Young Men And Clashing With Mature Women

[DrJ]

Really interesting topic. What I've come to think is that women are much more aimed towards fairness in everything. Fairness or equality depending on how you want to read it. What I see is that, when they are exerting an authoritarian stance, it is usually to enforce some sort of fairness as they perceive it. I don't think this is a bad trait at all. I think it can be quite excellent in an appropriate situation. It's great for bringing up children in which you want a fair playing field as much as possible to make sure each kid can develop well and to their potential or beyond. But there are certain extreme and obvious circumstance where you absolutely don't want fairness to be an issue, such as military endeavors or other things were competency matters to the point of meaning life or death (or success or failure in a business scenario). Of course, sometimes you just get mean people of any gender.

I not that long ago left working for a very large company with a very large, female-dominated HR department because it was getting impossible to get anything done without perfect circumstances. If I was on a project where no one wanted to be a problem, things went fine. But more often than not, there's always that person (or several) who is/are just there to get by and draw a paycheck, or even be a pain because they got some sick pleasure out of it and knew they could get away with it. On these project situations, you were screwed because you could not remove the person, you were forced 'involve' them and 'make things work for them' and you would be sent to training to 'learn' how to 'make them interested'. But it would never fix anything. That person would have to be treated 'fairly' at the expense of the whole project; they could not be held accountable. It would literally stop all progress while you wait on that person to be 'inspired' or 'engaged' to finally carry their part or whatever, which also never really happened. I saw projects run years behind and millions over budget due to this. It would have been better to remove the person and hire a consultant to fill their place. Most often, the situation was resolved by some of the (male) managers secretly setting up something to run around the problem person and get it done as side project that 'just so happened' so solve the problem in the other project that was the hold up and to keep HR happy.

I moved to a much smaller company with no HR department and a very masculine, semi-locker-room culture. ***t. Gets. Done. Competency is what rules and the environment is of can-do and make-it-happen, no excuses. Plus, all the guys, no matter what position/level are constantly busting on each other, not really mean-spiritedly, but as a way to keep things in line. There is no restriction on speech. It's like a way of subtly checking on each other, saying "hey, are you okay? You know I'm paying attention. I know you got this, and I'll get your back where I can, but if you don't, it's going to get done one way or another" but in crude terms to hide the fact that is what you are doing. It keeps everyone honest somehow. Despite lots of foul language, it's in an odd way the most professional environment I've worked in because everyone is basically held accountable. People that aren't doing anything or are bullshitters are quickly found out and fired. I quite like it. And, yeah, leaders naturally emerge as the people who can check on others, make sure they're getting the help they need, being honest, not taking too much crap, strengthening the team, and responding in a measured way to problems that arise, while also being competent themselves.

 

[Badger]

"I not that long ago left working for a very large company with a very large, female-dominated HR department..." Is there any other kind? In all the bigger companies I have worked in that had a HR department, I have never ever seen any HR department to be anything other than overwhelmingly (95%+) female dominated. And always - ALWAYS, without exception - badly managed. As someone said in a recent post to Dr. J. Peterson on his Twitter feed, "If Marxism was a company department it would be HR."

Really interesting topic. What I've come to think is that women are much more aimed towards fairness in everything. Fairness or equality depending on how you want to read it. What I see is that, when they are exerting an authoritarian stance, it is usually to enforce some sort of fairness as they perceive it. I don't think this is a bad trait at all. I think it can be quite excellent in an appropriate situation. It's great for bringing up children in which you want a fair playing field as much as possible to make sure each kid can develop well and to their potential or beyond. But there are certain extreme and obvious circumstance where you absolutely don't want fairness to be an issue, such as military endeavors or other things were competency matters to the point of meaning life or death (or success or failure in a business scenario). Of course, sometimes you just get mean people of any gender.

