So they say woman are more agreeable than men ah?

Biodegradable

Isn't this basically a polite way of saying that women are more submissive? That they pretend to agree for the sake of peace? And isn't it therefore the ultimate insult to make to a feminist. It either implies that they don't have the intelligence to have an opinion of their own, or that they only pretend to agree out of cowardice. And is it actually true?

Allow me to go off on a tangent briefly. In the past I've found myself in a situations at work where someone, higher up than me, will give me instructions that don't make any sense. And more often than not I'll presume that what they said only doesn't seem to make sense because they explained it too fast, or because it's something I should already know, or I'll say to myself that I'll probably realise what he/she meant later on (as I'm doing the task). But usually in situation like this it's them who haven't explained it incorrectly because they forgot something... only I didn't having the balls to just say it to them! to just say "no that doesn't make any sense"! So my question is, are men the ones who are more inclined to say "hang on, that doesn't make any sense what so ever!"

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

It’s been a long time since “sugar and spice and all things nice” was the prevailing view of women. These days, you are much more likely to gleefully hear how we’re much worse bullies than men, far more bitchy and that we can’t get along with each other.

Apiarist

Have they released Jordan Peterson out of the rehab already?

weldoninhio

Biodegradable wrote: »

Isn't this basically a polite way of saying that women are more submissive? That they pretend to agree for the sake of peace? And isn't it therefore the ultimate insult to make to a feminist. It either implies that they don't have the intelligence to have an opinion of their own, or that they only pretend to agree out of cowardice. And is it actually true?

Allow me to go off on a tangent briefly. In the past I've found myself in a situations at work where someone, higher up than me, will give me instructions that don't make any sense. And more often than not I'll presume that what they said only doesn't seem to make sense because they explained it too fast, or because it's something I should already know, or I'll say to myself that I'll probably realise what he/she meant later on (as I'm doing the task). But usually in situation like this it's them who haven't explained it incorrectly because they forgot something... only I didn't having the balls to just say it to them! to just say "no that doesn't make any sense"! So my question is, are men the ones who are more inclined to say "hang on, that doesn't make any sense what so ever!"

Depends on the singular man or woman. Some men will say "hang on, that doesn't make any sense what so ever!". Some women will say "hang on, that doesn't make any sense what so ever!". Some men will say nothing. Some women will say nothing. Males are not a hive mind. Females are not a hive mind.

Reading the opening paragraph, I had an alarming premonition of mr_fegelien. Then I realised it was just deja vu.

Apiarist

Biodegradable wrote: »

...my question is, are men the ones who are more inclined to say "hang on, that doesn't make any sense what so ever!"

No exactly. Hate to generalize, but I think men are more likely to disagree regardless of whether the request makes sense or not. Personally, in my mind (I am a man, btw), there is always a contrarian thought going on.

weldoninhio

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

It’s been a long time since “sugar and spice and all things nice” was the prevailing view of women. These days, you are much more likely to gleefully hear how we’re much worse bullies than men, far more bitchy and that we can’t get along with each other.

In fairness, where I work, my team has a mix of men and women. Other females have commented that we are lucky to have a mix because their teams are all female and it's too bitchy.

Woke Hogan

victor8600 wrote: »

Have they released Jordan Peterson out of the rehab already?

Must be carnival season already. Good job too, I've been running low on snake oil.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

weldoninhio wrote: »

In fairness, where I work, my team has a mix of men and women. Other females have commented that we are lucky to have a mix because their teams are all female and it's too bitchy.

Please. That men don’t bitch and gossip is the worst myth going.

The One Doctor

Biodegradable wrote: »

Isn't this basically a polite way of saying that women are more submissive? That they pretend to agree for the sake of peace? And isn't it therefore the ultimate insult to make to a feminist. It either implies that they don't have the intelligence to have an opinion of their own, or that they only pretend to agree out of cowardice. And is it actually true?

