Men (via other men’s judgments) can more easily manipulate social status around male roles in ways that change their attractiveness and bargaining power, because male peer respect weighs more heavily in opposite‑sex partner choice than vice versa. This asymmetry makes status‑based tactics (shaming, prestige boosting) a more effective coordination tool for men, which can help explain persistent gender norms and why certain culture‑war shaming campaigns succeed.
— If true, the idea explains why status‑based social campaigns (and policy appeals that rely on them) have asymmetric effects by sex, affecting debates on sexual norms, workplace gender policy, and cultural messaging.
@degenrolf
2026.01.06
65% relevant
The tweet’s claim that 'toxic masculinity' is absent in most men relates to the existing idea about how male status coordination drives behavior and social signaling: both concern which male behaviors are widespread versus exceptional and call for distinguishing status‑driven tactics from pathological group traits—i.e., the tweet questions an attribution that the 'Male Status‑Coordination Advantage' idea explains as social signaling, not universal toxicity.
Robin Hanson
2025.11.30
100% relevant
Hanson’s concrete claim that 'how much other men respect a man counts a lot more to women than how much other women respect a woman counts to men' and his examples of 'slut' shaming and 'hen‑peck' stigma illustrate the mechanism.
← Back to All Ideas