I not that long ago left working for a very large company with a very large, female-dominated HR department because it was getting impossible to get anything done without perfect circumstances. If I was on a project where no one wanted to be a problem, things went fine. But more often than not, there's always that person (or several) who is/are just there to get by and draw a paycheck, or even be a pain because they got some sick pleasure out of it and knew they could get away with it. On these project situations, you were screwed because you could not remove the person, you were forced 'involve' them and 'make things work for them' and you would be sent to training to 'learn' how to 'make them interested'. But it would never fix anything. That person would have to be treated 'fairly' at the expense of the whole project; they could not be held accountable. It would literally stop all progress while you wait on that person to be 'inspired' or 'engaged' to finally carry their part or whatever, which also never really happened. I saw projects run years behind and millions over budget due to this. It would have been better to remove the person and hire a consultant to fill their place. Most often, the situation was resolved by some of the (male) managers secretly setting up something to run around the problem person and get it done as side project that 'just so happened' so solve the problem in the other project that was the hold up and to keep HR happy.

I moved to a much smaller company with no HR department and a very masculine, semi-locker-room culture. ***t. Gets. Done. Competency is what rules and the environment is of can-do and make-it-happen, no excuses. Plus, all the guys, no matter what position/level are constantly busting on each other, not really mean-spiritedly, but as a way to keep things in line. There is no restriction on speech. It's like a way of subtly checking on each other, saying "hey, are you okay? You know I'm paying attention. I know you got this, and I'll get your back where I can, but if you don't, it's going to get done one way or another" but in crude terms to hide the fact that is what you are doing. It keeps everyone honest somehow. Despite lots of foul language, it's in an odd way the most professional environment I've worked in because everyone is basically held accountable. People that aren't doing anything or are bullshitters are quickly found out and fired. I quite like it. And, yeah, leaders naturally emerge as the people who can check on others, make sure they're getting the help they need, being honest, not taking too much crap, strengthening the team, and responding in a measured way to problems that arise, while also being competent themselves.

 

[LUH 3417]

the liver is our main estrogen detox. keep the liver healthy and stress free. been doing one meal a day for a while just to give the liver a break and testosterone does go up.

Even with lots of coffee?

 

[DrJ]

"I not that long ago left working for a very large company with a very large, female-dominated HR department..." Is there any other kind? In all the bigger companies I have worked in that had a HR department, I have never ever seen any HR department to be anything other than overwhelmingly (95%+) female dominated. And always - ALWAYS, without exception - badly managed. As someone said in a recent post to Dr. J. Peterson on his Twitter feed, "If Marxism was a company department it would be HR."

Yeah it was all female minus one gay dude. And right about badly managed. We were in a security business and could only hire US citizens. It was HR's responsibility to screen for citizenship. Literally ask the person, "Are you a US citizen?" And they couldn't get that right. It was a gov't mandated requirement for the job, no funny business. We would get through onsite interviews where we would fly the person in and put them up for probably around $1.2k a pop and then find out, oh, you aren't a US citizen so we can't hire you. Keep in mind we also spent 1.5hr each of about 10 peoples' time to interview, and those people's budgeted rate was anywhere from $60-$150/hr. Often, the HR folks would forget to book the hotel, rental car, or even flight for candidates, citizen or not, so we made a bad impression and lost good candidates. Absurd. One person they made a job offer to before they finally found out she wasn't a US citizen, so they couldn't rescind the offer and paid her for 6 months to sit in a room while they paid a team of lawyers at an ungodly rate to file an exception with the state dept for a waiver. Terrible really.

 

[Lolinaa]

Really interesting topic. What I've come to think is that women are much more aimed towards fairness in everything. Fairness or equality depending on how you want to read it. What I see is that, when they are exerting an authoritarian stance, it is usually to enforce some sort of fairness as they perceive it. I don't think this is a bad trait at all. I think it can be quite excellent in an appropriate situation. It's great for bringing up children in which you want a fair playing field as much as possible to make sure each kid can develop well and to their potential or beyond. But there are certain extreme and obvious circumstance where you absolutely don't want fairness to be an issue, such as military endeavors or other things were competency matters to the point of meaning life or death (or success or failure in a business scenario). Of course, sometimes you just get mean people of any gender.

