"One woman in an all-male group radically alters the dynamic".

Demonspawn · 2012-08-31T17:14:56+00:00

This quote early is gold:

Male social dynamics have two major parts: the first in which men are tested for their fitness for membership, and the second in which having passed the test they are accepted into the group almost wholesale. I don’t see this in female social groups (in fact I see the opposite – immediate superficial acceptance, followed by an undercurrent of obfuscated and passive-aggressive challenges from the inside).

And it just keeps getting better from there!

Having been in a number of all-male organizations in my life, I've watched this over and over again and the blogger is dead on with his assessments and observations.

gothedistance89 · 2012-09-01T01:28:33+00:00

This article is great, and explains why for all "breaking barriers" of male-only spaces and creating safe women's spaces, sometimes the guys just need a place to themselves. Making an environment co-ed has a lot more repercussions rooted in psychology and sexual dynamics than simply "removing the patriarchal old boy's club"

ErasmusMRA · 2012-08-31T17:38:36+00:00

I see this a lot in online gaming where girls make up only 10-25% of gamers. Once a girl enters an all-male team or guild, the group dynamic changes entirely. The girl can ameliorate this effect somewhat and act like 'one of the guys', or if she knows what she is doing she can play it for all its worth. She could literally make the group fall apart.

Because suddenly the dudes stop trying to impress each other and rise in the hierarchy through achievement and start trying to impress the girl, whether they're into her or not.

Yep, exactly this.

Gingor · 2012-08-31T18:49:51+00:00

Great article, though, I have to say that there are women who can fit fine into male groups.

I knew a girl in highschool that was basically a dude from her behaviour. She was also treated like a dude and absolutely included. She was totally excluded by any female groups for this, though.

SabineLavine · 2012-09-01T00:42:02+00:00

This makes me think of when one woman comes along with a group of men to the strip club. She always thinks she's "just one of the guys," and that the guys are cutting loose the same as they would if she wasn't there....which is not the case. I'm not saying they won't have fun, but there's a big difference between the way guys act with a woman in the group and the way they act when it's just them. As a stripper, I'd be happy if women were never allowed in the club!

Don't get me wrong, I love women, and have fun with them as customers sometimes, but the strip club is the last bastion of male freedom and it's so much more fun when men get to cut loose without feeling like their being watched. That might sound weird, but it's kind of hard to explain. It's not as if men behave like pigs when it's just them and us strippers, they just relax more, drink more, smoke more, curse more, talk and laugh louder, try to one up each other, get more dances, stay way later than they intended, and of course, they spend a lot more money. In other words, they go a little crazy. It's a beautiful thing to behold. ;-)

NorA_ChuGa · 2012-08-31T20:50:58+00:00

So how does one deal with this dynamic? Is there a way to "get the bridge built" when female presence is mandated from outside the group?

mayonesa · 2012-08-31T18:15:05+00:00

Welcome to sexual attraction.

Also notice that men and women are actually different.

Manatee7474 · 2012-08-31T17:17:46+00:00

Excellent insight.

Sadiebb · 2012-08-31T17:31:57+00:00

That was actually very informative. However as a woman in a high-paying male dominated profession I think he is confusing the behavior of 'all women' with that of 'women with crappy jobs or no job'. At the last holiday party I chatted with the wives of a couple of the senior partners (since we were almost the only women there). I quickly realized there was an unbridgeable gulf in the way we dealt with the world. They had married well and in their minds they had 'won'.

Collective82 · 2012-09-01T02:51:17+00:00

Dude this just got bookmarked.

chavelah · 2012-08-31T19:14:20+00:00

It's fine to have your sandbox as a social thing - but the workplace should be neither a sandbox nor a swing set. Ditto school, ditto the government. But sure, have an all-male set of buddies if you want. Who cares?

