Do we cut women more slack than men?

Okay, I got the idea for this thread when I read the thread about the guy whose wife found strange panties in the wash and thought he was cheating. A lot of people pointed out that the wife is pregnant/hormonal and to go easy on her.

I get the whole pregnancy thing, but I just wonder, if a guy did that stuff, would we be as easy to forgive? Would we say, “Oh, he’s scared/anxious/upset at work, give him a break” if he thought his wife was cheating and got very accusatory? I can’t help thinking that if someone did that I’d assume they were a bit controlling. And those kinds of excuses with a guy seem a bit enabling, and I couldn’t help wondering, is that because behavior that seems scary in a man just seems “emotional” in a woman?

In general I think emotional displays are more expected from women. If a woman bursts into tears or gets really angry about something, I don’t think people (necessarily) think she’s unstable. But when a man does so, do we see it as scarier, as more threatening?

Are there behaviors that we would see as more acceptable in a woman than in a man? And is that okay?

When I say we, I guess I just mean western culture in general or American, specifically.

It’s either OK or not OK depending upon your political ideology (I’m going to guess your view - you can probably guess mine :p)

As a general rule if you believe that men and women are different in some way, and we have a duty to treat people fairly, and that one of those ways is that women are more likely to be emotional, then of course we should give women more slack.

If however we believe that a strict equality of opportunity (or whatever you want to call it) is important, then no it is not fair to treat women and men differently.

Of course one needs to be more granular than this and tailor towards the individual. I would probably be more sensitive to that Chris Crocker guy than a 50 year old matron… heck, I’d probably be more sensitive to most men than a fifty year old matron :smiley:

But in the absence of any other information, sure, cut women more slack :slight_smile:

Women get cut a lot more slack then men IMHO, for everything from “emotional behavior” to crime. A man who took the liberties many women do would at the least end up a social pariah, if not in jail.

As I see it though both sides of the political spectrum are guilty of this. The Left tends to think that women are innately morally superior or victims deserving reparations. The Right thinks that women are weak willed idiots on the other hand; too stupid, too weak to be held responsible for much.

Both sides for their own reasons actually believe things like a women who cries and claims “my husband made me steal all that money” and toss him, not her in prison. The Left thinks that women are morally superior to men, and so much less likely to be stealing or lying (and besides, as a man her husband deserves punishment on general principles); the Right thinks that women can’t stand up to a man or make her own decisions.

I think you answered your own question…hormones.

Generalize much?

Not this again. Exactly how are we to speak of broad, general groups except in generalizations? Why aren’t you complaining about the OP using such general terms as “men”, “women”, and “we”?

I agree completely with everything Der Trihs said.

I think women (of which I’m one) get cut a lot of slack in most areas except sexual activity. It’s not as bad as it used to be, but the bias is still there.

Sorry…thought this was another circumcision thread.

How about sentencing differences between male teacher/female teenager and female teacher/male teenager?

I think you’ll find that on both of sides of many issues (crimes, outbursts, what have you) people get forgiven when they act according to gender stereotypes and punished when they don’t – or, in some cases, the complete opposite, wherein they get less sympathy for acting in a way or having a problem ‘typical’ to their gender (and therefore something they should just deal with). For example, from what I was taught in criminal psych, female juvenile delinquents get lighter sentences when they cry and dress in a feminine manner (but harsher when they stay stonefaced or are, to put it simply, butch). You see a bit of this with single mothers, who are par for the course, and single fathers, who get singled out as doing something extraordinary (and, conversely, looked at sideways in the kiddie pool and left out of some PTA discussions).

OTOH, a recent psych study showed that people are less sympathetic to men and women suffering from disorders seen as ‘typical’ to their gender (e.g. depression in women). Abstract below:

Re. the other thread, the effects of gestating a fetus for nine months are pretty measurable, so I can’t imagine cutting someone slack for the hormones, physical risks, discomfort, psychological stress, etc. is going above and beyond.

What the hell? I agree completely with a Der Trihs post?

Part is gender identity. Men get cut more slack for working long hours/going out with the boys and not helping around the house or with the kids. Women get cut more slack at work for taking time off for family issues. The women in the home/man earning a living expectation is still pretty strong, though it is getting weaker all the time.

Additionally, for many interaction behaviors, what matters is the perceived power imbalance. Men who hit women are looked down on much more than women who hit men. But the same is true for large bullies who pick on smaller/weaker kids vs. tough guys who like get in bar room brawls. Behaviors that would be considered macho bonding (head butts, chest bumps, nut shots or just getting in each other’s face), between two similarly sized athletes/teenagers/soldiers become something else entirely if one of them was a full back and the other was an old man with Parkinson’s.

I agree. Men, for example, get a lot more tolerance for domineering/aggressive behavior that would be called “bitchy” or “shrewish” or “controlling” or “ballbusting” if a woman engaged in it. Men can also get away with more sexual promiscuity than women can: he’s a “player”, she’s a “whore”.

On the other side of the coin, women are “allowed” to be irresponsible or emotionally undisciplined in lots of ways that a man couldn’t get away with without being called “wussy” or “immature” or “weak”.

I agree with this.

Not that long ago there was thread in which the OP was complaining about her ex being an absentee dad. A lot of people blamed her for his distance because, according to the OP own’s testimony, she had nagged him earlier in their relationship.

I have a hard time believing an absentee mother would have been able to use her -ex’s nagging personality as a excuse to become a stranger to her kids.

When a woman’s nagging is portrayed as an offense worse than a man basically abandoning his offspring, I don’t think it’s fair to flatly say that women are cut more slack than men.

At my workplace, at least, women get cut a lot less slack than their male coworkers. Female bosses tend to expect more from their female employees than they do from the males.

Woman don’t rape men in general. Rape and violent crimes mostly male crimes. It does seem though that women teachers can sleep with students and even get pregnant by boys and they get off easy? If a male teacher did it they would punished more severely.

Women seem to get a big fat pass on this issue.

Is there? The male teacher/female teenager thing actually happens quite often, and it regularly results in not much more than a quiet transfer for the teacher. We don’t hear about it in the news because we find it unremarkable that a male teacher would want to sleep with a teenage student, whereas we find it interesting and unusual that a female teacher would.

Since when?! In reality, that sort of thing creates screams of “child molester”, or even “Satanic cult!” The truth is the exact opposite; when a female teacher is caught with a male student there’s lots of winking about how “lucky” he was, while a male teacher who is even accused of sex with a student much less proven guilty is treated as a monster.

Holy spaghetti monster, yes. And vice-versa. Vive la différence.

But why is that a good thing? If there’s behavior that we would see as childish in a man but normal in a woman, does that mean that we see women as more childlike and men as more capable? If so, I think that’s really an outdated way of thinking that needs to be amended.