The difference between MASCULINE and FEMININE COMMUNICATION: information versus experience 

I submit that is an extremely poor analogy. And it seems very much as though you are using it to support the frame that both communications styles are relatively equal and codependent for optimal function. A closer (but certainly still insufficient) analogy would be: Masculine communication is like a language of only spoken words with the absence of inflection or tone or emotional content, and feminine communication is like a language of pure tone, inflection, and emotional content but no words. Both are possible for communicating, and each could potentially benefit from incorporating features of the other...but those benefits are without question asymmetrical in value.

Thank you for the video Dr. Taraban. I am currently working on transmitting more information than emotions for maximum effectivity in order to reach my personal goals

​​@@firestick4991 ​women speak from an *inductive reasoning* position, and their main goal in speaking is for *social cohesion.* But, you are correct about women speaking in an entirely different language. I've been putting together a small translation pamphlet, and if you're curious, here's a portion for you... Translated common phrases of Womanese [*Please be aware of the "Elephant and the rider" issue]: life = Intimate partner (My life = My significant other) Lifestyle = One of the many variable environments of which a life creates by the way it behaves. Exciting = New and different Single = No life (claimed as your own). [She has decided that she wants to test out and pursue an exiting lifestyle.] Experiences = lifestyles that create (positive) feelings (and add to her collection of knowledge). Travel = Exciting experiences Fun = S3x Naughty = Exciting fun Boring = You don't entertain me (lack of experiences) "Find myself" = Find a different lifestyle that's exciting, fun, and maybe even a little naughty. "Free Spirit" = A woman finding themselves through exciting behaviors and experiences. Time &/or space = Wanting to find myself because you're boring Nice = Push over that's good to use for things (food, rides, repairs, lawn care, etc...) Mean = Not Nice (Give or receive) Support = (Give or receive) money or things that solve needs (such as hunger, lack of vehicle, broken equipment, homecare work not being accomplished, etc...). @55hole = Someone that's interested in having fun, and may even be a bit mean. Friends = nice people that help give you support in your current lifestyle. * [Respect = a display of submission to the will or desires of another. One respects, or pays respect to dominance.] Funny/Makes me laugh = Socially Charismatic. Capable of balance, and the blending of the relative respect levels of the self and others within a social network. (Good potential for resource acquisition and social stability) Rude = Disagreeable or Contrary language or behavior, without first proving worth to act in a dominant social position. I.E. One is rude if you take a dominant stance, but do not garner respect. "It's not what you say, but how you say it" = You have been found to be rude, and you must demonstrate your ability to be funny and make people laugh. "Tired of all the FBoys" = Mean @55holes no longer choose me to have fun with. "Looking to settle down/for something serious" = (Consciously) Looking for a nice guy in my life. (Consciously) Looking for someone that is supportive, nice, and respects me.

...waiting for all the lefty cancel culture to begin their comments on "theres no differences between the 2" Who is this white guy think he his talking about feminine vs masculine communication! 3 year old rage, cancel, repeat.

@@tygon13 Very, very well understood. Your translations do a much better job of capturing the real world phenomena than do the technical definitions of these words and phrases. Additional note: Much of what you are describing here, insofar as the use of language goes, is not solely a women's operating system but rather the operating system functioning in humans with overriding irrationality and internal inconsistency. It is a dominant feature of left-leaning and "civilized" thinking, and humans in general have been toggling up this system more and more since the beginning of civilization. The reason one might think of it as "womanese" is because men are innately better at overriding the system, whereas women, by and large, have it set as their default mode. You should try to publish a more detailed and comprehensive collection. This could be a serious project if you were so inclined, and I think it could be quite beneficial to society at large.

Exactly

Great analogy. Thank you for sharing

Interesting description. It is interesting to me that (in general or many cases) “hitting” with words has few legal or social repercussions (barring slander, libel, obscenity, fraud, or fighting words). Hitting with fists almost always has repercussions even if the combatants walk away from it with a truce. So you can crush someone’s soul with words and the victim can be blamed for being soft. But there is zero tolerance for physical assertiveness no matter how disciplined or measured. I’m just making an observation. I don’t condone people hitting each other physically. But, I don’t condone using words to hurt either.

Brilliantly phrased. Thank you!

Women use fists too. And pans, knives.

Accountability is a foreign concept for women.

​@@thereisnosanctuary6184 Go to horny jail.

