~ archived since 2018 ~

Looking for Something Specific? Request Articles Here.

UnHope20 · 2022-06-11T01:00:11+00:00

Hi everyone, The purpose of this thread is to be a place where users can request articles about specific topics related to masculinity, males, men and boys....

UnHope20

June 11, 2022

3 upvotes

/r/Male_Studies

Download the post

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

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	Looking for Something Specific? Request Articles Here.
Author	UnHope20
Upvotes	3
Comments	6
Date	June 11, 2022 1:00 AM UTC (4 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/Male_Studies
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/Male_Studies/comments/v9m7df/looking_for_something_specific_request_articles/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/Male_Studies/looking-for-something-specific-request-articles.1215851 https://theredarchive.com/post/1215851

Comments

[–]Phantombiceps 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Oncefa2 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

This is a pretty good article which cites some of the research:

https://becauseits2015.wordpress.com/2016/12/11/yes-dear-henpecked-husbands-and-one-sided-relationship-dynamics/

Basically in practice women control most aspects of most relationships. For example, as many as 80% of marriages are controlled and dominated by the wife.

This also shows up as social aggression. Women are more socially and verbally aggressive than men, and engage in coercive control over their friends, family, and lovers more than men do.

Nagging is a pretty good example of relationship aggression and control.

Some of the following studies are discussed in the above article. I'm not sure which ones though.

Morin, R., & Cohn, D. (2008). Women call the shots at home; public mixed on gender roles in jobs. Pew Research Center.[Online] Available from: https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2008/09/25/women-call-the-shots-at-home-public-mixed-on-gender-roles-in-jobs/

Coleman D & Straus MA. (1986). Marital power, conflict and violence in a nationally representative sample of Americans. Violence & Victims 1(2) 141-157. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3154145/

Moxon, Steve. "Partner Violence as Female-specific in Aetiology." New Male Studies 3.3 (2014). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330467428_Partner_Violence_as_Female-specific_in_Aetiology

Vogel, D. L., Murphy, M. J., Werner-Wilson, R. J., Cutrona, C. E., & Seeman, J. (2007). Sex differences in the use of demand and withdraw behavior in marriage: Examining the social structure hypothesis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54(2), 165. Available from: https://public.psych.iastate.edu/ccutrona/psych592a/articles/Vogel%202007.pdf

This study might also be interesting:

Entitled women-but not men-make tougher strategic demands as proposers in the ultimatum game. No. 1708. DIW Discussion Papers, 2017. https://www.aeaweb.org/conference/2018/preliminary/paper/92Gd2Z9E

[–]Phantombiceps 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Thanks! Great stuff.

Is there any hypothesis as to how it is possible that women dominate, despite most men still being the breadwinners in our money -based societies? Does this research finding also hold up in societies where divorce is difficult? Is there a difference between rich and poor couples?

My own rough idea is that maybe the community at large, and in some cases the state, acts as a sort of wild card waiting to be played by the woman. Or is perceived that way by the man.

Another possibility is that men defer to women in private life due to women not being part of inter-male competition, combining with evolutionary heritage.

By the latter i mean: Sort of like how maybe we believe in ghosts because our ancestors who thought the rustle of wind in the trees was just the wind, got eaten by lions at a higher rate than the paranoid and superstitious ones. Maybe our ancestors who didn’t go fetch water for their wives first ( or wives who didn’t give such orders) had less successful pregnancies, and thus less offspring.

Any more ideas?

Thanks again!

[–]Oncefa2 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

My guess is that it's both.

Many men self-report that they stay with abusive women because they're afraid of the consequences of divorce, especially losing contact with their children.

This also doubles as an important cause of suicide in men.

The only thing I could find on this point though is a statistic that cites anonymous research claiming that 68% to 89% of men stay in abusive and / or unhappy relationships because they fear losing their children if they break up.

This is quoted by The Sun (here), but I couldn't figure out where they got those numbers from.

I do have some research about suicide though if you're interested in that.

The other theory is that men are evolutionary adapted to listen to and help women.

This was discussed by one of the world's leading domestic violence researchers in this interview:

https://www.centreformalepsychology.com/male-psychology-magazine-listings/you-cant-reduce-domestic-abuse-by-telling-people-that-life-is-a-power-struggle-between-men-and-women-interview-with-professor-nicola-graham-kevan

She cites research by Ann Campbell on this topic, but I'm not sure what research she's referring about.

You can also find some stuff related to the empathy gap about this as well. Pages 8 and 9 of Men’s Issues and Men’s Mental Health by Rob Whitley talks about this.

Whitley is a social psychologist, and while he talks about and cites research on this topic related to social causes, even he breaks down and basically says "it's probably rooted in biology". There are something around 10+ studies he cites about that.

When I get time, I'll type all that out for you.

[–]Oncefa2 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Of note, this study found that both male and female participants tended to show favouritism to women over men, indicating that differences in gender empathy are held by men and women alike. These findings are consistent with other research indicating that men are one of the few demographic groups who do not display in-group favouritism when making judgements and decisions, or when imparting empathy (Baumeister, 2010; Rudman & Goodman, 2004). This absence of in-group favouritism among males begins at an early age, with one study indicating that both adolescent boys and girls report more empathy to females in distress as compared to males in distress (Stuijfzand et al., 2016). This raises the question of whether the gender empathy gap has a biological basis, or is a product of wider socialization.

