MenAreGood
Prejudice Against Men - Aman Siddiqi
section on the empathy gap
September 26, 2022
post photo preview

Prejudice Against Men

 

The following is an excerpt from the dissertation of Aman Siddiqi that focuses on the prejudices against men. This section shows where Siddiqi begins describing the various prejudices that men face by taking a look at the empathy gap. The dissertation addresses psychologists and cautions them that the quality of the therapeutic relationship they are able to build with men is dependent upon their understanding of the prejudice men face. What a breath of fresh air!  Read the entire dissertation here 



Male Gender Empathy Gap

The male gender empathy gap refers to decreased levels of empathy for male suffering (Seager et al., 2016). Empathy takes the form of understanding the suffering of others, sharing their feelings, and experiencing an affective response to their experience. The male gender empathy gap occurs in two forms. 

First, individuals can underestimate the degree of suffering experienced by men. In this case, men are assumed to be less harmed than women by the same circumstances. For example, it may be assumed that performing difficult labor or experiencing physical violence has less effect on men. This form of the empathy gap may be facilitated by the normalization of harmful experiences which men are expected to endure. Empathy for their experiences decreases as painful situations are seen as ordinary instead of noteworthy. According to social role theory, when group members are commonly observed in a specific position, that role becomes expected from future members (Eagly, 1987). The Stanford prison experiment was an example of role theory in which college students took on the position of prisoners and guards in a real-life simulation (Zimbardo, 2007). The “guards” eventually began abusing the “prisoners” even though they were all student participants. Empathy for their fellow students was reduced because they unconsciously believed the amount of empathy people deserve is based on the role play. 

Second, individuals may feel less concern for the suffering men experience (Fiamengo, 2018). In this case, the degree of suffering is properly evaluated. However, individuals are emotionally unreactive solely because the suffering is experienced by men. This form of the empathy gap may be the result of negative stereotypes and attitudes towards men. As negative beliefs and feelings towards men increase, people feel less concern for the suffering they endure. According to routine activities theory, individuals can become “motivated offenders” when they view out-group members with “perceived deservedness” for their suffering (Cohen & Felson, 1979). The likelihood of discrimination increases when out-group members become “suitable targets” due to an absence of consequences for their persecution, and when they lack “capable guardians” to safeguard group members. The “Blue-Eye / Brown-Eye” experiment was an example of perceived deservedness in which a schoolteacher experimentally taught blue-eyed students negative beliefs about their brown-eyed classmates based on an arbitrarily novel prejudice (Peters & Elliott, 1970). The blue-eyed students began to encourage punishment against, and assume malice towards, their brown-eyed classmates. This demonstrates how negative beliefs about a group can reduce concern for its members and blunt affective reactions to their suffering. 

The Compassion Void and Helping Behavior

Compassion is expressed by displaying concern for others, offering acts of kindness, and providing help when needed. Compassion displays a desire to improve the situation of others.

One aspect of the male gender empathy gap is reduced compassion shown towards men, referred to as the compassion void (Farrell & Gray, 2018). Mr. Keig, a transgender male who transitioned at age 39, stated the biggest change he experienced after transitioning from a woman to a man was a reduction in concern from others about his well-being (Bahrampour, 2018, Para. 20). He stated that as a woman, he would receive friendliness and acts of kindness from strangers in public places, that are no longer extended to him now that he is a man.

A meta-analysis of 36 studies on gendered-helping behavior included a total of 22,357 subjects. The study found that, overall, men were less likely to receive help than women by almost half a standard deviation (Eagly & Crowley, 1986). Men may receive less help in various domains. For example, the dictator game is a social psychology experiment that evaluates helping behavior. The game involves giving money to another recipient for no personal gain. The experiment measures voluntary helping behavior. Various attributes of the game may be manipulated to measure implicit assumptions about what types of people deserve help. A study found that women received, on average, 56% more money than men from both male and female participants (Saad & Gill, 2001). This is evidence of an implict belief that men deserve less charitable aid. 