Hi there, thank you for your honesty! As men and women have coexisted since the dawn of homosapiens, never ever feel shame about having emotions as a woman. They are what they are, and for the most part men understand that. The real exercise in maturity is for women to truly understand that their actions have consequences, and that their words matter. When my ex wife threw tantrums, I understood her intentions loud and clear, but she did not truly understand how throwing tantrums physically and emotionally affects the people around her. Feeling emotion and what we do about them are related, but far from the same thing. I'll just say the quiet part loud: women need to hold themselves accountable for what they say and do more often, just as men need to understand that women communicate emotionally first and logically second.

@@weirdcoincollection Absolutely. Filters and consideration are essential. And when something mean slips out, you apologize. In my experience, mean comments have much more to do with what is going on inside the speaker than the person they are speaking to. My husband told me about things his ex told him and I could not believe it! She was a very tortured, neurotic woman.

@@kwtgjad Is she available?

As a fellow autistic guy i agree that normies' irrationality is cringe.... .

It really does work that way, though. If a person who knows two Germanic languages, he can figure out the gist of a third by focusing on the consonants and ignoring the vowels. The same applies to two Slavic languages or two Romance languages. Vowels can be distortive. Vowels make English and German sound much less similar than they actually are.

Yes. I've been finding that when I don't react right and think things through I can respond in such a better manner than just reacting emotionally right away.

There is no evolution involved but rather the hard wiring of the brain from conception as coded information imparted from a supreme intelligence. You evidently believe like Darwin, that organisms could just change according to need. Darwin, knowing nothing about DNA, genetics or mutations had an excuse for his ignorance. You don’t.

If you take a look at single mother home statistics most women can’t even understand their children.

Well, maybe that claim makes sense, but not in a context of gender. Because communication is never inherently masculine or feminine, it just gets mixed up with very traditional gender roles in this video. Men communicated with each other even before there were battlefields and they too were playing with kids or at least were in situations with friends and family were there was empathy necessary. And also women were hunting too in hunter-gatherer systems, as more recent research suggests. So these two styles of communication have inherently nothing to do with gender, both were used by all genders. And both are still used by all genders today, at least in my experience. Life just doesn’t work when you’re only communicating rationally or only communicating emotionally.

That's because you have been told by the modern propaganda that you should step into her frame to show support, you do not need to become a woman to show support. You just need to give her reassurance the the ground underneath her is not melting and that it's not the end of the world. On the other hand you should bounce all your concerns with other men (friends). Why would you want to go to someone who is not rational and talk about things that are rational. For starters a vvoman can not relate to you issues, and a man friend is going to hold you accountable and tell you straight (not just talk about it for the sake of talking). Like the stock market Men - 5-10 year zoomed out chart of the big picture and direction (consistent and slow) VVomen - 1 day and it's every minute volatility (inconsistent and fast)

And GAYS !

And most politicians

And that’s why women like them so much 🤷‍♀️

Actors, singers, most artists, models, some politicians, lawyers, musicians, poets, homosexuals. Not construction workers, marines, pipefitters, roofers or even many doctors,teachers. "Here's a Thing. It is what it is. You don't like this Thing, don't buy it."

What happened was I was minding my own business when all of a sudden something happened.

... And just the feels sir (say the women).

That is exactly the wrong conclusion. Read any book or other source about communication, they will tell you the same: the solution to this problem is to lead with emotion. Establish common ground first, make sure to create sympathy. Then you can get into whatever topic is on your agenda, but make sure to losen up every now and then. Weave in a joke, pause the rationality for some small talk, so you don't loose your audience halfway through. If you center too much on the rational part, the result will be that you will very clearly remember what was said and agreed upon, whereas your counterpart will mostly not.

Might I recommend Marshall Rosenberg's nonviolent communication (NVC). It marry's together a good balance between acknowledging your emotional state, recognizing and valuing the emotional state of others, and clearly identifying and communicating solid and actionable facts. The premise of it is ...a needs-based communication style that prioritizes the facts of problem solving in order to remedy any emotional discord. It offers a rather good balance that you might find both refreshing and useful.

Well said, sir. Well said. And I'd like to really stress something you said ("Men...had to...'be cold' sometimes to keep that balance")...this right here is major. The more a woman tilts towards the extremes of dysfunctional feminine communication, the more a man will (almost by necessity) tilt towards the extremes of dysfunctional masculine communication. (Almost subconsciously to keep balance.) This is why both individuals need to be developed enough to function within the optimal ranges of their respective communication modes. And I think you already know which party (in modern times) tends to tilt more towards the dysfunctional side without prompt.

