seventh-grader, her kindness making her well-liked by teachers but largely invisible to her peers. This changed when she unknowingly crossed paths with Cassidy, the undisputed queen bee of the school. Cassidy ruled with an iron grip on her "hive" of followers: three other girls who acted as her loyal enforcers. Emma's "offense"? She had been paired with Cassidy's crush, Jacob, for a science project, and the two had laughed together during lunch.

It began subtly. The first day, Emma noticed some classmates whispering and giggling as she walked past. At lunch, she realized her usual table-mates had moved to another table. She brushed it off, thinking it might be a coincidence.

By the next week, Cassidy had escalated her campaign. Using a fake Instagram account, she posted a doctored photo of Emma with Jacob, adding a caption: "Emma's stealing your boyfriends, ladies!" The post spread like wildfire, fueling rumors that Emma was a flirt trying to steal other girls' crushes. Some boys even teased her, calling her "heartbreaker," while girls scowled at her in the hallways.​

The rumors weren’t enough for Cassidy. She instructed her hive to spread more insidious lies. One girl whispered to the art teacher that Emma had plagiarized her last project. Another claimed to overhear Emma making fun of a classmate with a disability, a claim entirely untrue but shocking enough to stick. By the end of the week, Emma was not only isolated but also considered a liar and a bully by many of her classmates.

The hive also ensured Emma’s humiliation in real time. One of Cassidy's friends "accidentally" spilled a full carton of chocolate milk onto Emma’s lap in the cafeteria. Another "innocently" pointed out to their teacher that Emma had left a mistake on the board during a math exercise, leading to laughter from the class. Cassidy herself delivered the final blow: during a group activity, she whispered loud enough for others to hear, "I feel bad for her. You’d think someone would tell her that she smells weird."

Emma, bewildered and hurt, tried to stand up for herself. She went to the school counselor, who dismissed it as "girls just being girls." When she tried to explain to her parents, they advised her to "just ignore them," not understanding the depth of the social warfare she faced daily.

But the worst came when Cassidy uploaded a secret recording of Emma singing quietly to herself in music class. Captioned with, "Who told her she could sing? Cringe alert!" the video quickly went viral within their school’s network. Emma's voice cracked mid-song in the clip, a moment Cassidy had purposefully edited to repeat. The ridicule became unbearable.

In a final attempt to reclaim her reputation, Emma wrote an open letter to the class, posting it to the school bulletin board. She explained how much the rumors and bullying had hurt her and pleaded for a chance to be seen for who she really was. While a few classmates began to question Cassidy's actions, most were too afraid of crossing the queen bee to offer Emma support.

Though Emma found a few allies over time—students who admired her courage and kindness—her middle school experience remained a battle of endurance. Cassidy's hive eventually moved on to other targets, but the scars they left behind on Emma’s self-esteem and trust were lasting.

_________________End ChatGPT_________________

And here is the story of the feminists during #metoo

_________________Begin ChatGPT_________________

The Smear Campaign

Jason Carter was an unassuming but dedicated history professor at a mid-sized university. Known for his fair grading and thought-provoking lectures, he had earned the respect of his students over his decade-long career. However, his world turned upside down after a guest lecture he gave on the impact of gender roles in history. While he aimed to present a balanced perspective, some of his statements were misinterpreted—or deliberately twisted—by a group of feminist activists on campus.

Jason had mentioned during the lecture that certain historical gender norms, while limiting for women, had also placed immense pressures and dangers on men, such as the expectation to serve in wars or take on hazardous labor. To his surprise, a student group calling themselves Voices for Equality seized on his comments, accusing him of "dismissing women's oppression" and "upholding patriarchal ideals."

The campaign against him began subtly, with whispers in the faculty lounge and a few critical tweets labeling him a "problematic professor." But within days, it escalated. Members of Voices for Equality published an open letter on the university's website, claiming Jason's lecture was "an endorsement of toxic masculinity" and calling for his immediate suspension. The letter gained traction, with signatures from students and faculty who hadn’t even attended the lecture but wanted to align with the cause.

To make matters worse, someone anonymously leaked an email from Jason to a colleague where he had voiced frustration about the growing trend of ideological bias in academia. The activists spun this as evidence of his "anti-feminist agenda."

Jason’s lectures became the target of organized protests. Activists interrupted his classes, holding signs that read "No Room for Misogyny on Campus" and shouting over his attempts to teach. Social media lit up with hashtags like #JasonCarterExposed, where unfounded accusations began circulating. Claims that he had harassed female students—entirely baseless—spread quickly, as the mob prioritized outrage over evidence.

The university, wary of bad press, launched an investigation into Jason's "conduct." Though the accusations lacked substance, the administration pressured him to take a leave of absence, framing it as a "cooling-off period." His reputation, however, was already in tatters.

Determined to defend himself, Jason reached out to colleagues and students who knew his character. Several male and female students came forward to attest to his fairness and professionalism, and one even released a recording of the lecture in question, which disproved many of the activists’ claims. Yet, the damage had been done.

Though the university eventually cleared him of wrongdoing, the stigma lingered. Some faculty members distanced themselves, and a few students avoided his classes out of fear of association. Jason’s trust in his institution and colleagues was shattered, and he began to question whether he could ever fully rebuild his career.