Allow me to go off on a tangent briefly. In the past I've found myself in a situations at work where someone, higher up than me, will give me instructions that don't make any sense. And more often than not I'll presume that what they said only doesn't seem to make sense because they explained it too fast, or because it's something I should already know, or I'll say to myself that I'll probably realise what he/she meant later on (as I'm doing the task). But usually in situation like this it's them who haven't explained it incorrectly because they forgot something... only I didn't having the balls to just say it to them! to just say "no that doesn't make any sense"! So my question is, are men the ones who are more inclined to say "hang on, that doesn't make any sense what so ever!"

Hello again Mr feglein, wearing a different suit I see?

Shanotheslayer

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Please. That men don’t bitch and gossip is the worst myth going.

Nobody is saying they don't, women are just far better at it

DrPhilG

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Please. That men don’t bitch and gossip is the worst myth going.

I wouldn't say that men don't bitch and gossip, but it's not a myth to say that women are way way worse.

I work in a female dominated environment and all of the girls agree with that assertion.

Even my feminist wife admits that it's true!

Raconteuse

DrPhilG wrote: »

I wouldn't say that men don't bitch and gossip, but it's not a myth to say that women are way way worse.

I agree bitchiness/cattiness is more of a female trait, but...

I work in a female dominated environment and all of the girls agree with that assertion.

This kinda thing I don't get. Not you saying it but the women saying it. If they agree so readily, who are these women being so bitchy? Them? Or is it always *other* women? Do they not see the irony of being so negative about other women while complaining about bitchiness? (These are all rhetorical questions btw!)

I worked with a group of women once who were horrendously bitchy - and I was very young so of course I then thought "women are worse to work with" but absolutely none since then. Even though it is more of a female trait, it's not as prevalent as some claim. Sometimes people want to see it too.

DrPhilG

Raconteuse wrote: »

Do they not see the irony of being so negative about other women while complaining about bitchiness?

They don't complaining about others bitching. They acknowledge that it's a common trait whilst admitting their own guilt.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

DrPhilG wrote: »

I wouldn't say that men don't bitch and gossip, but it's not a myth to say that women are way way worse.

I work in a female dominated environment and all of the girls agree with that assertion.

Even my feminist wife admits that it's true!

I’m also a woman and I’ve worked in various majority or all female teams. The bitchiness was variable from very bitchy to not really at all.

I don’t think it’s a myth. Men love juicy gossip just as much, in my experience, and can be just as pass-remarkable but somehow it doesn’t get pegged as bitchy quite as much.

Biodegradable

The One Doctor wrote: »

Hello again Mr feglein, wearing a different suit I see?

I am not him. He's African as far as I know, where as I'm Irish. I've been around since September. And my threads have a little more depth.

Biodegradable

weldoninhio wrote: »

In fairness, where I work, my team has a mix of men and women. Other females have commented that we are lucky to have a mix because their teams are all female and it's too bitchy.

Everyone is talking about bitchiness all of a sudden, even though the thread was about agreeableness.

I guess if you pretend to agree with someone on something you don't like, you're going to carry that resentment with you. Hence the need to bitch!

Raconteuse

Biodegradable wrote: »

Everyone is talking about bitchiness all of a sudden, even though the thread was about agreeableness.

Because women aren't viewed as much in the way you say we are. That's an old fashioned outlook that needed to change because some females can be right cuntts. :pac:

But seriously, it's not the case that we are viewed as more agreeable. I mean it can be, but it can be for men too. That said, there are obviously traits which are shared but still more likely female or more likely male.

I think age is a factor with the resistance or stubbornness of men. As a teen or young man (20s), I'd be in conversations, and seek points to disagree, simply to state my own opinion. It really didn't matter how reasonable the other person was, I simply wanted to make my own points, and establish some authority within the group. Usually, though, it had the opposite effect.

I find that as men mature, there becomes far less of that, in that they can disagree without it becoming a sign of aggression, and their experience guides them towards less hostile encounters. Some will simply roll over because of the realisation that such conversations just aren't worth getting worked up over.

