Most women overestimate their emotional intelligence
Controversial maybe but hear me out. When I worked as a cashier back in high school, I noticed it was overwhelmingly women who took their bad days out on others, who showed up at the checkout lane with a scowl, who snapped at their children or partners, who ignored you when you greeted them, who raged or swore or swiped the bag aggressively from your hand. Overwhelmingly women. And all of those behaviors are antithetical to what it means to be truly emotionally intelligent, which is to not only have self-awareness but orient yourself to others’ feelings over your own when your own feelings are harmful to the people around you. To be emotionally regulated.
And mostly it was men who smiled at you, asked about your day, laughed easily, and spread their joviality all around. And we can’t be sure they weren’t having a bad day, either. One of those customers I remember was literally homeless and never, ever came in with a nasty attitude. Ever. Even though it would be perfectly reasonable for anyone in that situation to be unpleasant.
And it’s funny because not too long ago there was a post asking why men take no interest in the inner worlds of their women. How true is that, really? Think of all the ballads or songs you know written by a man about his women, her essence, her whole being paid tribute to, and then recall all the songs you’ve heard written by a woman about her man. Not how that man makes her feel, but who that man is as a person. How many songs, books, movies, poetry, etc. are written by women about a man’s soul? Not his actions, not stereotypy, but a soul unraveled. Emotional complexity projected like a holograph for all to see.
The reality is, for anyone to probe your soul, or be motivated to do so, you have to show you care about theirs. You get what you give. Everybody wants those long thoughtful paragraphs from your loved ones when you’re feeling down or unlovable describing everything they love about you, what makes you special to them, (genuine) compliments, emotional validation, promises of unwavering support and compassion. But how many of you write those yourselves?
And I’m not saying men are more emotionally intelligent than women. The kindest, most gracious person I’ve ever known is a friend of mine and she’s a woman. But the vast majority of people - both men and women - are chiefly preoccupied with their own emotions, life story, trauma, desires, dreams, inner world, etc. over anyone else’s. But women definitely don’t have a monopoly on emotional intelligence the way men don’t have a monopoly on cognitive intelligence. Whatever differences we observe is mostly due to socialization the same way women are not bad at math so much as conditioned to believe that men are “better” at STEM.
Having a rudimentary interest in psychology doesn’t make you emotionally intelligent. Feeling things deeply doesn’t make you emotionally intelligent. Even what I’m doing right now writing about emotional intelligence doesn’t make me emotionally intelligent. Emotional intelligence is in our words and actions to others — awareness of how the other is feeling, tender gestures and words. And emotional intelligence is not discriminating.
Y’all can downvote if you want, but the message is going to resonate with somebody and that’s what matters ♡
>>696357>>696362They'll call you an incel for saying that women can develop egregious personalities while admitting that women get infantilized and get seen as objects. Like yeah, this is the consequence of being treated like a child and being given a pass for being a pretty face in a world of men looking for ass; you become a psychotic asshole whose never checked, and ends up abusing and hurting everyone.
Just btw, behind every raping man, is a momma who only sees a perfect angel :p
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david-graeber-revolution-in-reverse> Let me start with the household. A constant staple of 1950s situation comedies, in America, were jokes about the impossibility of understanding women. The jokes of course were always told by men. Women’s logic was always being treated as alien and incomprehensible. One never had the impression, on the other hand, that women had much trouble understanding the men. That’s because the women had no choice but to understand men: this was the heyday of the American patriarchal family, and women with no access to their own income or resources had little choice but to spend a fair amount of time and energy understanding what the relevant men thought was going on. Actually, this sort of rhetoric about the mysteries of womankind is a perennial feature of patriarchal families: structures that can, indeed, be considered forms of structural violence insofar as the power of men over women within them is, as generations of feminists have pointed out, ultimately backed up, if often in indirect and hidden ways, by all sorts of coercive force. But generations of female novelists — Virginia Woolf comes immediately to mind — have also documented the other side of this: the constant work women perform in managing, maintaining, and adjusting the egos of apparently oblivious men — involving an endless work of imaginative identification and what I’ve called interpretive labor. This carries over on every level. Women are always imagining what things look like from a male point of view. Men almost never do the same for women. This is presumably the reason why in so many societies with a pronounced gendered division of labor (that is, most societies), women know a great deal about men do every day, and men have next to no idea about women’s occupations. Faced with the prospect of even trying to imagine a women’s perspective, many recoil in horror. In the US, one popular trick among High School creative writing teachers is to assign students to write an essay imagining that they were to switch genders, and describe what it would be like to live for one day as a member of the opposite sex. The results are almost always exactly the same: all the girls in class write long and detailed essays demonstrating that they have spent a great deal of time thinking about such questions; roughly half the boys refuse to write the essay entirely. Almost invariably they express profound resentment about having to imagine what it might be like to be a woman. >>696364yeah totally this doesn't have to do with the fact that gender variance in males is heavily punished with violence - i wonder why?
<It's because people hate women!Totally, the peasant being hanged for daring to wear purple shows how wickedly brutal society is against the monarchy.
>>696370I like how you
enforce that women are the victims and presume I'm a man.
I'm a faggot-transhumanister. I've lived basically right on the edge between male and female. Yeah, it sucks consistently being talked over and being given a dismissive laugh when you try to speak your piece, but that's better than being beaten for trying to speak up for yourself when you're not there on the pecking order. Go fuck yourself fascista.
>>696370I agree with that anon thovghever
Yes it is true that as Graeber said women are often vulnerable to violence and has to manage men's ego all the time. But this is balanced by the fact that under the patriarchy beating your wife or other women is literally seen as dishonorable or a sign of societal problem. Meanwhile beating and mutilating men is see as simply discipline; discipline of labour, which manifested in the Army and Prison where corporal punishment and sexual abuse against men is not only encouraged but seen as character building. Almost no men would apply the same thing to women
>>696364i have always thought highly of david graeber since reading and watching some of his work back in 2021. i had no clue he published /lit/ on this subject matter.
thank you for sharing this with us anon, curating an engaging and poignant sample of the text as you did really sold it for me
can’t wait to read it again in its totality when i’m less fried (worked yesterday on ~5 hours of sleep, worked today on 0 hours of sleep)
i hope i’m making sense here i’ve been dissociating hard since like 4pm yesterday
>>696422It's clearly tied to it, plus they're basically brought it up with
>>696375 in arguing an analysis extending to the violence of the patriarchy, which rape is included into.
>>696474>>696423And you two prove my point.
If I don't automatically agree with you and function as your rape slave, then that's problematic – with the latter message wrapped around a snarky reddit tier comment.
Unlike you I don't reject consent, eat shit.
>all of those behaviors are antithetical to what it means to be truly emotionally intelligent,"truly strong people don't go to the gym" 🥸
>why men take no interest in the inner worlds of their women. How true is that, really? <[guy naively posted this before incel rape enthusiasts immediately identified with him in his misogynist thread] lmao
>>696407>Atleast I wouldnt be an abusive, selfish, hypocritical, psychopathic, and rapey piece of shit; or a tolerator of other pos women>>696498>function as your rape slave,<DARVO is a manipulative tactic used by abusers. It involves a perpetrator denying the abuse occurred, attacking the accuser's credibility, and reversing the roles to portray themselves as the victim. <Deny: The perpetrator denies the abuse or wrongdoing they are accused of.<Attack: The perpetrator attacks the accuser's character, credibility, or motives.<Reverse Victim and Offender: The perpetrator flips the narrative to portray themselves as the victim and the actual victim as the aggressor