I not that long ago left working for a very large company with a very large, female-dominated HR department because it was getting impossible to get anything done without perfect circumstances. If I was on a project where no one wanted to be a problem, things went fine. But more often than not, there's always that person (or several) who is/are just there to get by and draw a paycheck, or even be a pain because they got some sick pleasure out of it and knew they could get away with it. On these project situations, you were screwed because you could not remove the person, you were forced 'involve' them and 'make things work for them' and you would be sent to training to 'learn' how to 'make them interested'. But it would never fix anything. That person would have to be treated 'fairly' at the expense of the whole project; they could not be held accountable. It would literally stop all progress while you wait on that person to be 'inspired' or 'engaged' to finally carry their part or whatever, which also never really happened. I saw projects run years behind and millions over budget due to this. It would have been better to remove the person and hire a consultant to fill their place. Most often, the situation was resolved by some of the (male) managers secretly setting up something to run around the problem person and get it done as side project that 'just so happened' so solve the problem in the other project that was the hold up and to keep HR happy.

I moved to a much smaller company with no HR department and a very masculine, semi-locker-room culture. ***t. Gets. Done. Competency is what rules and the environment is of can-do and make-it-happen, no excuses. Plus, all the guys, no matter what position/level are constantly busting on each other, not really mean-spiritedly, but as a way to keep things in line. There is no restriction on speech. It's like a way of subtly checking on each other, saying "hey, are you okay? You know I'm paying attention. I know you got this, and I'll get your back where I can, but if you don't, it's going to get done one way or another" but in crude terms to hide the fact that is what you are doing. It keeps everyone honest somehow. Despite lots of foul language, it's in an odd way the most professional environment I've worked in because everyone is basically held accountable. People that aren't doing anything or are bullshitters are quickly found out and fired. I quite like it. And, yeah, leaders naturally emerge as the people who can check on others, make sure they're getting the help they need, being honest, not taking too much crap, strengthening the team, and responding in a measured way to problems that arise, while also being competent themselves.

In what way what you are describing in your first example is fair? Its definitely not fair to be a pain in the arse ans get away with it.

I have a colleague, each time she has to do anything she is complaining. She talks about everybody behind their backs and yet some people do follow her like doggies to keep the peace. These people are that way because there are a lot of cowards and fake people who tolerate them.

 

[Badger]

The theory I heard in the places I worked with an HR department that explained why HR departments are mostly comprised of women is that companies need to show a certain number of female employees to keep the government happy. They hire women to pump up their numbers for female employment and stuck them in HR, where the management figures they would do the least harm to the company. A mistake, I believe. Because a well-run HR department with competent employees would be capable of hiring high-quality employees and filtering out mediocre performers, among much else. Maximizing the number of competent people and minimizing the incompetents would alone avoid a huge number of problems that would never occur and raise productivity and profit-making in consequence. But despite lip service mouthed otherwise, most company CEOs don't really value their employees, they regard them as interchangeable and expendable as flower pots. The almost universal crappiness of HR departments doesn't matter to them in consequence.

Yeah it was all female minus one gay dude. And right about badly managed. We were in a security business and could only hire US citizens. It was HR's responsibility to screen for citizenship. Literally ask the person, "Are you a US citizen?" And they couldn't get that right. It was a gov't mandated requirement for the job, no funny business. We would get through onsite interviews where we would fly the person in and put them up for probably around $1.2k a pop and then find out, oh, you aren't a US citizen so we can't hire you. Keep in mind we also spent 1.5hr each of about 10 peoples' time to interview, and those people's budgeted rate was anywhere from $60-$150/hr. Often, the HR folks would forget to book the hotel, rental car, or even flight for candidates, citizen or not, so we made a bad impression and lost good candidates. Absurd. One person they made a job offer to before they finally found out she wasn't a US citizen, so they couldn't rescind the offer and paid her for 6 months to sit in a room while they paid a team of lawyers at an ungodly rate to file an exception with the state dept for a waiver. Terrible really.

 

[Andman]

Hello,

I've come across information on the forum about when young androgenic men clash with mature women with elevated estrogen and or on SSRI drugs and I experience this in my personal life and I think it would help if we could discuss this issue and seek some clarity as to what is going on in order for people to foresee and prevent altercations in communication in family and in work environments.

My personal experience is that these women are expressing a personality of authority, dominance, control, manipulative, patronising, condescending, passive aggressiveness, stubbornness, lack of empathy and compassion, inability to admit fault, inability to apologise, inability to express gratitude.