_________________End ChatGPT_________________

Anyone see any similarities? So I asked ChatGPT to describe the similarities in the relational aggression in these two stories. Here's what it said:

_________________Begin ChatGPT_________________

The tactics used in both stories—by the mean girls targeting Emma and the feminists targeting Jason—rely heavily on relational aggression, a form of manipulation aimed at damaging someone's reputation, social standing, or relationships. While the contexts differ, the underlying strategies share striking similarities. Here's a breakdown of the common tactics:

---

1. Twisting the Narrative

• Mean Girls: Emma's innocent interaction with Jacob is reframed as her "stealing boyfriends," casting her as a flirt to alienate her from peers.

• Feminists: Jason's balanced lecture is distorted to suggest he supports "toxic masculinity" and dismisses women's struggles, framing him as an oppressor.

Both groups manipulated perceptions of neutral actions to paint their targets in a negative light.

---

2. Rumor-Spreading

• Mean Girls: False claims, like Emma plagiarizing or mocking a disabled student, are circulated to harm her credibility.

• Feminists: Baseless accusations of Jason harassing female students are spread to amplify outrage and tarnish his reputation.

Rumors serve as powerful tools to create doubt and erode trust in their targets, regardless of truth.

---

3. Public Shaming

• Mean Girls: Emma’s humiliation is made public through a doctored Instagram post and a widely shared video mocking her singing.

• Feminists: An open letter accusing Jason of upholding patriarchal ideals is posted online, ensuring widespread exposure to the accusations.

Both groups weaponized public platforms to maximize the reach and impact of their attacks.

---

4. Mobilizing Allies

• Mean Girls: Cassidy’s "hive" of loyal followers amplify her actions and rumors, creating a sense of collective condemnation against Emma.

• Feminists: Voices for Equality rallies support through signatures and hashtags, encouraging others to join in the attack on Jason.

By enlisting others, both groups create the appearance of broad consensus, adding legitimacy to their campaigns.

---

5. Social Isolation

• Mean Girls: Emma’s usual friends abandon her, classmates avoid her, and she becomes an outcast.

• Feminists: Jason faces protests during his lectures, professional distancing from colleagues, and social stigma within the university.

Both stories demonstrate how ostracism is used to isolate the target, cutting off support and reinforcing feelings of helplessness.

---

6. Exaggeration and Misdirection

• Mean Girls: The milk-spilling incident and mocking of Emma’s mistake in class escalate her perceived ineptitude and unpopularity.

• Feminists: The leak of Jason’s private email is framed as proof of an "anti-feminist agenda," though it’s unrelated to the accusations.

Small incidents or irrelevant details are exaggerated to further discredit the target.

---

7. Exploitation of Authority Figures

• Mean Girls: Teachers dismiss Emma’s concerns, reinforcing her sense of powerlessness.

• Feminists: The university’s hasty investigation and pressure for Jason to take leave validate the activists’ accusations, even without evidence.

Both groups leverage authority figures to give their actions an air of legitimacy, forcing their targets into defensive positions.

---

8. Persistence and Amplification

• Mean Girls: Cassidy and her hive sustain the attacks through continuous rumors and humiliations, ensuring Emma never gets a break.

• Feminists: The use of social media hashtags and organized protests keeps the accusations against Jason visible and ever-present.

Relational aggression thrives on repetition and visibility, ensuring the damage lingers even after the attacks slow down.

---

Key Similarities

Both groups rely on psychological and social warfare rather than direct confrontation. Their tactics are designed to:

1. Erode Trust and Credibility: Ensuring their targets are viewed as unreliable or harmful.

2. Maximize Public Humiliation: Using public platforms to amplify their message and rally support.

3. Isolate the Target: Cutting them off from allies and resources to leave them vulnerable.

4. Exploit Power Structures: Leveraging authority figures or systems to validate their claims and escalate the harm.

Despite the differing contexts (middle school social politics vs. ideological activism), these tactics reveal a consistent pattern of relational aggression aimed at total social and reputational destruction.

_________________End ChatGPT_________________

​Conclusion

It seems clear that feminists are simply adult mean girls who are leveraging gynocentrism to protect them from accountability and counter attacks. The reluctance of men to fight back against these powerful forces seems to be a calculated response to the overwhelming risks they face. Feminism, bolstered by societal institutions and the pervasive influence of gynocentrism, has created an environment where challenging the status quo often results in severe personal and social consequences for men.​

The damage being done to men, and to our culture by the relational aggression of feminists is massive. There is a giant blind spot in many who simply don't see these crusades as hurtful. It's time we started to point out the damage that is being done to men, families, children, and to women.

In the final post of this series on gynocentrism, we will explore practical strategies men can adopt to counter these forces effectively.

Video on relational aggression https://menaregood.substack.com/p/relational-aggression
text version https://menaregood.substack.com/p/relational-aggression-its-a-trap
research on young children and relational aggression https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9022243/

Other posts in this Series

​Chat GPT defines Gynocentrism https://menaregood.substack.com/p/gynocentrism

​Gynocentrism Runs Silent and Runs Deep https://menaregood.substack.com/p/gynocentrism-runs-silent-and-it-runs

​How We Spot Gynocentrism https://menaregood.substack.com/p/gynocentrism-2

Leveraging and Weaponizing Gynocentrism https://menaregood.substack.com/p/3-leveraging-and-weaponizing-gynocentrism

​Why Men Won't Fight Back https://menaregood.substack.com/p/why-wont-men-fight-back

Why Men Won't Fight Back: Key Insights from Research https://menaregood.substack.com/p/why-wont-men-fight-back-key-insights