As for women.. I think the stereotyping needs serious upgrading. Women, as a gender, are given a lot of leeway in conversations because the way they disagree is far more subtle than males, and yet, they're still often disagreeing to reasonable arguments/topics. Especially, when feminist or "woke" related topics are factored into the mix. I do think there's a rise in general nastiness too by some women, in that there was a measure of politeness (or social pressure) in the past to hold them back, but with women's rights in the fore, that politeness has been removed. Not all women, mind. It's difficult not to generalise on a subject like this.

Biodegradable

Raconteuse wrote: »

Because women aren't viewed as much in the way you say we are.

Me? Actually, I didn't say anything about bitchiness. I raised the issue of agreeableness and whether it's true or not, yet everyone started harping on about bitchiness.

Badly Drunk Boy

Biodegradable wrote: »

Allow me to go off on a tangent briefly. In the past I've found myself in a situations at work where someone, higher up than me, will give me instructions that don't make any sense. And more often than not I'll presume that what they said only doesn't seem to make sense because they explained it too fast, or because it's something I should already know, or I'll say to myself that I'll probably realise what he/she meant later on (as I'm doing the task). But usually in situation like this it's them who haven't explained it incorrectly because they forgot something... only I didn't having the balls to just say it to them! to just say "no that doesn't make any sense"! So my question is, are men the ones who are more inclined to say "hang on, that doesn't make any sense what so ever!"

I'm an intelligent male, but not really a people person, so in the work situation you describe*, I possibly wouldn't say anything if I thought they were wrong, but I'd do what I think should be done in relation to the matter, and if they came back saying that that wasn't what they'd asked of me, I'd just explain why it's better.

Something sort of similar actually happened to me within the last hour, although it was with my direct manager and I'd have no problem telling him in this type of situation. But he was delighted with my solution.

*(It might depend on how well I know the colleague and their seniority.)

victor8600

victor8600 wrote: »

Have they released Jordan Peterson out of the rehab already?

Considering the abuse and general nastiness by many people, I'd imagine most of us would have been in rehab a lot quicker than him. He endured it all for quite some time, although I'd imagine the money he made from his cause helped a fair bit.

I don't particularly agree with most of his arguments, but the man has been in the cross-hairs of a lot of groups for a long time. That's gotta fray the nerves.

And as a male, I gotta admit I do admire him somewhat for being one of the first to stand up to PC, SJW and feminist cultural changes. Not something I'd want personally as a career...

Biodegradable

victor8600 wrote: »

Have they released Jordan Peterson out of the rehab already?

I didn't know that. So much for all that advice about life, and then he goes and gets hooked on some drug! I guess Kathy Newman beat him in the long run.

Biodegradable

Deleted User wrote: »

Considering the abuse and general nastiness by many people, I'd imagine most of us would have been in rehab a lot quicker than him. He endured it all for quite some time.

Abuse? Oh come on, he had to have gotten some amusement out of watching everyone get their panties in a bunch every time he spoke out against political correctness. He knew what he was getting into, and I'd say his entering rehab has nothing to do with the public's opinion of him.

Raconteuse

Biodegradable wrote: »

Me? Actually, I didn't say anything about bitchiness. I raised the issue of agreeableness and whether it's true or not, yet everyone started harping on about bitchiness.

Has this place turned into "let's pretend they said something which they didn't say" land?

You said women are viewed as more agreeable - yes I know you didn't say anything about bitchiness. I said women aren't viewed anymore the way you say we are (as more agreeable).

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

I agree with everything ye've all said.

Lalala

Raconteuse

Deleted User wrote: »

I do think there's a rise in general nastiness too by some women, in that there was a measure of politeness (or social pressure) in the past to hold them back, but with women's rights in the fore, that politeness has been removed. Not all women, mind. It's difficult not to generalise on a subject like this.

Presume you mean hardline feminism rather than women's rights (which were only a positive).

As for Jordan Peterson. I don't mind him - says some fair things, makes good, valid points. Same with Paul Joseph Watson. The problem is some of their fans. They (especially Peterson) appeal to the utter dregs. But their fans aren't them. Although sometimes JP says really provocative things to showboat for his more unhinged fans, which he should be above.

nkl12xtw5goz70

Biodegradable wrote: »

So much for all that advice about life, and then he goes and gets hooked on some drug!