@Gohann This connects well to Orion's video about Love having nothing to do with relationships. Which are mainly a platform to exchange value. Seems like every side gotta play their gender part to make this platform work. Thus, a man who can't really share, be vulnerable with his own girl (cause that's not in his job description)... is not really a loved man. That's a dude playing his part in the exchange of values game. They say if you got problems, difficulties etc. - go talk to anyone but your girl. It's a truth nobody talks about.

@Gohann It may not quite seem like it, but everything you've said is completely consistent with my comment. (Your comment articulated it in a much more red pilled manner.) Nicely done. Those "sh!t tests" are designed (often unconsciously) to see if you will stay firm in your role as a leader (in which case you'll maintain the balance by NOT bending to her frame). Most women are biologically driven towards males with solid leadership qualities. They aren't looking for the beta males of the tribe (until they have no other options). And it shouldn't be surprising to men that women are constantly testing for this. Cheers

@@eladbari "Seems like every side gotta play their gender part to make this platform work." You nailed it. (If you get bored, go find my comment under the "Who has more POWER in a RELATIONSHIP" video.) "...not in his job description" So on the mark.

SPOT ON! HEAVENS THEY ARE A PAIN.

Yes indeed....woman are from bra's,men are from penis.....that was the spoof made out of the title...

Maybe I’m crazy but half the people in the comments are missing the “solution” in the end. That both parters need to give a little in communication. If understanding is the basis communication can improve

My experience is the same. Although sometimes I'd get ' humor the crazy person ' responses as well.

Respectfully, that is not because your emotions were not valid or because it was a bad idea to reveal them. It is likely because the person was not mature/balanced enough to be able to hear you. I'm speculating, but it could be that it touched upon a raw nerve and they acted defensive. It doesn't mean you should not try again to express your emotions with a different person :)

I always had to look into her eyes at all times. It was such hard work and I was so focused on doing that that I couldn’t focus on her words anymore

Haha, this is exactly what I went through in my marriage as well, except is was my facial expressions. Now she complains about how I just stare emotionlessly at her when she's upset.

I was attempting to explain to a sibling why I did not want strangers (in this case, a repairman) in my home without me present, because it is potentially dangerous for her. Instead of focusing on my concern for her safety and wellbeing and shifted the topic to how I was being "mean" to her, because of the "smirk" I had on my face. This is when I realized that there is no way to reason with a woman.

I tried that. My ex simply fantasized her own facial expressions and vocal times and projected them onto me.

Omg this, it’s insane sometimes dealing with women

This is soo true! And I’m a woman who gets annoyed when talking to women sometimes. That manipulation is lack of self awareness. Period

There’s a female coworker like this. I see right through her

Damn bruh, who hurt you?😂

@@nevad1784 Your mother. 😂

@@nevad1784 Your mom probably did it. Shame on her!

That’s hilarious and probably true

Female autistics are said to be similiar to a neutotypical male.

And where does sociopathic behavior fit into that equation?

​@@thereisnosanctuary6184Is that so? Interesting...

@@thevisitor1012 I read it in the internet. Truth.

Exactly lol to act like women aren’t intentionally obscure in much of their communication as a tactic is to be naive.

Very important, one of the main points of fyodor dostojevsky's novels. If you lie to others, you will start lying to yourself and believing your lies. You will hate yourself. "The man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to a point that he cannot distinguish the truth within him, or around him, and so loses all respect for himself and for others. And having no respect he ceases to love.”

​@@jimmymaracas6442 they are deceptive by nature

Based

I doubt that sentence is 100% true.

You're right. And this is because part of the mechanism of being a man is to see reality, so that they can alter it, for the better survival of our species. And part of the mechanism of being a woman is to maintain social cohesion, in order for us to unite, for the better survival of our species. In theory, this creates a species that works together, and alters and improves their environment.... A species that survives and thrives.

And women have successfully destroyed that one purpose of their existence

Well said

It’s truly crazy and usually when are saying the same thing but in different languages

Well said🥂👏🏾

Getting angry is not feminine, how you express that anger can be. Most women tend to get emotional, most men internalize, let it burn and move on; or exercise stoicism. Talking about plants and animals is not feminine; how you do it may be.

