Another curious thing I observe is that I find far more women than men who associate negative connotations to the idea of "competition", as though it's on the polar opposite spectrum of "cooperation". For me at least, that's completely off. I see competition, provided people are reasonably good sports about it, to be an ultimately cooperative activity. If lots of guys see things the way I do, that might explain why they don't go to war with each other and hold grudges with each other in more competitive environments.It's like I've been competing with friends since I was a little boy, over everything. We'd compete and tease each other but it wasn't hostile, it was cooperative and friendly. It's like we were ritualistically preparing each other for a competitive world. Girls who don't have that sort of upbringing might see competition as more hostile even through the huge differences in sociological conditioning and the lack of healthy competitive behavior they were exposed to growing up.My wife's an exceptional case. She was raised halfway like a boy with her brothers, took Kendo from her father who is a Kendo master along with her brothers (although also ballet, piano, and ballet from mother), and she doesn't see competition as a hostile activity and is a very good sport about it (gracious winner and gracious loser). It's like even early on in the dating process she wanted to take these two romantic boats and race against each other across the lake, and I loved that "boyish" side of her, and I think that's what helped her work from an intern to the leader in her workplace. But she's highly unlike most women I've ever met.
I think it's this general negative view about competition and inherently seeing it as a hostile activity (a view I can't help but was driven by some group of women) that I think we have things like "participation trophies" now. I can't help but see all these things as somewhat related.
I think you nailed it. And it makes sense from an evolutionary/biology perspective. Men had to work together, fight in wars together and generally do all the horrible, grueling labor together. When you put men together and give them a task the worker bee instinct takes over. Personal vendettas don't enter into the equation. They're focused on getting shit done. Women in the work environment can't stop fighting over who gets to be "Queen Bee". You can really see why the division of labor ended up as it did. It wasn't by accident.
@joanofarcher I wonder if there's a way to counteract this somewhat sociologically. We guys do have our own belligerence though -- sometimes egotistical, territorial, insensitivity, and I've not seen guys immune to jealousy in all contexts (but I usually think they need something they both want, like a girl).I think one thing that helps with the competition is that guys tend to be competing on multiple dimensions. It's like when I was a boy, we'd compete over so many things, including the silliest... fastest runner, strongest arm-wrestler, who can balance a spoon on their nose, who gets the highest score in a video game, who is the best at solving puzzles, etc. etc. etc. The sheer number of dimensions we were competing along usually meant that there was a place for practically everyone in our group to excel and gain some respect.Meanwhile, I sometimes think women are competing on narrower dimensions... like maybe who is prettiest or something like this. I see guys reduced to pettiness and jealousy when they're reduced to competing on narrower dimensions too, but often I think they're more prone to compete on much wider dimensions.
@joanofarcher "Men had to work together, fight in wars together and generally do all the horrible, grueling labor together"You are talking about a blip in terms of our evolutionary time though. Our behaviors were set way before wars or labor together happened.But I also think speaking from an evolution point of view, I think men would be more competitive with themselves than women would be with themselves. Look at other animals and you'll notice women tolerate themselves much more than men tolerate themselves. There are way more animal societies with multiple women than multiple men.
@cavmanier I think the men were hunting in packs and fighting off predators since long before we were standing upright and using lettered language
@joanofarcher maybe you're right but that's not what I understand happening. If that's true though, women were still together in groups when they were doing their daily activities too.But what I was saying though is that men are much more competitive when it comes to getting women then the other way around. Women just sit back and pick the best they can get. Women aren't fighting each other for men.
@cavmanier "Women aren't fighting each other for men"We are constantly doing so. I think its just happening on a subtler level so guys don't pick up on it..
@joanofarcher If you do fight for men, it's super passive. It doesn't seem comparable to what men would do. It could be that women use their minds and manipulation to win because their bodies aren't able to fight as well. I don't know.But seriously, women are known to have more socially developed brains and have more friends than men on average so I don't understand this guy's question.
@cavmanier. It definitely requires some Grey matter in the brain to understand the sayings of great men.I think you're better off readimg junk and fairy-tales that have a nice ending to sooth your sensibilities and novice convictions of the world.
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
Right that is why men have been at war killing each other for thousand of years... . Bc women are more competitive with women.
@VIVANT Men's neurochemistry shows brotherhood is built by men through physical activity. In women sisterhood is built by talking and social activities. Due to testosterone men are more hostile to outgroup people, and altruistic to ingroup people.