I theorize that this stuff is very subculture dependent. So I'll note that the above example took place in Chicago in the 90's.
Genuine question, why are there so many dudes in the world who think of themselves as âprotectorsâ, and yet Iâve never been âprotectedâ while being harassed in public?
Now most creeps will try to get you alone somewhere, and generally all of them will leave you alone while you are clearly with another dude, but there are a lot of creeps who will harass you in broad day light on a busy street.
Here is an example: I was ~12 on the train with my little sister. We sat down next to each other and the dude across from us was a big guy in his 30âs, drunk. He sees us, stairs, pulls his pants down and starts masturbating. This train car was not empty. About 40% of the seats were taken. All sorts of people on that train car, women and men, just sat there and ignored it while this guy masturbates in front of two not even teenage girls.
Where are the protectors?
Sigh, Iâm 41 and still âthe wallâ remains an elusive myth.
Iâve spent the past 3 days strolling around Chicago as we are in town for the holidays. 3 days and not one cat call⊠and then I dared to think it, maybe, maybe itâs finally happened. Perhaps Iâve hit âthe wallâ and the creeps are no longer interested in me. Maybe! đ€đ€
Not 5 mins later and a dude starts walking next to me rather erratically. In front of me, then behind me⊠maybe heâs just drunk? But nope. Then he starts walking close behind me commenting on how âsexyâ I am.
Iâve just had it with this shit. I turned around, took my headphones out, clutch my pepper spray, and gave him a lecture about how very uncool that is of him. He actually took it pretty well.
The oh so âsexyâ outfit that Iâm wearing is pajama pants, gym shoes, and a full length black wool coat. Hot shit.
I don't have a great soundbite evidence, but I can roll out the argument through indirect evidence:
- Hierarchy has direct effect on health (cardiovascular system, cortisone levels)
- Hierarchy can be effective way to divide goods and labor
- Male and female hierarchies are different - male are more strict structure (shown in mice and some studies on primates/humans)
- Social comparison has worse effects for women
- Countries pushing for gender equality resulted in more psychological differences between men and women.
This psychology journal explored hierarchy from different directions, but especially the effects on health:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/current-opinion-in-psychology/vol/33/suppl/C
The results (e.g. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352250X19300946 ) show that the people on top of hierarchy end up being healthier, less stressed, etc. Fairly believable imo, matches my personal experience.
Further, hierarchy can be effective way to divide goods and labor (shown in
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5494206/#:~:text=Importantly%2C%20the%20organization%20of%20social,and%20labor%20among%20group%20members. with further evidence)
There is way more research in mice and monkeys, but not sure how much you believe that translates into humans, e.g. showing differences between male and female hierarchies: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-43747-w#:~:text=Female%20mouse%20hierarchies%20exhibit%20several,directional%20consistency%20than%20male%20hierarchies.
Now to the point, this shows one example where social comparison is notably worse for women compared to men: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21642850.2024.2390939#references-Section
And just to highlight, if the countries/nations push more towards gender equality (in some dimension, like work), it actually ends up in causing larger psychological difference in personality, values, and emotions between men and women (as shown in https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2007-07951-011 ), which presumably would make the social comparison effects more pronounced.
Have you studied religion, or philosophy, or psychology? If you dig into any of these, they all point to comparison being the bringer of misery. And, unfortunately, given the state of most of the world in the past few thousand years, nearly all of that work was done by men(as in males).
Oh this one is also interesting specifically about competition difference between men and women: https://sci-hub.se/10.1257/0002828041301821
"The results confirm the initial conjecture: competition
enhances the performance of males, but not
females."
I think this is the most direct evidence for your question I could find.
Are you a religious or spiritual person at all?
I don't think we can deny that there are animalist aspects to humans. I have a friend that likes to joke that humans are what you get when a an angle and a chimp have a baby.
Humans have the ugly zerosum primate instincts, but we also have more enlightened more cooperative instincts too. So the question is... where do we want to go from here? Which of our sets of instincts do we want to lean into?
I don't have a great soundbite evidence, but I can roll out the argument through indirect evidence:
- Hierarchy has direct effect on health (cardiovascular system, cortisone levels)
- Hierarchy can be effective way to divide goods and labor
- Male and female hierarchies are different - male are more strict structure (shown in mice and some studies on primates/humans)
- Social comparison has worse effects for women
- Countries pushing for gender equality resulted in more psychological differences between men and women.
This psychology journal explored hierarchy from different directions, but especially the effects on health:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/current-opinion-in-psychology/vol/33/suppl/C
The results (e.g. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352250X19300946 ) show that the people on top of hierarchy end up being healthier, less stressed, etc. Fairly believable imo, matches my personal experience.
Further, hierarchy can be effective way to divide goods and labor (shown in
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5494206/#:~:text=Importantly%2C%20the%20organization%20of%20social,and%20labor%20among%20group%20members. with further evidence)
There is way more research in mice and monkeys, but not sure how much you believe that translates into humans, e.g. showing differences between male and female hierarchies: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-43747-w#:~:text=Female%20mouse%20hierarchies%20exhibit%20several,directional%20consistency%20than%20male%20hierarchies.
Now to the point, this shows one example where social comparison is notably worse for women compared to men: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21642850.2024.2390939#references-Section
And just to highlight, if the countries/nations push more towards gender equality (in some dimension, like work), it actually ends up in causing larger psychological difference in personality, values, and emotions between men and women (as shown in https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2007-07951-011 ), which presumably would make the social comparison effects more pronounced.