If this behaviour is expressed towards me I react strongly with aggressiveness and full adrenaline reaction as if I am under great threat and has occurred even if I am using progesterone and taking aspirin. I tend to get 'gas lighted' for my behaviour. This does not happen to me with men of all ages or young women healthy women.

I think it would be beneficial if we can speak about what is happening on a biological level and how to communicate with these kinds of women for the peace and harmony of humanity. I think it has to do with young androgenic men being dominant themselves and not wanting to submit and these women getting used to less androgenic men in society.

Perhaps people with greater knowledge and or experience could chime in.

Yes. Having a hard time to function at work due to exactly this. Im curious, has it always been that way for you?

 

[Repas du soir]

.

 

[schultz]

If a woman is your superior in a hieracrhy, they will sometimes act bitchy because they have no real authority, just to compensate.

In this scenario, wouldn't they have more authority than you since they are your superior? Do you mean they have no authority because of their personality and/or because they are merely a female?

There is a subtle quality of disdain for women on this forum (not by everyone, but some) and I am not sure why. I've met more men that are bitchy than I have women, to be frank.

Maybe men who perceive women in positions of authority as "bitchy" are just not confident with their own manhood. People are bitchy in general, but people in positions of authority tend to come across moreso as such. It's possible women just vocalize more whereas maybe men don't talk as much and therefore aren't seen as "bitchy".

I wish more women would chime in, as these types of threads tend to turn into seemingly bitter men complaining about women. Sorry men if I am hurting your feelings. Feel free to attack me .

 

[fradon]

Even with lots of coffee?

coffee is said to help the liver and espeicially the liver's partner in crime the GALLBLADDER. From what I read coffee helps WITH BILE and will also lower uric acid level brought on by high fructose consumption.

After the liver detoxes it dumps everything into the gallbladder for excretion into the colon.

 

[Repas du soir]

Never mind, I didn't mean anything I said.

 

[DrJ]

In what way what you are describing in your first example is fair? Its definitely not fair to be a pain in the arse ans get away with it.

Exactly! The people putting in extra hours on the project to make sure their stuff is not behind don't find it fair, but it's seen from the outside view of the HR dept whose view of fairness is: are you giving this person a chance? Are you 'meeting them at their level'? But they are not watching the day to day to see what is going on.

 

[LUH 3417]

coffee is said to help the liver and espeicially the liver's partner in crime the GALLBLADDER. From what I read coffee helps WITH BILE and will also lower uric acid level brought on by high fructose consumption.

After the liver detoxes it dumps everything into the gallbladder for excretion into the colon.

What I meant is you even eat one meal a day when drinking a lot of coffee? I can sustain on one meal a day and feel fine but once I start drinking coffee all day I need a lot more food

 

[TreasureVibe]

I remember reading high estrogen makes a woman manly. I think it was Dr. Peat who actually said that.

 

[Badger]

So can high testosterone in women.

Typical symptoms:
"Male pattern hair loss i.e. thinning hair on their scalp and pubic regions, more hair on their face (in particular the chin and upper lip) and hairy arms, hair on the tops of the feet and toes and around their nipples
More competitive urges, aggression, rage and irritability
Deep voice
Muscle definition"

High T in women also gives them manjaws: "A large chin is often the product of a high level of the male growth hormone testosterone, which is present in all women in various amounts. But a high level of the hormone increases sexual assertiveness in a woman, a tendency more attributed to males." Next time you are around a bitchy female boss, you will usually see those manjaws. Good pictures of women with manjaws.

"Something is afoot in the land. An ossified pall hardens like cement over our Western women. Armies of bony, chiseled, jutting mandibles of maxillofacial transsexuality following in formation behind blitzkrieging boffo chins are mowing down reserves of beauty and femininity. What is happening to our ladies? Their collective femininity is disappearing before our eyes. ..The traditional domain of women — their softness and erotic vulnerability — is yielding to a Grrl Brigade who look like they chew nails for fun. I half expect AskMen’s next Top 100 Babes to sport stubble.

The manjaw plague didn’t happen overnight, though it seems that way. It’s been in the works for a couple of generations now. Reasons abound.