Interestingly, some studies indicate that biology can play a role in the gender empathy gap. For example, several studies indicate that the presence of neotenous features (known colloquially as ‘cuteness’) such as large eyes, small nose, fattened face, high-pitched voice and low muscle mass elicits more empathy, help, support and pity from third parties (Lishner et al., 2008; Keating et al., 2003; Dijker, 2001). Of note, such neotenous features are sexually dimorphic, thus being significantly more common in women than men, meaning that third parties may instinctively extend the same level of empathy and protection to women as they do to children (Cunningham et al., 1995; Barber, 1995; Gould, 1985). Indeed, a vignette-based study found that more muscular individuals receive less pity or attention for their suffering in comparison to leaner (i.e. more neotenous) individuals, with very muscular males receiving the least pity (Dijker, 2001). Like neotenous features per se, muscle mass is also sexually dimorphic, with men tending to have significantly more muscle mass than women (Lassek & Gaulin, 2009).

In other words, the possession of more childlike features in adolescence and adulthood can elicit more empathy and concern from others, but males tend to lose such features as they age, while females often maintain them into adulthood. Incidentally, neotenous features in females may also contribute to benevolent sexism, a paternalistic belief that adult women are like children and need care and protection (or ‘safe spaces’) from challenging environments and demanding situations.

Others have argued that the empathy gap may be due to evolutionary psychology. For example, men possess human sperm, while women possess human eggs. To put it crudely, human sperm is much more common than human eggs, meaning that sperm is less valuable and more disposable than human eggs. This means that (at a species level) women make a greater physiological contribution to reproduction, which may result in collective values that prioritize the protection of women from harm, while caring less about male suffering, as this ensures the reproductive vitality of a culture (Baumeister, 2010). This can be seen in social norms such as ‘women and children first’ in the face of disaster. For example, the survival of women was prioritized during the sinking of RMS Titanic, meaning 73% of women on board survived, compared to only 21% of men (Seager & Barry, 2019). Such phenomena led Farrell (1993) to write that “men are the disposable sex”, while Baumeister (2010) argues that “men’s lives are valued much less than women’s...men are more expendable than women”. To support such claims, both these authors argue that societies are often prepared to sacrifice men for the common good, whether this be in war, hazardous occupations, or other dangerous activities that protect and enhance civilization (and simultaneously lower the life expectancy of men). This occurs with little public outcry, again indicating a gender empathy gap between women and men.

However, it is commonly accepted that within a civilized society, evolutionary psychology or long-practiced social norms should not take precedence when making decisions about policy and practice, especially when this has public health consequences. In contrast, reason, science and ethics should combine to ensure equitable and evidence-based policy and decision-making. As will be detailed later in this book, such procedures are not always observed with regards to the mental health of men and boys, where services are underfunded and policies often punitive. The empathy gap is another real yet ignored phenomena that may be contributing to dysfunctional practices and policies regarding men and boys, and is thus revisited throughout this book.

Barber, N. (1995). The evolutionary psychology of physical attractiveness: Sexual selection and human morphology. Ethology & Sociobiology, 16(5), 395–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/0162-3095(95)00068-2

Baumeister, R. F. (2010). Is there anything good about men?: How cultures fourish by exploiting men. Oxford University Press.

Cunningham, M. R., Roberts, A. R., Barbee, A. P., Druen, P. B., & Wu, C.-H. (1995). “Their ideas of beauty are, on the whole, the same as ours”: Consistency and variability in the cross-cultural perception of female physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(2), 261–279. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.68.2.261

Dijker, A. J. (2001). The infuence of perceived suffering and vulnerability on the experience of pity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(6), 659–676. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.54

Farrell, W. (1993). The myth of male power. Berkley Books.

Gould, S. J. (1985). Ontogeny and phylogeny. Harvard University Press.

Keating, C., Randall, D. W., Kendrick, T., & Gutshall, K. A. (2003). Do babyfaced adults receive more help? The (cross-cultural) case of the lost resume. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 27(2), 89–109. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023962425692

Lassek, W. D., & Gaulin, S. J. C. (2009). Costs and benefts of fat-free muscle mass in men: Relationship to mating success, dietary requirements, and native immunity. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30(5), 322–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.200.04.002

Lishner, D., Oceja, L. V., Stocks, E., & Zaspel, K (2008). The effect of infant-like characteristics on empathic concern for adults in need. Motivation and Emotion, 32(4), 270–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-008-9101-5

Rudman, L. A., & Goodman, S. A. (2004). Gender differences in automatic in-group bias: Why do women like women more than men like men Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(4), 494–509. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.4.494

Seager, M., & Barry, J. A. (2019). Positive masculinity: Including masculinity as a valued aspect of humanity. In J. A. Barry, R. Kingerlee, M. Seager, & L. Sullivan (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of male psychology and mental health (pp. 105–122). Palgrave Macmillan.

Stuijfzand, S., De Wied, M., Kempes, M., Van de Graaff, J., Branje, S., & Meeus, W. (2016). Gender differences in empathic sadness towards persons of the same- versus other-sex during adolescence. Sex Roles, 75(9), 434–446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0649-3

[–]lmfao687687 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link