@@sargeb.cuttin6512 maybe I wasn’t clear; when someone is angry, they are expressing with feminine energy. When someone stays “stoic” as you said, they are expressing with masculine energy. Everyone has both. When speaking to plants, animals, babies people tend to be more emotional, either softer or harder than usual which is feminine energy. Being calm, deliberate, and logical is masculine energy. That doesn’t mean that men are in masculine energy all the time and women in feminine energy all the time. We need a mix.

It's always I'm a 10, or I'm ugly

I dialed a wrong number and the lady at the end was a hot mess, buy we decided to chat all night. She described herself as at least a 7, maybe an 8. I looked up her Facebook. 4. Being generous including personality, independence....i give her a 5.5.

​@@yumirow7487and the "I'm ugly" ones are usually just chad widows that got dumped or exploited

Evolutionary biology is the lazy and simple answer. But it isn't off the mark.

The key word you used was ‘most’. So you are correct that most women despise when men show feminine energy or emotion. The reason for this is it’s akin to a magnet of like charge approaching another magnet with the same charge. Polarity is important dude. When you, as a man, dip into the feminine, you force the woman out of the feminine and into the masculine, which most are not comfortable with hence the repulsion. The trick is the find a woman who is good with balance, where she is feminine 70-75% of the time, but does allow you the space to be in your emotions occasionally. That’s a sign of an emotionally mature woman. Most women out there aren’t capable of that tho so it makes it easier for you to weed them out. Hope this helps

They can't look up to, or respect someone who is emotional and weak. You need to pay attention to their actions, not what they say.

I think in women's head they want it, it sounds in theory good to be open with your feelings. In practice when they actually get their man being emotional, they realize it's not what they want.

From an evolutionary-psychology perspective, women experience greater negative emotion because they're meant to feel and communicate for the infants and small children they would traditionally be caring for. From this perspective an emotional man is a liability to a woman. The idea of the "emotionally sensitive man" is a post-feminism idea, which is to say an idea from after the time academics indoctrinated society to believe men and women weren't really that different and traditional gender norms were just made up, which is to say a wrong and bad idea. Women say they want emotional men because somebody told them that's what they want, but they really don't. They want a man who can get fired from his job, come home without a hint of panic and sincerely tell her 'everything will be OK'.

I get this man. I keep hoping to find a woman with interesting thoughts or perspectives but they're just self-absorbed. It's all about them and how they feel.

I tend to have concern for other’s emotions in as much as it relates to the objective I or we are seeking. Men and women are emotional creatures. Emotional in different ways. If I’m indifferent to other’s’ emotions, I could fail at my well crafted, logical scheme because I get no buy in. I think as a male I can feel good if it makes sense. I think for many women, it makes sense if it feels good.

wtf, are you calling men materialistic

Reality is wider than thoughts, concepts and emotions ....that's why mystics wipe the floor with philosophers.

Whaaa…?

As an autistic man i concur. Me and women come from different universes that could never connect

​@@paulhunter1422-- The writer assumed background knowledge which I happen to have. He is 100% correct.

​@@keylanoslokj1806-- Omfg, you are so right!!!!!

I've done a lot of work in places with young men who're neurodivergent. My specialty is hearing loss and ASL so I've had very little training in the more common forms of neurodivergence. I mention that because I was continually flabbergasted at the utter INability of most women to tell when a ND man was experiencing overload or some other type of distress. A main part of the reason seemed to be they paid no attention to his language. They seemed unable to grasp that the men often showed their affect (demeanor/mood/emotional state) with their language, not their facial expression, body language, or tone of voice. Most (not all) of the women couldn't figure out how I knew a guy needed some assistance with whatever. They were always, "But how did you know?". My answer was usually, "Because he told me." The women invariably responded with, "But he didn't seem angry..." I'd respond with, "He wasn't doing any 'seeming'. He communicated his emotional state directly & explicitly." Seriously, how fucking complicated is this? At the time I thought it was a lack of training. Then I realized that this particular type of miscommunication only seemed to occur when the men were ND and the staff were NT females. Subsequent experiences only reinforced my perception that gender was the main factor.

_"Despite the description of his views and his reputation as a misogynist, Sim maintains that he is not one. In 2008, Sim sent out a self-written form letter to individuals who had sent him mail, detailing his disagreement with being called a misogynist and disenchantment with what he perceived as a dearth of support in refuting those claims to his character. Contending that society perceived misogynists as the "lowest, subhuman form of life in our society", he mentioned that few, if any, people had defended him, allowing him to be called "the lowest, subhuman form of life in our society with impunity." Sim's letter ended with an ultimatum, requesting that those who wished to receive his return correspondence reply with a letter or online posting and the statement, "I do not believe Dave Sim is a misogynist." All others were asked not to attempt to contact him again."_

You have a typo in the titel

It is a titillating to topic although feminine recognizes Mac u lying.