- One word: Plastics. Are endocrine disrupting chemicals in that cherished SWPL standby, the plastic water bottle, masculinizing our women?
- Parabens. Or is it the stuff put into cosmetics? Could women be slavering testosterone boosters onto their cheeks each time the get ready for a night out on the town?
- The Pill. Let’s face it, the pill has been a huge society-wide experiment on women (and men, indirectly), which… interesting… ramifications are only now coming to light.
- Soft polygamy. What happens when you give women the run of the place? Well, besides voting for socialist diaper changers, you get a bunch of chicks chasing lantern-jawed alpha males and having illegitimate children by them, leading inexorably to future generations of more masculine daughters being raised by ever more feminine beta hubbies.
- A combination of all the above."

One could add to above list T produced in pre-natal development: more T is produced the more stressed a women is during pregnancy.

I remember reading high estrogen makes a woman manly. I think it was Dr. Peat who actually said that.

 

[fradon]

What I meant is you even eat one meal a day when drinking a lot of coffee? I can sustain on one meal a day and feel fine but once I start drinking coffee all day I need a lot more food

oh got it. yeah i only do coffee in the morning with my food. I get the same as you if i drink it alone during the day plus my blood sugar drops.

 

[theLaw]

Perhaps the best discussion that I've seen regarding the modern battle of the sexes.

 

[goodandevil]

Really interesting topic. What I've come to think is that women are much more aimed towards fairness in everything. Fairness or equality depending on how you want to read it. What I see is that, when they are exerting an authoritarian stance, it is usually to enforce some sort of fairness as they perceive it. I don't think this is a bad trait at all. I think it can be quite excellent in an appropriate situation. It's great for bringing up children in which you want a fair playing field as much as possible to make sure each kid can develop well and to their potential or beyond. But there are certain extreme and obvious circumstance where you absolutely don't want fairness to be an issue, such as military endeavors or other things were competency matters to the point of meaning life or death (or success or failure in a business scenario). Of course, sometimes you just get mean people of any gender.

I not that long ago left working for a very large company with a very large, female-dominated HR department because it was getting impossible to get anything done without perfect circumstances. If I was on a project where no one wanted to be a problem, things went fine. But more often than not, there's always that person (or several) who is/are just there to get by and draw a paycheck, or even be a pain because they got some sick pleasure out of it and knew they could get away with it. On these project situations, you were screwed because you could not remove the person, you were forced 'involve' them and 'make things work for them' and you would be sent to training to 'learn' how to 'make them interested'. But it would never fix anything. That person would have to be treated 'fairly' at the expense of the whole project; they could not be held accountable. It would literally stop all progress while you wait on that person to be 'inspired' or 'engaged' to finally carry their part or whatever, which also never really happened. I saw projects run years behind and millions over budget due to this. It would have been better to remove the person and hire a consultant to fill their place. Most often, the situation was resolved by some of the (male) managers secretly setting up something to run around the problem person and get it done as side project that 'just so happened' so solve the problem in the other project that was the hold up and to keep HR happy.

I moved to a much smaller company with no HR department and a very masculine, semi-locker-room culture. ***t. Gets. Done. Competency is what rules and the environment is of can-do and make-it-happen, no excuses. Plus, all the guys, no matter what position/level are constantly busting on each other, not really mean-spiritedly, but as a way to keep things in line. There is no restriction on speech. It's like a way of subtly checking on each other, saying "hey, are you okay? You know I'm paying attention. I know you got this, and I'll get your back where I can, but if you don't, it's going to get done one way or another" but in crude terms to hide the fact that is what you are doing. It keeps everyone honest somehow. Despite lots of foul language, it's in an odd way the most professional environment I've worked in because everyone is basically held accountable. People that aren't doing anything or are bullshitters are quickly found out and fired. I quite like it. And, yeah, leaders naturally emerge as the people who can check on others, make sure they're getting the help they need, being honest, not taking too much crap, strengthening the team, and responding in a measured way to problems that arise, while also being competent themselves.

I feel that the natural role of men is to establish truth, and the natural role of women is to reinforce and propagate it, teach men how to disseminate it. Moral codes, or folkways and mores, the problem is that few people are really moral, and the natural instinct have been perverted, where men react to insecurity in finding truth, confusing satisyimg their insecurity for truth, and accepting untenable ideologies, and women are indoctrinated into lies about morality and men, and it's a self-perpetuating cycle, that further splits apart the natural functions.

