TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Women more often employ “levelling” as a competitive tactic, study finds | Levelling is a tactic aiming to transfer resources from an individual having more resources to one having less, under the explicit guise of equality.

PMASPF226

April 25, 2023
184 upvotes
/r/MensRights

https://www.psypost.org/2023/04/women-more-often-employ-levelling-as-a-competitive-tactic-study-finds-77839

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Women more often employ “levelling” as a competitive tactic, study finds | Levelling is a tactic aiming to transfer resources from an individual having more resources to one having less, under the explicit guise of equality.
Author

PMASPF226

Upvotes 184
Comments 22
Date April 25, 2023 2:57 AM UTC
(3 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/12y611r/women_more_often_employ_levelling_as_a/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/women-more-often-employ-levelling-as-a-competitive.1216740
https://theredarchive.com/post/1216740

Comments

[–]Suspicious-Sleep5227 47 points48 points49 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Women tend to work interdependently while men tend to work independently. This is nothing new under the sun. But what the story lacks is any kind of objective analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of both styles. I got the impression that, without really saying it, this was yet another story of man bad woman good

[–]Omz-bomz 12 points13 points14 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I really struggle to understand their underlying hypothesis / reasoning.

Women is a lot more risk averse, something that answers the whole difference between men and women when it comes to competitive tactics.

​

When playing with a lower-performing partner, women more often chose to play alone, compared to men. Finally, when playing with an equally performing partner, men more often chose the winner-takes-all scheme compared to women. When asked to explain their choices, participants most often answered that they were motivated by desires “to make the most money” and “to play it safe.”

Women try to gain the best possible position for themselves, doesn't matter if that is due to the success of someone else.

I read this as women are not willing to go all out on the risk, and go for winner takes all (increasing their winnings further) when playing with lower-performig partner, but more selfish than men and wanting as much as possible for themselves when they clearly see they have an advantage.

And when playing with an higher-performing partner, they don't want to take the risk at all, and go for what is more tactically sound, ie sharing the winnings when they are the underdog.

Men are just more willing to take a risk, going "even though he has scored higher than me, I might win"

Note, that the difference they talk about is the minor difference between genders, as most participants chose the same regardless of gender.

[–]Forcetobereckonedwit[🍰] 7 points8 points9 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Fascinating interview and discussion about this very subject. Once you understand the underlying drives of both males and females, our collective behaviors play out like a well rehearsed script. https://youtu.be/_4jKAgYL0gg

[–]lumpynose 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I only watched a little of it because she lost me at the beginning saying that males could engage in risky behavior because once they get a female pregnant their job is done, while the females need to stay alive in order to raise the offspring to adulthood. That may be true for animals like cows where there isn't a partnership between the male and female while the offspring are growing to adulthood. But during human evolution the survival of the offspring depends on the partnership of the male being the provider and protector and the female staying home in the cave or whatever raising the offspring. That could be because it takes 16 years or so for our offspring to grow to adulthood. With humans, if the male walks away after getting the female pregnant the female doesn't suddenly turn into a hunter and warrior. Compare that with lions where both the males and females are hunters.

[+]baby_budda 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That sounds similar to communism.

[–]plumberack 21 points22 points23 points 3 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

That's socialism for you. Less work but equal money.

[+]TheDwiin -12 points-11 points-10 points 3 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

That's not socialism. Socialism is workers owning the means of production. Kinda like WinCo or Publix. Essentially instead of profits of a company going to shareholders and CEOs, it goes to the employees. That's what socialism is.

[–]antifeminist3 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

In socialism, people who work less/not at all still get resources. The people who work more have to produce a surplus to give to them. This creates a class based system of inequality in which a subordinate class of people has to work to produce a surplus of resources to give to the entitled class.

[–]TheDwiin -4 points-3 points-2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

This creates a class based system of inequality in which a subordinate class of people has to work to produce a surplus of resources to give to the entitled class.

Bro... you seriously just described capitalism...

[–]antifeminist3 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Socialists give it a nice name called 'redistribution' and make it sound like equality. Equality of outcome at the expense of turning some people into a proletariat class who have to do more work. And they ignore that the system they claim to rail against is what they are implementing.

[–]TheDwiin -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

But the two companies I provided offer different hourly wages for different jobs, meaning that they pay different skills different wages, and there are plenty of companies just like them.

The only difference is that the profits for their work go back to the workers instead of to people who don't work for that profit that are called shareholders.

You see, we still have redistribution in capitalism. It's just not going to the pockets of people who need it, it's going into Dragon Hordes of people who just sit on it. And the only thing they contribute is that "they have money." They don't produce a damn thing.

[–]hatefulreason 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

you can't argue against capitalism on this sub, even though men are the most affected by it

[–]Jacklshere 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The problem isn't critiquing capitalism. The problem is supporting socialism because in the west most "socialists" are also feminists.

[–]hatefulreason 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

some socialists they are, wanting gender transition support more than unionization

[–]TheDwiin 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

That's the decades of indoctrination and brainwashing for you.

The funny part is, I never directly spoke out against capitalism. I just corrected someone's false misconception.

Oh no, he merely corrected a misconception and spoke out against daddy Bezos, that's frightening my world view.

[+]plumberack -13 points-12 points-11 points 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Socialism is "our money". Once it become ours instead of mine and yours, it means divide it equally.

[–]Spirited-Road-4345 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Divide equally, with varying degrees of effort = inequality = theft = capitalism with bad outcomes.

[–]TheDwiin -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole instead of a few individuals.

This is the definition of socialism. On a company level it is just as I've said where the profits go to the employees rather than to shareholders and CEOs.

Essentially, everyone is sharing the profits, yes, but they are also sharing the risk as well, as losses will lead to everyone getting smaller paychecks. Including higher level managers.

Unlike what we have now where only shareholders and chief suites see the majority of the profits, while losses lead to layoffs but not decreases of bonuses for the chief suites.

[–]plumberack 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Why should I take the loss equal to those if I worked more hours than them, worked more overtime, attended more work on weekends and took less leaves?

[–]TheDwiin 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

Where did I say the compensation was equal regardless of effort?

[–]Spirited-Road-4345 -2 points-1 points0 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Where did you say compensation would be based on effort, knowledge, or anything else that should normally cause differences in pay?

[–]TheDwiin 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

These companies exist, I already provided 2 real world examples and they pay an hourly wage, and the bonuses you get based off of the profits are based off of how much money you made during that time.

So you put in more hours, you get paid more.

They also pay different wages for different jobs. Truck drivers make twice as much as a cashier in my state. Same company.

Maybe if you actually looked at my examples, you could've not made a fool of yourself.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter