Do people here believe women are less capable and poorer leader?

[Carousel]

These men self-identify with the group, blend their ego with "men" as a group, and then start cheering for "men" because their own personal ego is at stake.

Note also how these guys are trying to use elite-levels males as an argument that the average man is somehow superior. "I am smarter and more rational due to Alexander the Great, Gengis Khan, Caesar, Einstein, Elon Musk, military generals, CEOs, elite athletes etc. Women can't do this". Never mind that nearly all guys making such arguments are never going to change history, lead armies, colonize Mars or lead any larger enterprises themselves.

 

[lux7]

Note also how these guys are trying to use elite-levels males as an argument that the average man is somehow superior. "I am smarter and more rational due to Alexander the Great, Gengis Khan, Caesar, Einstein, Elon Musk, military generals, CEOs, elite athletes etc. Women can't do this". Never mind that nearly all guys making such arguments are never going to change history, lead armies, colonize Mars or lead any larger enterprises themselves.

Bang on!

And it's quite common, too.

See how many upvotes that comment received on a video showing a man faster than a woman (not shit!):

It's "so satisfying" because that man is projecting his self-esteem starved ego onto "men" as a group, and because he's victim of latent misogyny (albeit for many men it's more fear, than actual hatred).

Thus, when he sees "men" who are "putting women in their places", he feels like he is winning (and "superior" to women).

Exactly as you say, it doesn't matter that the woman in that race would have smoked 99% of those who felt "satisfied".
It's about feeling good about himself, not getting good.

Latent misogyny is huge in the manosphere, and it's often fueled by fear, low self-esteem, and a misplaced "sense of belonging" to "men" as a group (I prefer healthy individualism, and respecting high-quality people, no matter of gender and race).

-------

P.S.: the same is true for feminists!
The same is true for many feminists, by the way.
They seek a win "for the group" because of their latent anger and personal low self-esteem.
It's not less idiotic whether it comes from men, or women.

 

[Carousel]

Yeah it is just trying to piggyback on the achievement of others which you have NO part in. This also shows that the person making the statement is most likely not a meritocrat himself, as in your example with the runner.

And yes this is also just a mirror image of the Feminist argument that "men are generally bad due to a couple of male outliers". Just flip it to "men are generally superior due to a couple of male outliers".

 

[Velasco]

And some men embrace the "girls are cute and silly" as mental crutch, because they fear strong and more independent women (which makes sense, in a way: strong and independent women do not respect most men lower in dominance).

lol.
Even strong independent wom*n want men who view them as silly and cute. Because at the end of the day....They are

 

[Velasco]

And yes this is also just a mirror image of the Feminist argument that "men are generally bad due to a couple of male outliers". Just flip it to "men are generally superior due to a couple of male outliers".

Men (not males) are superior leaders to women for their ability to handle and thrive under uncertainty. Which there is a lot of in business and in life. You only have to observe your own girlfriend, mothers, sister's, women you work with, reactions when there is something wrong. It's usually the man who goes, "hold on. I got this".

As Brett McKay once put it:

Even in the most progressive of families, when something goes bump in the night, the man will not send his wife to investigate while he huddles under the covers. When the car stalls in the middle of nowhere, a man will not send his wife to walk miles in search of the nearest gas station while he stays to wait with the kids in the locked car.

when you then start your argument with "that's not true! I know this one girl who..." NOW you are using outliers to prove a point

 

[Carousel]

Men (not males) are superior leaders to women for their ability to handle and thrive under uncertainty. Which there is a lot of in business and in life. You only have to observe your own girlfriend, mothers, sister's, women you work with, reactions when there is something wrong. It's usually the man who goes, "hold on. I got this".

How many men are actually able to be say, top business leaders? 1%? 2%? 5%?

My point is only that the rest should shut up about their superiority until they are CEOs or special forces operators or something similar themselves.

There are girls warming up with the one rep max of nearly everybody here.

 

[Chrance]

This is a very different topic, man.

And you're absolutely right!
A strong / dominant / powerful woman struggles in dating.

It's difficult to combine femininity and power.

And it's difficult to find eligible men as their power increase (women want more powerful men and the higher they go, the fewer men above them. So they often end up with more submissive men, who on the other hand make for more stable long-term partners).

That's one of the reasons why fewer women reach the real top of organizations, by the way: women instinctively know there is a trade-off between hierarchical power and "dating power".

But many attractive and feminine women don't even want/need hierarchical power: they can get a top-grade man and enjoy power through him (a different form of power, sometimes even more effective).

But it's not that these women are (necessarily) less capable (or less intelligent and "silly and cute").
They're just going for a different strategy, using different skills and covering different needs and drives. And, in a way, they let the man do all the hard work .
I actually respect those women: they're top grade partners, perfect "first lady material".