Well. I guess that explains why I could spend ten minutes explaining the car breaking down on the way home and it having been towed to the garage only to have her ask where the car is. Yup, that's my ex..... Paying attention to everything except what was actually going on.

It really comes down to your audience. If you're giving a speech to a class full of female students and you put zero emotion or expression into your speech, no matter how informative and well-crafted your message is, you are going to put them to sleep. If you're giving a speech to a class full of male students and you put zero facts into your speech, no matter how riveting of a story you tell, they are going to feel that the class was pointless (i.e. no 'information' was conveyed). In either case there will be some students who might enjoy/appreciate the speech anyways, but in general the chosen approach was ill-suited. Ultimately I don't think either style is 'better' or 'worse' than the other, it just depends on who your audience is and what you're trying to convey. And it's obvious that the marriage of the two is ideal. If you've spent any significant time reading academic papers, legal briefs, terms of service, user manuals, etc., mediums where the information is almost entirely 'masculine' you will find that it is incredibly difficult to read and digest. It is 'useful' but it is a chore to sit down and read. If you sprinkle the same information with even the tiniest bit of personality, levity, or anecdotes however you are more likely to find it memorable and easier to understand and digest. I literally just used this approach in my opening argument- the first sentence is masculine, and the following two chunks are emotionally evocative anecdotes. They aren't full-blown 'emotional journeys', but the feeling of boredom in the first case and frustration in the second case adds some depth to the message and argument.

Both have their uses IMO, I think which style is more effective is too context dependent to really say one is clearly better than the other but otherwise agree with everything you've said. In my experience treating your woman something like a cross between cherished pet and a spoiled teenager makes for the healthiest, most harmonious relationships. Don't take their words too seriously, but don't totally discount what they have to say either.

​@@TrenchcoatJesus Thank you for your answer. That's why I think the masculine way of communication is superior. Not because it is per se (!), but because it is much more variable and adaptable. I agree with you that good communication consists of being sensitive to the other person and their understanding of language. At least if I have the goal that the other person understands me somehow. That's why good communication should be flexible. But it seems to me that flexibility is much more difficult when I act emotionally from the beginning. I wouldn't say that men communicate better per se. I think it's like all things in life: You communicate as well as you have learned and trained. My problem with some partners was not that they communicated in a "feminine" way, but at the level of children. As if they hadn't learned anything in twenty years after their youth. (But I also know enough men who are somehow stuck in their development of communication).

The more and more you deal with women, the more and more it does make you feel like you are deal with pets that are just ruled by instinct and emotion. The worst thing you can do is match their emotionality and try to communicate like them. Learn to interpret their emotions, reflect back to them confidence and understanding and then tell them what to do without arguing with them. Both sides are pretty happy once she feels understood and he feels obeyed.

@@Chuckommando You learn what you practice. By and large, women practice communication. They are experts at wordplay and arguments, because with these tools they can obtain what they want. By and large, this also means developing and weaponizing emotion as a kind of 'trump card' to establish themselves amongst other women and in relationships they form with men. Many may not even consciously realize they are doing this, they are simply repeating behavior that has been positively reinforced in them since they were young to get the things they want. If I act a certain way, I attract the attention I like. If I complain a certain way, I get the outcome I want. They are trained to be narcissistic, because narcissists are rewarded. 'Good', honest, humble, non-manipulative women are not rewarded by society at large. Conversely, men do not practice communication nearly as much. To the point where you noticed some men have underdeveloped communication skills. This is because they do not need to improve their communication skills to get what they want- they don't need to be excellent storytellers to enjoy status among their friend groups. They don't need to be stellar communicators to attract women (it certainly helps, though!). What they need (and what they practice) is practical skills i.e. a job. Men with access to wealth and resources are rewarded. Men without are not rewarded.

We're you raised mostly by your father?

Same here, but I like chatting with everyone. It's a different kind of fun. I do like the endless roasting aspect you don't get from both sides. It's fun having diverse friends; when I want affection, I go to the the girls, when I want banter or the unfiltered truth, I go to the guys.

Yes. I'd pay him $50 to do so, and hide the cable. It gives me a weird OCD...