A similar experiment measured the tendency of participants to either reward everyone equally, or provide a reward based on individual performance (A. Kahn et al., 1980). It was found that when women were underperforming, participants were more likely to reward all group members equally, preventing the women from receiving less than those who performed better.

However, when men underperformed, participants were more likely to reward each group member based on their performance. This is evidence of an unconscious belief that women deserve assistance when in need, but men should only receive what they can earn. 

When people observe men in need of help, their affective responses may not provoke a sense of compassion. For example, crying men have been shown to receive less sympathy than women (Stadel et al., 2019). Similarly, a psychologist related to me a conversation she had with her son. He complained that when his sister becomes upset, his mother shows her concern and empathy. However, when he becomes upset, she chastises him and tells him to calm down. The psychologist saw her daughter’s emotionality as a signal to help, but her son’s display of feelings as something negative. The psychologist told me she was glad her son spoke to her about the bias and believed he was correct. 

The compassion void is especially apparent when men discuss the challenges or prejudices they face because they are male. When men discuss the difficulties of being male, others may be dismissive of their pain, ridicule their help seeking, minimize the issue, or invalidate their experiences by stating or implying that men don’t suffer. 

 
2
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
December 03, 2022
Prejudice Against Men: Maintaining the Prejudice -- Aman Siddiqi

This is part two of the Prejudice Against Men. This video focuses more on the ways that the prejudice against men is maintained. Another fascinating interview with Aman Siddiqi.

There is another on his reactions to the Depp trial from the perspective of the prejudice against men.
Prejudice Against Men: Maintaining the Prejudice -- Aman Siddiqi

00:59:30
December 03, 2022
The Prejudice Against Men - Part One Aman Siddiqi

This is the first of several interviews with Aman Siddiqi about his dissertation on the Prejudice Against Men. Aman's dissertation is extraordinary and his ability to explain its complexity in interviews is excellent. I am sure you will enjoy Aman and his ideas. It is like a breath of fresh air!

00:39:26
November 29, 2022
Sex Differences in Strength and Exercise - James Nuzzo, PhD

Jim Nuzzo, PhD, an exercise researcher, has been a frequent contributor to men's issues. Jim has been in one Regarding Men video on men's health, one on the misandry of the United Nations and now this enlightening study on Sex Differences in Strength and Exercise. Jim has created a mammoth article with over 500 references that pulls together literally hundreds of different studies in order to get a clear picture of the biological sex differences that exist in men and women around exercise and the difference in their exercise choices and the reasons for those choices. This is a well timed contribution and Jim explains what he found in a straight forward and fascinating way. This article and video offer the scientific facts surrounding our sex differences and bring clarity to the trans issue, the lowering of standards for women's issues in firefighting and the military and more.

After 50+ years of feminists lying about all sex differences are due to socialization this information ...

01:12:53
May 13, 2022
Boys and Rough Play

This is a short excerpt from Helping Mothers be Closer to their Sons. The book was meant for single mothers who really don't know much about boy's nature. They also don't have a man in the house who can stand up for the boy and his unique nature. It tries to give them some ideas about how boys and girls are different. This excerpt is about play behaviors.

Boys and Rough Play
December 04, 2022
coming vid on women's diminishing value/status due to attractiveness

Yes, men gain status as they age and women lose status as their appearance dwindles. I was talking with a couple of men from this group and telling them about the vid I am planning and how I am going to use a pumpkin to explain this diminishing. I will post the first attractive picture of the pumpkin and I am guessing you know what the followup pics will look like. LOL

Should be ready by the end of this week. Anyone have a name for her????