Knock on the board of directors of your company next time they have a meeting, and tell them "we're not at war, it's easy being a leader, so let me take the helm, please".
See what they say.
90%+ of human history is not wartime.

But I'm not interested in a diatribe on "who's better" leader.
That's my whole point: men (and women) who get stuck in "who's better" diatribes have personal ego-issues that they project onto the opposite gender.

I don't, and I recognize that typically male and typically feminine dispositions both have a place and time in which they can perform more or less well.
And open-minded men can learn to embrace both styles, so to be more effective in any condition (Robert Greene talks about this in "The Laws of Human Nature").

Avoid "LOL" When Discussing

And personal a suggestion: try to avoid the "lol" when you disagree with someone.

The "lol" makes you come across as passive-aggressive and low-power (I know because I used to do it a lot as well).

Plus, it's a cheap power move to get under people's skin, which communicates "I'm not discussing, I'm just trying to unsettle you and show myself as superior".

------

On domineering dikes, I'm with you.
But I usually just avoid them, saves time and energy .

-------

Anyway, yeah, interesting topic.
But usually, the larger a topic gets, the harder it is to have a good dialogue.

My point is that the manosphere / red pill often exaggerates the case of women "needing" a man and/or being unable to lead or handle life on their own.
And some men embrace the "girls are cute and silly" as mental crutch, because they fear strong and more independent women (which makes sense, in a way: strong and independent women do not respect most men lower in dominance).

These men self-identify with the group, blend their ego with "men" as a group, and then start cheering for "men" because their own personal ego is at stake.

I mean, you’re posting about women being great leaders or equal to men in that skill, which is kind of a joke lol. Not worth taking seriously. Just look at history. Women doing their job to make money - whether it’s fulfilling their role as a manager or leader in a company - is their choice. I don’t really care. They are literally just people doing their job. Wow. Congratulations. I don’t need to disrespect my boss and risk getting fired to know the nature of his occcupation

(and there’s a difference between intelligence and leadership. Not the same thing. I’m not going to put the two in the same bag. I’m just focusing on leadership.)

there really isn’t much to discuss. nearly everyone throughout history was aware that women are not equal to men in telling people what to do. That’s just how it is man.

I don’t want to be a dick but your whole post is just feminist reframing lol. “You’re just scared of a strong woman”. Oh my God. We have to hear this shit again? How strong are these women when they’re getting raped? How strong are they when there’s no police? Because they have a cushy office job they are so strong lol? I know all about the “strong women career obsessed” archetype. My family is filled with them. Not something to respect or care about.

youre doing something a lot of people on the internet do for some reason ... you’re reading into manosphere/red pill/online-commentator motivations by assuming it’s all about ego or manhood or mental crutches or whatever. Perhaps you are a mind reader. Idk. You aren’t actually making a case for women themselves, something like “why women are just as good leaders as men”. How about just make that case. do what feminists have been trying and failing to do for decades since your positions are the same.

REMEMBER: so long as you like hot women, you are part of the problem. Be the change you want to make lol and impregnate some nagging power driven thots.

 

[ulrich]

Strong is a word that has changed meaning to fill a political role.
Strenght is the realm of men... no one here is going to dicuss that, men are stronger than women.

But the political players have been succesful in taking that away from us in their search for equality.

Now women can be "strong" too... and for that they came out with "emotionally strong", "mentally strong", "strong willed"... that's political bullshit.
There are words that describe that: empathy, resilence, perseverance, determination, temperance.
And those words have been around for over a millenium.

Look at books that have more than 50 years around, nobody says that someone is "emotionally strong"... that tells you something about the views modern society is pushing on us.

The idea of the "strong woman" is political bullshit to take strenght (one of men´s classical virtues) away from us without fighting.

 

[Velasco]

99% of the people featured on Forbes' America's Most Innovative Leaders are men.
The only women on the list is this lady:

I fail to see how this is explained by testosterone / estrogen ratio.

 

[Carousel]

Apart from being a natural steroid. . . testosterone will also improve spatial ability. This determines your capacity to measure, understand and manipulate the relationships between objects in space. This is the source of the stereotype. . . of men being better athletes or having refined navigation skills.

This is actually a bit more complicated. Spatial rotations/vectors etc are better represented in the male brain. This has the consequence that only 1 of 3 women pass the flight controller exam here in Norway, while 2 of 3 men do. However spatial ability like remembering where things are placed is actually stronger in women according to my evo-psych course from the local university. I exhibit exactly this pattern myself, strong at spatial visualization, not particularly strong at spatial shortterm memory. One may invent explanations such as men hurling projectiles at prey or each other while women keep track of all sorts of stuff, but this is speculation.