Why do Americans always want to put TVs on walls? Someone should get on that…

@@mark9294 Lol :) Personally I have an 86" TV (sorry, even in Canada they use imperial for TV size), and even though it's flat, it's really really heavy. Wall mounting it saved some room, and increased safety in case of a hard bump, earthquake etc. 3 of my speakers are also wall mounted around the set. The subwoofer, due to physical constraints (it's huge!) sits on the floor. I'm didn't know this was a North American thing. I'm actually an Aussie living here, but found in Australia many people also wall mount. It's cleaner looking as well. Anyway, just my 2c.

What did he say that's misogynistic?

​@@SisypheanRoller-- I think the OP was going by surface impressions. I agree that he uses a lot of words that over-wrought people tend to label 'misogynistic'. However, if you actually attend to the information you realize he's not misogynistic. In many of his vids he accurately describes most of my interactions with women.

Yeah, largely true. And it's not just speech, it's also morality. For example, the "we must lock down everyone during covid to protect grandma" is a feminine response. The masculine response would have been "no lockdowns, but strong advice to stay home."

Society swings like a pendulum and often overcorrects. 50 years ago, it would’ve sucked to be a woman. Right now we’re in the middle of a very necessary but excessive period of feminization. Things will even out again soon. The worst thing any of us can do is be bitter about it. You have to wake up everyday and be prepared to engage with the world with sincerity, curiosity, honesty, and a desire to make things better.

@@HelloWorld-cq1sq SPOT ON! The ones in charge are doing everything to break the harmony between m3n & vv0men because and to encourage society to be more f3minine, because a f3minine society is a controlled one. Motivated by fear, since everything to such society is about security...security...security. And when the Nevvs braוnwash 24/7 to fear for our lives- then such illogical society will do whatever they tell us to do. A m@sculine society? After 2-3 weeks would say "F-that. I'm going to work". Now they saw how easy it is to control the world, so crazy stuff is gonna come next. And the funny thing is how f3mini$ts keep repeating the mantra of how the "p@triarchy still rules". Yea, ok.

@Decernere Initium "women were happier 50 years ago .." Eh .. I'd say .. 64-plus years ago. In 1960 the hormonal birth control was approved by the FDA, and *that* changed *everything.*

You raise some good points and clear, critical questions. As a side note, are you employed in research or academia? I think you would be good at it. You’re absolutely right to point out that sincerity can lead us to ruin. I should clarify that sincerity is necessary for making the world better, but it is not sufficient on its own. One must also have wisdom and many forms of objective knowledge such as understanding how global economic systems work, just to name one. I think the attributes I listed as being valuable earlier are really most valuable for engaging constructively with people whose viewpoints we disagree with, and they are not necessarily a comprehensive toolkit for improving everything. I agree that modern values regarding gender and other things are often enforced top-down, but I don’t think that’s an adequate explanation of their origin or rise to prominence. These things wouldn’t be prominent if a lot of people didn’t agree with them, or if they weren’t benefitting some significant portion of society. Now, that doesn’t make them all good, but I think we should agree that there is no centralized effort to reshape society in a matriarchal fashion, unless you believe that it had been deliberately structured in a patriarchal fashion previously. Personally, I find the notion of the patriarchy to be nebulous and suspect, and I treat any notion of a matriarchy or something like that to be equally nebulous and suspect. Why do I think “feminization” was necessary? Unfortunately, this point is harder to defend, and if you disagree then I doubt I can change your mind. Personally, I think women have benefitted from an increased level of individual respect and an increased lev of access to expertise and money. I also think men have benefitted from increased permission and encouragement to explore their emotions and their vulnerability. Do I think any part of this has changed perfectly? Of course not. I also think some things were probably fine they were before. But that’s why I say it’s a pendulum swing, and in the process of correcting, we usually overcorrect to some extent. Finally I will address the claims that women were happier 50 years ago. That may very well actually be true, and until I do an in-depth review of the research, I have to remain agnostic with regards to that specific metric. You express some skepticism of that metric and I think you are right to do so, as happiness seems like a very difficult to measure. Furthermore, I think we can both agree that happiness is not actually the most important goal possible. Wouldn’t you say that, too, in response to the claims some feminists make that women score as being happier when they’re not dating men? Or just consider children. Most children are happier than their future adult selves, but I think we can all understand that remaining a child forever is not the best thing imaginable. So it goes for women as they have gained more independence.

I've found the same thing with my vocal modulation. Women misunderstand it much more often than not.