He became dependent on the anti-anxiety medication clonazepam, which he was using to manage the stress associated with his wife's cancer diagnosis.

Prominent_Dawg

I think men get more satisfaction from knowing they're right, more so than women, am I right?

IAMAMORON

I think there are differences between men and women, emotionally and physically. I am also quite sexist, I am not a chauvinist, but I think there are glaring differences and society has not addressed them correctly.

However, the chances of meeting an argumentative bitch as opposed to an argumentative or non-agreeable bollocks, are completely the same. How contrary you are has nothing to do with what sex you are.

But men are quicker at peeling the spuds, they have much better hand to eye coordination.

Raconteuse

Prominent_Dawg wrote: »

I think men get more satisfaction from knowing they're right, more so than women, am I right?

Jeez I dunno. I think that can be equally applied to both.

Raconteuse

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I think there are differences between men and women, emotionally and physically. I am also quite sexist, I am not a chauvinist, but I think there are glaring differences and society has not addressed them correctly.

That's not sexist. We are different.

Raconteuse

Jada Polite Mule wrote: »

He became dependent on the anti-anxiety medication clonazepam, which he was using to manage the stress associated with his wife's cancer diagnosis.

Wonder what his fans' who scoff about mental illness would say about that.

Biodegradable

Biodegradable wrote: »

Abuse? Oh come on, he had to have gotten some amusement out of watching everyone get their panties in a bunch every time he spoke out against political correctness. He knew what he was getting into, and I'd say his entering rehab has nothing to do with the public's opinion of him.

He got addicted to a prescription drug, and the US has a long history of giving drugs to deal with stress or depression. His own lectures/podcasts/youtube tell of his struggle with depression during his life. Considering that there's over 17 million Americans addicted to one form of prescribed drug or another, I'd give him some slack. He never painted himself as being perfect, just that he had some of the answers. (yes, I did watch many of his early stuff, and then lost interest because he got far too political or overly technical)

The idea that he wouldn't be affected (in any way) by the torrents of abuse directed at him is ridiculous. Any person with feelings would be affected.

In any case, the thread isn't about JP, and I'm not terribly interested in defending him or his behavior.. I do think a little empathy would be nice, but I guess that's asking for a bit much these days.

Not answering any more posts about JP. Sticking to the thread subject.

Raconteuse

Raconteuse wrote: »

Presume you mean hardline feminism rather than women's rights (which were only a positive).

As for Jordan Peterson. I don't mind him - says some fair things, makes good, valid points. Same with Paul Joseph Watson. The problem is some of their fans. They (especially Peterson) appeal to the utter dregs. But their fans aren't them. Although sometimes JP says really provocative things to showboat for his more unhinged fans, which he should be above.

Yup. Agree completely (both points)

Biodegradable

Raconteuse wrote: »

Has this place turned into "let's pretend they said something which they didn't say" land?

You said women are viewed as more agreeable - yes I know you didn't say anything about bitchiness. I said women aren't viewed anymore the way you say we are (as more agreeable).

Yes but you used the word 'because' in an a way that gave me the impression you were answering a question of mine, which in fact, you weren't.

Biodegradable

Jada Polite Mule wrote: »

He became dependent on the anti-anxiety medication clonazepam, which he was using to manage the stress associated with his wife's cancer diagnosis.

Any smart scientist knows that there is no way of avoiding stress that won't get you in the long run. Either the drug has side effects, or will be bad for your health in the long run. All drugs prescribed by psychiatrists are utterly pointless.

Biodegradable

Deleted User wrote: »

He got addicted to a prescription drug, and the US has a long history of giving drugs to deal with stress or depression. Considering that there's over 17 million Americans addicted to one form of prescribed drug or another, I'd give him some slack.

Yeah, but he's an educated person. What's his excuse for ending up being played by the shrinks who peddle drugs to make money, when he himself is a shrink!

It's mainly fat people from Texas who actually believe that prescription drugs will actually be of help.

Deleted User wrote: »

The idea that he wouldn't be affected (in any way) by the torrents of abuse directed at him is ridiculous. Any person with feelings would be affected.