 

[lux7]

How strong are these women when they’re getting raped? How strong are they when there’s no police?

Not that your other messages were very good, but with this one, I was truly looking for an ignore button (sadly, not available).

 

[Velasco]

You are thinking in a narrow minded way to support pre-conceived notions.

I was looking for an explanation for this. but ok

Read my post again in the context of parenting, social groups, mass media, school teachers or church leaders. Even the person who currently dominates a conversation. . . between one man and one woman is in a leadership role.

lol I know there are chicks who are more capable than others with regards to getting their way. It's typically with chodes who do not understand female psychology, and their need for a man with stronger frame control than their own.

Castro asked if she was working for the CIA, to which Lorenz replied “not really. I work for myself.”

Then he leaned over, pulled out his .45, and handed it to me. I flipped the chamber out and hit it back. He didn’t even flinch. And he said, ‘You can’t kill me. Nobody can kill me.’ And he kind of smiled and chewed on his cigar…. I felt deflated. He was so sure of me. He just grabbed me. We made love.

The Story Of Marita Lorenz, the CIA Agent Who Was Sent To Kill Castro But Slept With Him Instead

The U.S. government invented all sorts of harebrained schemes to kill Fidel Castro—and I mean really, truly off-the-wall plots. There was the time the CIA tried to poison his milkshake. There was the ploy to discredit him by spraying him down with LSD and watching him go insane during a live...

jezebel.com

Does not however say anything about leadership abilities.

 

[lux7]

(....)

Some leadership roles will require eloquence and persuasion. A certain deftness with tricks of the tongue and no. . . I'm not talking about cunnilingus. Others jobs or careers will need a leader. . . who can remember and manipulate visual imagery. Or animate them mentally with spatial-visualizations.

Exactly, it's contextual.

Hanging onto the spheres in which men are better to point out at women and say "not good leaders" or "girls are silly and cute" is preposterous and, in my opinion, it's the sign of the unhealthy mindset of men who have the need to feel superior as men (because of low self-esteem, and because they fuse they project their ego onto the whole man-ensenble).
See also in this same thread guys talking about "taking one for the (man) team". I'm in no "team man", and especially not in your team of pitching men against women).

Men with a healthy self-esteem don't feel the need to be superior to women as men, because they know they will be more dominant and superior to most women they meet as individuals.

Exceptions apply, of course, as always.

 

[Chrance]

@lux7 all this talk of “strong independent women” goes out the window when you’re walking through a shitty neighborhood. I literally know women who were arrogant enough to think they could stroll at night down a shitty part of town and not get hurt, then they got hurt. Now they know to be accompanied by male friends.

Men with a healthy self-esteem don't feel the need to be superior to women as men, because they know they will be more dominant and superior to most women they meet as individuals.

being able to lead is not a “superiority” thing or an “achievement”. It’s what some people are more suited for and naturally do. Does women being more beautiful then men make them superior? no lol

“leadership” is a broad category. You can fit all sorts of phenomena in there, allowing the inevitable shifting from (a) clear leadership positions and figures to (b) girl leading her friends for a bachelorette party. Might as well talk about nothing if this wide variety of “leadership” is what you’re referring to

 

[Mr.Rob]

There are girls warming up with the one rep max of nearly everybody here.

True, I'll be the first to admit.

But if we're going to compare elites we should compare elites of one group to elites of another.

To take your example of power lifting here:

Deadlift - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Woman deadlift world record: 672lb
Mens deadlift world record: 1,015lb

I mean it's not even close. Statistically the only women drawn to do extreme stuff like any of the things we're talking about (be it CEO, entreprenuer, athlete, manager/leader, etc) is going to be even further in the upper limits/outliers in comparison to men. This is why women are underrepresented in all these fields.

It's also why men are underrepresented in being surrogate mother's for their children and professions such as daycare, kindergarten teachers, secretaries, hairdressers, nursing, social work etc.

Due to each genders natural tendencies based on their inherent biological differences draws them to pursuing different fields.

I think it's clear some women can make great managers and even leaders, just like some men can make great surrogate mothers for their children.

I'm not intimidated by that and I think it's great if a woman wants to pursue that if it makes her genuinely happy/fulfilled.

But on average men are much better geared to be innovators and leaders in comparison to the average women... hence the under-representation.

 

[Mr.Rob]

all this talk of “strong independent women” goes out the window when you’re walking through a shitty neighborhood. I literally know women who were arrogant enough to think they could stroll at night down a shitty part of town and not get hurt, then they got hurt.