T

post photo preview

this man had to fight in court for his rights from a fiction purported to have happened in 1988. https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/military-officer-dany-fortin-acquitted-on-1988-sexual-assault-charge

November 29, 2022
Worth checking out

Hard to believe but an article about the disadvantages men face came out in Newsweek! Really? Have a look., Good to see.

https://www.newsweek.com/biden-administration-unwilling-oppose-discrimination-against-men-opinion-1762731

October 23, 2022
Straus Exposes the Academic Veils Placed on Domestic Violence Research

This is an article I wrote 7 years ago that summarized an important journal article by Murry Straus about the ways feminist researchers lied.  We now see these same techniques used in a number of areas including the research connected to the trans issue.  A subscriber here was talking about this and I thought putting this article up would be helpful to anyone wanting to see through the BS we face today on a number of fronts.

This was part 2 of a multi-part series of artices on menaregood.com that I will link here if you are interested. Bias Agasinst Men and Boys in Psychological Research

 

Hope you find it useful. 

Straus Exposes the Academic Veils Placed on Domestic Violence Research ( 2 – Bias Against Men and Boys in Psychological Research)

There are millions of compassionate and loving people in the United States who have been given erroneous information about domestic violence. Over the years the media and academia have offered a steady stream of information that indicates that women are the only victims of domestic violence and men the only perpetrators. We have all been deceived. What most don’t know is that a part of that deception has been intentional and has come from the scientific community. As hard as it is to believe it is indisputable. Most of us had no idea of this deception until recently. More and more is now coming out about the symmetry of victimization in domestic violence between men and women.

One of the breakthroughs that have helped us identify this deception was the journal response of Murray Straus Ph.D. Straus has been an acclaimed researcher of family and interpersonal violence for many years. In his article he unveils the ways that this misinformation has been intentionally spread via “research.” He shows the seven ways that the truth has been distorted. It is a fascinating yet sobering article that shows how, without actually lying, the researchers were able to distort things and make it appear that it was something that is was not. We all know that once a research study is published the media will latch on and print the results as gospel truth so the media became the megaphone to spread the misinformation once it was inked in the scientific journal. I would highly recommend your reading the full report by Straus which can be found here:
http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V70-Gender-symmetry-PV-Chap-11-09.pdf  (this link is now dead and was likely removed after Straus's death in 2016)

Let’s go through the seven ways one by one.

1. Suppress evidence.

The first type of deceit that Straus describes is suppressing evidence. The researchers would ask questions about both men and women but only report on the answers from women. The half-story would leave readers with the impression that it was only women who were victims even though the researcher had the surveys of male victims on hand they simply didn’t report it. The data on male victims was simply buried while the data on female victims was reported. Straus discusses the Status on Women report from Kentucky in the late 1970’s that was the first to use this strategy. They collected data on both male and female victims but only the female victims were discussed in the publications. Scientific method is dependent upon creating a hypothesis and testing it. If you get data from your test that is contrary to your original hypothesis this is just as important as getting data that affirms the hypothesis and can be used to adjust your original hypothesis. To ignore ones own data that contradicts the hypothesis is the epitome of disregard to the foundations of scientific inquiry. It leaves the realms of research and enters the realms of propaganda and shaping the outcome to mislead.

2. Avoid Obtaining Data Inconsistent With the Patriarchal Dominance Theory.

The second method described by Straus was that of simply not asking the questions when you didn’t want to hear the answers. The surveys would ask the women about their victimhood and ask men about their perpetration but failed to inquire about women’s violence or men’s victimhood. If you ask questions that address only half the problem you are certain to conclude with only half the answers. Straus highlights a talk he gave in Canada where he evaluated 12 studies on domestic violence. Ten out of the twelve only asked questions about female victims and male perpetrators. If you don’t ask the questions you will never get the answers. Publishing half the truth is intentionally misleading.