All he'd have to do is watch one of those "Jordan Peterson owns needy feminist" videos on youtube, read the comments, and he'd feel like a God.

Biodegradable

Biodegradable wrote: »

Yeah, but he's an educated person. What's his excuse for ending up being played by the shrinks who peddle drugs to make money, when he himself is a shrink!

It's mainly fat people from Texas who actually believe that prescription drugs will actually be of help.
All he'd have to do is watch one of those "Jordan Peterson owns needy feminist" videos on youtube, read the comments, and he'd feel like a God.

I thought about crediting you with a proper response, but nah. No real point, is there? Not that I agree with you, even slightly.

As for your prescription drugs reference, do a google search. You'll find yourself remarkably incorrect.

Raconteuse

Peterson was probably in such a bad way about his wife's cancer (coupled with his existing mental health issues) that those were the only meds he could cope on. I feel for the guy - very tough situation.

Biodegradable

Deleted User wrote: »

As for your prescription drugs reference, do a google search. You'll find yourself remarkably incorrect.

Well fat Texans would be the stereotype, but of course there are idiots everywhere.

Biodegradable

Deleted User wrote: »

The idea that he wouldn't be affected (in any way) by the torrents of abuse directed at him is ridiculous. Any person with feelings would be affected.

And what about Donald Trump? Isn't he a person with feelings?

Do you think that if a bunch of group thinking idiots took to tweeter, or the streets, to whine about whatever, that that would upset JP? If it would then I have no sympathy for him. He should have known what he was getting into... just like Ben Shapiro knows what he's getting into when he gauges a reaction from a particular group of people.

LaFuton

victor8600 wrote: »

(I am a man, btw)

thats the spirit buddy!

Earthhorse

Lane Thousands Wardroom wrote: »

I agree with everything ye've all said.

Lalala

Hang on, that doesn't make any sense what so ever!

Church on Tuesday

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Please. That men don’t bitch and gossip is the worst myth going.

Some do, but those are men you really wouldn't want to be taking seriously anyways.

"Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people".

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

Some do, but those are men you really wouldn't want to be taking seriously anyways.

"Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people".

I love that quote, it's so hypocritical.

"You the kind of people I don't like? Wait, wait no I'm painting myself into a corner there...you know the kind of MINDS I don't like?"

Church on Tuesday

Lane Thousands Wardroom wrote: »

I love that quote, it's so hypocritical.

"You the kind of people I don't like? Wait, wait no I'm painting myself into a corner there...you know the kind of MINDS I don't like?"

I get where you're coming from alright but there's some truth to it.

I find people who gossip about others pretty tiresome and boring.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

I get where you're coming from alright but there's some truth to it.

I find people who gossip about others pretty tiresome and boring.

Yeah me too. The workplace is the worst for it I find, and the two biggest gossips I know there are men.

Also I come from rural Clare. Back in the early 2000s my friend's sister was once greeted in a shop as "the one who paid for a round of drinks with a LASER CARD at the weekend!"

The shop and the bar in question were in towns five miles away from each other. Nobody can gossip like culchies.

Raconteuse

The two biggest gossips I know are... Aaronson and Zykowski.

One eyed Jack

Biodegradable wrote: »

Isn't this basically a polite way of saying that women are more submissive? That they pretend to agree for the sake of peace?

That’s a very negative way of looking at agreeableness. I don’t think agreeableness and submissive are synonymous at all. I do believe that women are generally more agreeable than men and that’s certainly been borne out by my experience - they’re far less likely to want to fcuk off and do their own thing for starters.

Women are generally much more likely to be cooperative, empathic, and considerate, whereas men are generally more competitive, selfish and inconsiderate, the opposite of agreeable. Without the balance between the two, civilised society wouldn’t have progressed as it has done. Whether that’s a positive or negative thing though will depend entirely upon the individual. I don’t regard either being agreeable or disagreeable as inherently negative personality traits.

Winning_Stroke

Biodegradable wrote: »

Isn't this basically a polite way of saying that women are more submissive?

Well depends, what is a woman?