I agree it is environmental. But in a modern safe and economically prosperous society that we live in its pretty easy for women not to have to encounter situations like this ever in their lives. Hence due to the inherent safety built into western society women can easily be "strong independent women" and not require mens protection.

But lets say war breaks out or all the police are defunded and actual present danger becomes an escapable part of reality then you can bet those strong independent women are going to roll their pigtails back and play "I'm just a helpless girl"...

 

[Carousel]

True, I'll be the first to admit.

But if we're going to compare elites we should compare elites of one group to elites of another.

My entire point is that I am NOT comparing elites. I am the comparing average guys ranting about women being "irrational", "incompetent", "weak" etc with top-level women. And thus trying to piggyback their ego on the achievement on some great men in current or historical times.

Also I am actually doing powerlifting at the advanced (NOT ELITE!) level and that is why I am aware about how ridiculously weak most guys are relative to top-level women (not to mention how weak people are today in general as opposed to previous times). Thus I have my ego in check, as opposed to many of these guys.

There is another even larger hate-fact here, the male CEO is likely a wimp compared to the gym-rat women, as elite achievement in one area will usually reduce achivement in other areas. Imagine the absolute elite CEO Mark CuckerSperg in a fight with a even moderately trained woman, he would break like a toothpick and probably get PTSD.

PS: Why have men been losing the culture war in the West for 50 years if they are so strong in the face of uncertainty, so rational and such good leaders? We have guys here constantly pissing in their pants about some fat SJW Feminists or trannies at work or getting run over in the divorce courts. The bravado is ridiculous compared to the actual competence and bravery. The only Manosphere guys I respect are the top level PUAs and Jack Donovan, who is a macho gay Pagan who lived for some time in his own honor culture haha.

 

[Velasco]

Majority of chicks in the West are more capable at getting their way. . . in dating and relationships. This community might not even exist if the opposite was true.

The community exists because the way things currently are, and have been for quite sometime, is unnatural. Men are suppose to lead women. Men are stronger than women. They have not realized this. Maybe it is because they do not view women as silly and cute

Girls: Silly and Cute

Don’t forward this post to any feminists. There’s a lot of animosity among men in the West toward women these days, and a lot of it, I’m quite sure, ties back to the efforts women have made to change their image. Fifty years ago in America, if you watch old television shows, women are quite...

www.girlschase.com

There are many men who become authority figures in society. . . due to a strong motivation to get their way in dating and relationships. If they could get laid with ease or weren't chodes to begin with. . . perhaps they wouldn't have become CEO's. What's more is several men who may be considered as above-average in one area. Or what you and I would call elite leaders. . . supplicate to average-looking chicks openly. . . or behind closed doors. What percentage of men on that Forbes list date up? Or could deal with a string of frame-grabs and win frame encounters to bed hot girls?

You are looking at things through your perspective. I don't think the majority of the guys on that list set out to become powerful leaders just so they could bang scores of hotties (maybe Branson, but I don't see him on that list) lol.

 

[Mr.Rob]

My entire point is that I am NOT comparing elites. I am the comparing average guys ranting about women being "irrational", "incompetent", "weak" etc with top-level women. And thus trying to piggyback their ego on the achievement on some great men in current or historical times.

OK gotcha, fair enough. Well I agree with you there. I'm personally not too intimidated by women competing with men, I think it's great they can choose to go after what their excited about in life.

Yeah Rhonda Patrick would kick my ass in a fight, but the average woman will not have much of a chance.

I can live with

Imagine the absolute elite CEO Mark CuckerSperg in a fight with a even moderately trained woman, he would break like a toothpick and probably get PTSD.

Sure but that same woman's probably going to break under the pressure of running a company with no prior business experience either and get fired from the job after making a few bad decisions pretty quick.

Why have men been losing the culture war in the West for 50 years if they are so strong in the face of uncertainty, so rational and such good leaders?

Historically men have NEVER won the culture war once a society becomes successful, safe, and prosperous.

Glubb - "The Fate of Empires"

It's a good question though as to why. Is it a breakdown in leadership of men? Or just a natural occurence where once a society gets to a certain level of safety/success that minority groups can make demands and obtain more power/freedom?

I believe its the saying "men control the resources, and women control the men". Over time once a society becomes sufficiently safe/successful the women hen peck until the society is like they want it (because it can afford to be since there is no major war/famine) and then it crumbles accordingly (as we've been seeing over the past 50 years).

 

[Velasco]

But lets say war breaks out or all the police are defunded and actual present danger becomes an escapable part of reality then you can bet those strong independent women are going to roll their pigtails back and play "I'm just a helpless girl"...

let's not forget the pre-COVID WW3 memes