3. Cite Only Studies That Show Male Perpetration

Straus reveals a number of situations where studies or official documents would cite only other studies that showed female victims and male perpetrators. He uses the Department of Justice press release as just one example where they only cite the “lifetime prevalence” data because it showed primarily male perpetration. They omitted referencing the “past-year” data even though it was more accurate since it showed females perpetrated 40% of the partner assaults. Straus shows journal articles and names organizations such as the United Nations, World Health Organization, the US Department of Justice and others who used this tactic to make it appear that women were the primary victims of domestic violence and men the primary perpetrators.

4. Conclude That Results Support Feminist Beliefs When They Do Not

Straus showed an example of a study by Kernsmith (2005) where the author claimed that women’s violence was more likely to be in self defense but data to support the claim didn’t exist. Apparently he had made the claim even without any supporting evidence. Straus shows that the self defense category was primarily about anger and
coercion and not about self-defense at all but this didn’t stop the researcher from claiming the erroneous results which of course could be quoted by later studies as proof that such data does indeed exist.

5. Create “Evidence” By Citation

The “woozle” effect is described by Straus as when “frequent citation of previous publications that lack evidence mislead us into thinking there is evidence.” He lists the Kernsmaith study and a report from the World Health Organization as examples. Both made claims (without evidence to back it up) that women’s violence was largely in self-defense. The claims were quoted repeatedly and people eventually started to believe that the claims were correct.

6. Obstruct Publication of Articles and Obstruct Funding Research that Might Contradict the Idea that Male Dominance is the Cause of Personal Violence

Straus mentions two incidents that illustrate this claim. One was a call for papers on the topic of partner violence in December of 2005 from the National Institute of Justice where it was stated that “proposals to investigate male victimization would not be eligible.” Another was an objection raised by a reviewer of one of his proposals due to its having said that “violence in relationships was a human problem.” He also stated that the “more frequent pattern is self-censorship by authors fearing that it will happen or that publication of such a study will undermine their reputation, and, in the case of graduate students, the ability to obtain a job.”

7. Harrass, Threaten, and Penalize Researchers who Produce Evidence That Contradicts Feminist Beliefs

Straus provides details of a number of incidents where researchers who found evidence of gender symmetry in domestic violence were harassed or threatened. He described a number of instances such as bomb scares at personal events, being denied tenure and promotions, or “shouts and stomping” meant to drown out an oral presentation. He relates being called a “wife-beater” as a means to denigrate both himself and his previous research findings.

Straus concludes that a “climate of fear has inhibited research and publication on gender symmetry in personal violence.” His words help us to understand the reasons that our public is so convinced that women are the sole victims of domestic violence and men the only perpetrators. It has been years and years of researchers telling only half the story and when we get only half the story and consider it the whole truth we are likely to defend our limited version of the truth and ostracize those who may offer differing explanations. The matter is further complicated due to the media having acted as a megaphone for the half story that has emerged so the “common knowledge” that has emerged from the media for many years has been half the story and due to its not telling both sides of the story, it is basically misinformation.What this tells us is that we need to stay on our toes when it comes to social science research. Straus’s paper has helped us immensely in seeing how research can be set up to appear to tell the truth but fail miserably in doing so. While the researchers are not technically lying, the end product is similar since it produces only a partial image of the reality of domestic violence and leaves people without the details to fill in the reality of the situation. It is likely a good idea to have a look at the way each study gets its data, the exact nature of the people being used as subjects, and the conclusion drawn and if they are congruous with the data that was gathered. Next we will look at a study that uses Straus’s first example, ignoring ones own data.

 

Read full Article
September 25, 2022
post photo preview
Excerpt from Farrell's The Boy Crisis
on things Dad's do Differently

Excerpt from WArren Farrell's the Boy Crisis pgs 146-148

This is from a section of Warren's book about what Dad's do differently.

5. Challenging the Kids’ Limits

“Enough is enough,” Betty complained to Arnold, Marcy’s dad. “This is only Marcy’s fourth time skiing, and you’re bringing her to the intermediate slope with kids who’ve been skiing for years. And when she fell, you didn’t get the point, you just kept her out there. Suppose one of those faster skiers had run right into her? Didn’t you see how exhausted and scared she was?”