 

[CLASH]

I work as a male nurse. My supervisor, boss and bosses boss are females. My co-workers are females. My HR is all females and one gay guy. Most of the females are overweight, stressed out, and easily agitated. They exhibit the same behavoir that the OP mentioned and has been discussed. Whats interesting is that this is a female dominated environment yet the same charicteristic behavoirs are at play. To combat their behavoiur I make jokes and when theyre getting agitated I make slight fun of thier agitation such that if they get upset they have given into the joke and then they have lost in an ego sense. Works everytime, keeps everyone happy and allows them to realize that theyre just stressed out. I would say they react the way they do because of thier hormonal state more than some social pressure to be honest. They are overworked, have poor emotional intelligence and self awareness, have poor emotional regulation, have general low self esteem, low self regard, they eat terribly or not at all, they have children and families that they have to take care when they go home and theyre interpersonal relationships are somewhat toxic. I think they all have the possibility to be counter to everything above but they dont have the info, time, support, or energy to turn themselves around so they act out of their situation and vent thier pent up cumulative stress on the people around them. The thing is, atleast for me, once I understood this I was able to get along with them nicely and give them an ear to listen what they had to say or make the jokes that subtly put them in thier place when they began to display innapropriate behavoir by commonly accepted standards (the jokes are never mean though, only a slight push back to the behavoiur indicating a crossing of a boundary). The thing is I think most people are functioning under these same conditions. Its not just the women (I often see people pointing out specific groups). I think its all people. Everyone is under a squeeze by bills, laws, work, family obligations, health problems etc. And the only outlet for the pressure is sideways to other people when the real problems are from above and below. This coupled with the progressive fracturing of families and hence childrens upbringings and emotional development is only snowballing through the generations. I understand the initial reaction to outrageous behavour though, we all get the hair raised on the back of our necks when someone is being illogical and its directly effecting you.... The only thing you can do is manipulate your surroundings and people by controlling yourself (emotions and all) to effect the desired outcome (i’m still working on this, helps to think of it like a challenge, a puzzle to solve, as opposed to a barrier or obstacle).

 

[Blossom]

I work as a male nurse. My supervisor, boss and bosses boss are females. My co-workers are females. My HR is all females and one gay guy. Most of the females are overweight, stressed out, and easily agitated. They exhibit the same behavoir that the OP mentioned and has been discussed. Whats interesting is that this is a female dominated environment yet the same charicteristic behavoirs are at play. To combat their behavoiur I make jokes and when theyre getting agitated I make slight fun of thier agitation such that if they get upset they have given into the joke and then they have lost in an ego sense. Works everytime, keeps everyone happy and allows them to realize that theyre just stressed out. I would say they react the way they do because of thier hormonal state more than some social pressure to be honest. They are overworked, have poor emotional intelligence and self awareness, have poor emotional regulation, have general low self esteem, low self regard, they eat terribly or not at all, they have children and families that they have to take care when they go home and theyre interpersonal relationships are somewhat toxic. I think they all have the possibility to be counter to everything above but they dont have the info, time, support, or energy to turn themselves around so they act out of their situation and vent thier pent up cumulative stress on the people around them. The thing is, atleast for me, once I understood this I was able to get along with them nicely and give them an ear to listen what they had to say or make the jokes that subtly put them in thier place when they began to display innapropriate behavoir by commonly accepted standards (the jokes are never mean though, only a slight push back to the behavoiur indicating a crossing of a boundary). The thing is I think most people are functioning under these same conditions. Its not just the women (I often see people pointing out specific groups). I think its all people. Everyone is under a squeeze by bills, laws, work, family obligations, health problems etc. And the only outlet for the pressure is sideways to other people when the real problems are from above and below. This coupled with the progressive fracturing of families and hence childrens upbringings and emotional development is only snowballing through the generations. I understand the initial reaction to outrageous behavour though, we all get the hair raised on the back of our necks when someone is being illogical and its directly effecting you.... The only thing you can do is manipulate your surroundings and people by controlling yourself (emotions and all) to effect the desired outcome (i’m still working on this, helps to think of it like a challenge, a puzzle to solve, as opposed to a barrier or obstacle).

Great post. Couldn't agree more.