Humans are not chimps, and human progress comes from cooperation, not from domination.
Here is a lovely article on the topic, https://freemansperspective.com/i-like-jordan-peterson-but-hes-wrong/
"The dominance strategies of animals generate animal results.
The cooperative strategies of humans generate human and humane results."
Where do you want humanity to go from here?
I don't have a great soundbite evidence, but I can roll out the argument through indirect evidence:
- Hierarchy has direct effect on health (cardiovascular system, cortisone levels)
- Hierarchy can be effective way to divide goods and labor
- Male and female hierarchies are different - male are more strict structure (shown in mice and some studies on primates/humans)
- Social comparison has worse effects for women
- Countries pushing for gender equality resulted in more psychological differences between men and women.
This psychology journal explored hierarchy from different directions, but especially the effects on health:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/current-opinion-in-psychology/vol/33/suppl/C
The results (e.g. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352250X19300946 ) show that the people on top of hierarchy end up being healthier, less stressed, etc. Fairly believable imo, matches my personal experience.
Further, hierarchy can be effective way to divide goods and labor (shown in
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5494206/#:~:text=Importantly%2C%20the%20organization%20of%20social,and%20labor%20among%20group%20members. with further evidence)
There is way more research in mice and monkeys, but not sure how much you believe that translates into humans, e.g. showing differences between male and female hierarchies: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-43747-w#:~:text=Female%20mouse%20hierarchies%20exhibit%20several,directional%20consistency%20than%20male%20hierarchies.
Now to the point, this shows one example where social comparison is notably worse for women compared to men: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21642850.2024.2390939#references-Section
And just to highlight, if the countries/nations push more towards gender equality (in some dimension, like work), it actually ends up in causing larger psychological difference in personality, values, and emotions between men and women (as shown in https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2007-07951-011 ), which presumably would make the social comparison effects more pronounced.
It's debatable if hierarchy is good for those at the top with primates, it can be very stressful to maintain that status. And certainly hierarchy is very bad for those at the bottom.
Also, humans are not chimpanzees... thankfully, and even more so, even Baboons are not doomed to hierarchy. here is an interesting case study.
There are things in life that are zerosum. It is a matter of survival that we can compete with others for those zerosum resources. However, if your self concept is zerosum, your mental health will suffer.
Sometimes we go through a phase of life where we need to prove to ourselves that we can âmake itâ, essentially that we can survive the zerosum aspects of human life.
Have you read âHow to Know a Personâ by David Brooks? It's worth the time and there is a section in there about various "life tasks" that a person may be undertaking at any point in their life. One of them he calls Empirical. Here we prove to our selves that we can achieve things and develop agency. This is comparative and competitive. and can lead to narcissistic and abusive behavior if not moved past. It's an important task in life, but is disastrous if we stay there too long.
So the idea here is that comparison is good for men... as in males specifically?
Please give me some evidence here.
Have you ever read any of Nathaniel Branden's work?
"Genuine self-esteem is not competitive or comparative. Neither is genuine self-esteem expressed by self-glorification at the expense of others, or by the quest to make oneself superior to all others or to diminish others so as to elevate oneself" - Nathaniel Branden, Honoring the Self
I don't think so.
In my head there is a direct link between comparison and anxiety. It's about a 5 second delay, the comparison enters my head and 5 seconds later the anxiety hits my body.
Healing from anxiety requires removing comparison.
What might be some examples?
...you think there is healthy comparison?
American culture is so very, very comparative. There is a constant âwho is above who?â that is pervasive in the American subconscious.
For most of my life I was consumed by it. Now I see it, but it will probably take another few years to properly work it out of my head.
Comparison is the path to misery. True confidence, real peace, requires an absence of comparison.
Itâs been over 7 years since the #MeToo movement and I need to take a moment to appreciate all that it did for women.
This movement began the flipping of sexual assault shame from the victims, to the perpetrators. It dramatically improved my life and my safety, and gave me hope for my daughters safety in the world.
Prior to Oct 2017, I had bought into the idea that the mistreatment of women was mostly a thing of the past. Because of this I as assumed that the assaults and mistreatment that I had endured must have been flukes, horrible luck, or just a result of stupidity on my part. It wasnât until that week, when I received a flood of texts and calls from female friends telling me the stories of the abuse that they endured, that I learned that I wasnât unlucky at all, I was actually very, very fortunate as nearly all my American female friends had endured much worse abuse than I did.
The abuse that I had endured wasnât a fluke, it was simply the result of the abuse of women still being endemic in our world. That week lifted the veil of secrecy and shame that was so pervasive.
To those who are concerned about the use of #metoo as a political weapon, remember, it is the job of a politician or any sort of âinfluencerâ to jump on any bandwagon they can find and try to steer it in a direction that serves them. The abuse of the me too movement is exactly that, just more abuse in the world. Those using this for personal gain also deserve our condemnation, they deserve to carry some shame.
Villains never think that they are villains. They are just people who decided that the ends justified the means.
Today marks 15 years since me and nostr:npub1mfpdevu5dsuclurfns4t3ypah8uwje73dcyycfuenxhpnq9997jqp7nesj decided to put our relationship agreements in writing at the Lake County Court House.
I don't want to push the idea that the "success" of a relationship is measured in years, it's not, it's measured in how healthy it is for the participants. But, with that measure of success, we are 17 years in and I think we're still doing pretty well. And that is very much worth celebrating đŸ đ„đŻđ«¶

No. but the person who is driven to become a billionaire is a person with a very comparative self concept. They won't be stopping.