Arnold retorted, “And did she wake up early this morning, all excited to go back out there again?”

“Sure, yeah, but she’s a teenager,” Betty said. “You’re supposed to be the adult!”

Arlene told me about a similar problem with her husband, Martin, who would use a verbal equivalent to challenge the limits of their kids, Marty Jr. and Maggie. “Martin uses vocabulary that he knows Marty Jr. and Maggie don’t understand. He knows it, but when I point it out, he’s dismissive.”

“I’m not dismissive. I’ve explained to Arlene that this is the way they learn new vocabulary.”

“That’ll just frustrate and discourage them.”

“Well, I do it whenever you’re not around, and they come back for more.” Arlene and Martin both looked my way.

 I shared with Arlene the research about the positive impact that using vocabulary beyond the child’s current grasp has on children’s ability to express themselves.[i] When I explained that no vocabulary is understood when first heard, and that part of building language is to keep introducing new words and ideas until the context builds the child’s vocabulary, Arlene was more at ease. Since she was the household Scrabble champion, she gave herself permission to try it on the kids herself.

Whether in sports or school, dads will often encourage their children to challenge their limits.[ii] When a dad sees his kids trying hard, he typically lets them win, but if they are not trying to their capacity, he may let them lose. The same dad whose ego might get involved when it comes to competing against peers is characteristically selfless when he engages in competition with his child. He feels no reward from winning with his child; his victory is teaching his child to both lose and win.

A dad’s tendency to turn everything into a game is the way dad makes it palatable to challenge his children’s limits. Often the competition is “last time you ran the hundred-yard dash in fifteen seconds—let’s see if you can beat that.” The laughter and the energy created by friendly competition may well lessen for dads the stress and sense of feeling overwhelmed that moms so often report.

While it is challenging for many moms to “get” roughhousing and the degree to which dads challenge kids’ limits, what even fewer moms get is how a dad’s propensity to challenge takes time to process and therefore requires more hangout time with dad.

6. Hangout Time

Boys have to hang out before they let their feelings out. This is not necessarily true with mom, but it is with dad.

When Rick’s dad picked him up from soccer and asked him how the game went, Rick answered, “Fine.” Rick’s dad couldn’t pry another word out of him.

That evening, Rick was doing his homework on the dining table while his dad was cleaning up in the kitchen. Rick wandered into the kitchen. Eyeing up the options in the fridge, he wondered aloud, “Hey, if you do a good job playing goalie one week, but then the coach asks someone else to play goalie the next week, what’s that about?”

That was the start of a half-hour conversation. The relief Rick felt with honest feedback about his disappointment over being replaced as goalie gave him enough security to ultimately broach a half dozen other disappointments that had been quietly poisoning his psyche and unwittingly leading him down a slippery slope toward depression. Had Rick’s dad just picked Rick up from soccer and delivered him to his mom, that conversation would never have taken place.

Wouldn’t the conversation have just taken place with his mom instead? Probably yes, and perhaps with even less hangout time. Why? Rick is likely to have anticipated reassurance from his mom, but a challenge from his dad. It takes less time to prepare oneself for reassurance than for a challenge. That is why hangout time with dad is so important—to balance mom-style input with dad-style input.

When two researchers examined the many possible reasons why children do so well psychologically when they either have about equal parent time or live primarily with dad, high on the list for boys was hangout time with dad.[iii] Hangout time with dad, though, was number one on the list for girls. Although girls express their feelings more easily, what they receive most often from girlfriends and mom is reassurance. Unlike boys, who are frequently challenged by their friends (as we’ll see below), girls are less likely to have anyone besides dad to go to with the anticipation of being challenged by someone who has her best interest at heart. [iv]

That challenging takes many forms. Perhaps the one that creates the deepest mom-dad divide is teasing.