2012-09-01T02:30:31+00:00

I believe this might have to do with how each gender is generally inclined to act in social settings. A collection of Deborah Tannen’s studies found differences in how men and women act in several different situations. Its worth noting that like almost all psychological studies, these results are simply based on statistics, and do not necessarily reflect every member of either gender.

In my opinion, I believe it is because of many of these general differences that males and females might not understand each other fully when they communicate. For example, the studies found that "men feel that there is no need to talk about a relationship that is going well", whereas the studies also found that "women feel that a relationship is going well as long as they are talking about it". Both of these are completely contrasting styles of communication.

So the changing of styles of communication when the opposite gender is present is actually a good thing. It shows people are trying to build bridges by changing the way they normally act. And by changing styles back when in the presence of the same gender, bridges can be built more effectively as well. I don't see how women should view males changing their social styles in their presence as a bad thing, but instead a sign that they want to build friendships with them and better communicate.

2012-09-01T02:56:15+00:00

A lot of it is accurate, but at the same time it's badly stated and stated in generalizing way that is not necessarily true. Yes, men tend to form social groups and communicate in a different way than women tend to form social groups and communicate. However, this is far from universally true. Additionally the idea that a women has a lower social status is an all male group because shes a woman is just flat out wrong. A woman who is part of a male group is judged by male standards just as a male who is part of a female group is judged by female standards. Men tend to excel over females in male groups just as females tend to excel over males in female groups. I can only speak for the male side, but I can say for sure that gender doesn't matter. If a girl passes the ribbing (she can dish it as well as she can take it without getting butthurt) and has something to add to the group... Shes welcomed with open arms.

The problem is that females tend to socialize passive aggressively while males tend to be open about their hostility. I'm not even going to begin to speculate on the causes. I'm just stating that on average, males socialize with males differently that females socialize with females.

A female that wishes to be 'one of the guys' has to act like one of the guys and socialize like one of the guys. She is treated like one of the guys. This is one area where the article got it horribly wrong. Guys don't act different when a woman joins their group. They treat her like any guy who wants to join the group. I've seen it tons of times. This is an example of a girl trying to talk her way in...

Her: "I'm just one of the guys"
Me: "You gonna play hockey with us on fridays?"
Her: "Nah, I cant skate."
Me: "Oh that's no problem at all. we just get piss drunk and shoot the puck around for a while before heading over to ********'s to drink a shitload of whisky and beer around a bonfire talking shit."
Her: "I think I'll pass."

There was more to it than that but that's just an example that exemplifies everything. She had no respect from any of us and was only ever invited because one guy wanted to sleep with her (she was extraordinarily hot). She milked him for thousands of dollars in free drinks (as a result the guy lost a ton of respect). At the same time though I've seen girls say hell yeah. They were highly respected. There was no hint of sex from any of us because they weren't 'girls'. They were just one of the guys, they were treated as such and were expected to act as such. There's no gender discrimination but very strong discrimination based on actions.

"I'm too weak for this" = shutdown
"Fuck you assholes, I'll beat you later" = maintaining respect.

He mentioned this but I don't think it can be said enough. Respect is everything. You never lose respect by losing, only by refusing to fight.

ErasmusMRA · 2012-08-31T19:21:35+00:00

It's interesting to note how religion used to solve this problem: By making women subservient to men. We were told that it's not the man's duty to make the woman obey, but the woman's duty to follow the man. Thus the man is the master of the household, and no Swingset forms to wrestle power away from him.

Of course, with the advent of feminism and thus Churchianity the whole dynamic is thrown out of whack. The church now has to cater to the woman by following Oprah 3:16 and telling her she's not accountable for her actions, lest the church finds itself without its female members, directly reducing its income.

Title	"One woman in an all-male group radically alters the dynamic".
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	41
Comments	72
Date	August 31, 2012 4:17 PM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/z53fu/one_woman_in_an_allmale_group_radically_alters/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/one-woman-in-an-all-male-group-radically-alters.1014561 https://theredarchive.com/post/1014561

Comments