[i] Nadya Pancsofar and Lynne Vernon-Feagans, “Mother and Father Language Input to Young Children: Contributions to Later Language Development,” Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 27, no. 6 (2006): 571–87, doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2006.08.003.

[ii] Fletcher, University of Newcastle, Australia, and others, as cited in Shellenbarger, “Roughhousing Lessons from Dad.”

[iii] K. Alison Clarke-Stewart and Craig Hayward, “Advantages of Father Custody and Contact for the Psychological Well-Being of School-Age Children,” Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 17, no. 2 (April–June 1996): 239–70, doi:10.1016/S0193-3973(96)90027-1.

[iv] For more on girls’ safety with bio dads—and usually, but not as certainly, with stepdads—see Warren Farrell, Father and Child Reunion.

Read full Article
September 15, 2022
Feminists say "Men SHOULD"
make me happy and stop killing yourself

A friend sent me an article today written by a female who is a member of the APA division 51 which is the division dedicated to studying men and masculinity.  The article was about lowering men’s suicide rates by getting them to take more time in caring for the children.  What?!  Guess where the article was published?  MS Magazine! 

https://msmagazine.com/2022/01/26/men-suicide-rates-caregiving-kids-education-family-build-back-better/


So the first thing to note is that the MS crowd has always pushed for men to do more care for the children.  Take care of the kids.  Yes, we have heard that rally cry for many years, right?  So now a researcher comes along and ties in that feminist dream with the idea that if only men would do more to take care of the kids it would keep them from committing suicide!  Voila!  We get what we always wanted and can frame it in terms of “helping.”  What a plan.

But wait a minute.  There are a couple of things wrong with this research idea.  Well, more than a couple of things.  Here’s a start.

It is a fact that today’s men are spending more time in taking care of the children than ever, right? If men are indeed spending more time caring for the children this theory would postulate that their suicides would be in decline, right?  But has the ratio of 4-1 males to females committing suicide changed over the last century and into this one?  Nope. 

Okay, that is one strike.

 

The research started by saying that countries like China and Pakistan, where women outnumber (or are close to outnumbering) men in suicides are not outliers but show that the male to female 4-1 ratio is not universal.  Good point.  But why then did they not include China or Pakistan in their research?   Those countries would show that married women, who do most of the caring for children are very likely to kill themselves.  Sorta blows the whole theory, right?  

Strike two.

Then they would have to explain why White men outnumber Black men in suicides since the White guys are more likely to be involved in child care?  Right?

Strike three.

And then they would need to show why 5 times as many adolescent boys kill themselves compared to girls?  It obviously has nothing to do with the boys caring for children.  Something way beyond that variable.

Strike again.

But there is another little problem. Why are men over the age of 65 at the greatest risk of suicide? Is that because they didn’t care more for their kids when they were in their 30’s?

Strike again.

The reality about male suicide which no one will address is the empathy gap.  The reasons for male suicide are many and it could be that caring for children might be one of the many. But the one factor that is obvious to anyone who has swallowed even a part of a red pill is the empathy gap.  Basically, no one gives a shit about a man’s emotional pain.  Let women experience for even a short period what it would be like if no one attended to her emotional pain. She can’t imagine what it would be like since she has never experienced such a thing. She watched as her brothers were told “Big Boys Don’t Cry” and continued to make use of her advantage to get what she wanted while her brother looked on.  He never had that and has a hard time imagining what it would be like.

I see this article and this research as an easy way to skate away from personal responsibility for the empathy gap.  Every therapist should be singing this to the masses, that men get less compassion simply due to their being men. Every therapist should be looking at their own part in offering men less empathy and making changes. Every therapist should be helping people understand that men need admiration and respect to feel whole. I am picking on therapists here because they should be the frontline in alerting the culture and teaching others about psychological issues.  But we don’t see that.  What we see are feminists thinking men should care more for the kids.

Fuck sake.

Read full Article
See More
Available Now
app store google store
Powered by Locals