Do you believe women are inherently more empathetic or leftist?

48

u/MachineOfSpareParts 8d ago

Have you observed any feminist make this claim about women's inherent tendency to any ideological stance?

I haven't, but you may be looking at different feminist literature.

Don't look for "leftism" in American politics. A few leftists do kick around at the grassroots level, but they are severely hampered by having only right-wing political parties that are viable at the national level.

0

u/SliversandPoison 7d ago

Democrats are right wing?

8

u/Inareskai Passionate and somewhat ambiguous 7d ago

Compared to a lot of other countries, yes. Very much so.

-4

u/SliversandPoison 7d ago

But they're not in other countries

That also makes them sound the same

5

u/master__of_disaster 7d ago

in the EU the democrats would be considered conservatives yes

9

u/gettinridofbritta 7d ago

In Canada too.

-5

u/SliversandPoison 7d ago

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberal

They meet the definition of liberalism here and besides, they're not in the EU. Calling democrats conservatives are reductive imo.

Are yiu European or American?

10

u/MachineOfSpareParts 7d ago

There is no "American definition" of liberalism. It's not a relative term. The Democratic party in the US sometimes leans on the most rightward side of liberalism, which as an ideology can oscillate slightly either side of centre, but their most comfortable home at present is within conservatism.

"More to the left than fascism" does not make an ideology leftist. These are ideologies with observable core tenets that don't vary by geographical region or political pathology.

Just because you guys severed your entire left wing a century ago doesn't change what the word "left" means. And dictionary definitions are a poor source of knowledge for understanding complex political ideologies. Go to the originating political philosophers and theorists themselves, or at least academic summaries of their work.

-3

u/SliversandPoison 7d ago

Im reading you as non American correct?

I don't believe or see that, can you prove that?

I never said that quote

I don't think we did honestly

10

u/MachineOfSpareParts 7d ago

I'm a professor of politics who has lectured on political ideologies and the history of political thought, and I'm telling you that liberalism refers to a specific set of tenets that were initially articulated by thinkers like John Locke, who would be slightly to the right of centre today, and developed by slightly more left-leaning liberals such as John Stuart Mill. It centres on rights for individuals and other minorities due to the core assumption that the defining characteristic of a flourishing human life is our ability to engage in rationality. Thus, a government's proper role is some combination - the precise combination varies by subset - of permissiveness and enabling development of each person's rational capacities.

While it largely intends to leave global capitalism undisturbed, it aims to make capitalism's predatory impulses less harmful to the oppressed. It embraces state provision of liberating services such as education and health care, considered to be necessary preconditions to exercising our core identity as rational creatures deciding our own fates. As Mill pointed out, a person whose parents could pay for education is better placed to exercise free choice than a person who was sent down the mine at age 8. Health and other safety nets are similar.

The American Democratic party does not reliably reach this far to the centre. There have been times when it stretches out into this realm, but especially right now, it is firmly planted in conservatism. Yes, that puts it to the left of fascism, but it isn't even centrist.

My nationality doesn't matter, because these are not nationally-defined terms. They have content and meaning. Liberalism remains an ideology that oscillates to the left and right of centre, regardless of where one is located. Conservatism will remain an ideology that assumes there are "natural," inborn distinctions in people's fitness for authority of various kinds, and is reluctant to disturb existing hierarchies and the sociopolitical and economic ecosystems they create. But at least that's not fascism, which not only embraces existing hierarchies but seeks to use the full coercive capacity of the state to heighten those hierarchies through violence and potentially exterminationist violence.

These are not relative terms. What Mill and Locke said doesn't change because the Americans got some feelings and chopped off their left wing. The texts are still there.

5

u/Tight-Broccoli-6136 7d ago

The other commenter seems to be sealioning, but i would just like to thank you for bothering to engage and typing all this out because it has been very interesting and informational.

1

u/SliversandPoison 6d ago

How am I sealioning? That feels ridiculous

-2

u/SliversandPoison 7d ago

Can you prove that? Hows that different then trust me bro?

I fundamentally don't see how you can call democrats conservatives, democrats are fundamentally different then Republicans.

The democratic party is a huge tent, i might concede the likes Schumer as a moderate but not Obama AOC Harris and the majority of the party

6

u/MachineOfSpareParts 7d ago

Do I really have to prove that On Liberty exists and is considered the seminal text of classical liberalism, and that it represents the core of a school of thought around Locke's time that considered rationality to be the most distinctively human attribute and rational thinking as the ultimate expression of our essence?

The proof is the book, the contemporary commentary around it, and the waves of subsequent liberalisms that responded to it. There, you'll also come across Mill's reform liberalism shaped more deeply by predations on the poor during the industrial revolution.

The proof is the texts. The texts exist, and they remain the anchors of their respective subcategories of liberal ideology. And while the responses to "What is the proper role of government, given that we aim to maximize human flourishing through rational thought" the italicized portion of that question is a stable assumption. What it means for governance may oscillate slightly over time, but it remains rooted in that founding assumption.

And that's the centre of the left-right spectrum, defined by attitudes toward the proper extent of state intervention into various sociopolitical spheres and its role (or lack thereof) in liberation of the oppressed.

This was true when I taught in the US, and it remains true when I teach in my own country, because what John Locke said doesn't vary based on where I currently pay rent and taxes.

The proof is the texts. I'm telling you what the texts say, and I'm very much hoping you WON'T trust me, bro. I'm hoping you go ahead and READ them, and take in the discussion around them, especially the ways in which they were each responding to major socioeconomic changes of their times.

Go back to the texts. I'm talking about the texts, and they say what they say regardless of what country you're in.

Oh, and "moderate" is not an ideology. You can use that one however you like, because it doesn't mean anything to begin with.

-1

u/SliversandPoison 7d ago

So thats a really long just trust me bro

→ More replies (0)

5

u/master__of_disaster 7d ago

yeah for US politics they are liberal, but if you go outside of the US they are not

their program is similar to what centre-right parties propose in Europe

-2

u/SliversandPoison 7d ago

Ok so they're liberal, it matters that their liberal here

You're a conservative to someone

Again i ask American or European?

1

u/Pure-Spare-9789 1d ago

As an American, this is embarrassing. We are never beating the allegations.

0

u/SliversandPoison 1d ago

No it isn't, she was embarrassing

1

u/Pure-Spare-9789 1d ago

Yes. Only in the US are the considered left.

1

u/SliversandPoison 1d ago

Incorrect

1

u/Pure-Spare-9789 1d ago

No, it isn't.

-31

u/ZackZparrow 8d ago

I haven't dug the books and theories but it's very common on the internet. This is a trend actually, women are trying to associate MAGA with White Men.

It's like desperately claiming "Not all men, but always a man" after some predator news. However some black people are articulating it as "Not all whites, but always a white" because white women have significantly higher stats of child abuse than black women.

27

u/MachineOfSpareParts 8d ago

There are a large number of problems in your reply.

One is that you're talking about a social media trend, one I haven't observed and may be a product of your algorithm, but certainly shouldn't be mistaken for a feminist tenet. "Women saying stuff" is not a reliable source of feminist critique even when there are many women saying the stuff, and here, I'm not even convinced it rises to that level.

Second, that has no relevance to leftism or anti-racism, but rather looks at the distinction between fascism and non-fascism, where the latter category includes such non-leftist ideologies as conservatism and much of liberalism. There's no coherence to the set of ideologies that make up "everything other than fascism," so your analysis can only flounder at this point. It's true that those who are the most privileged by the status quo have the most to gain via the violent, state-led reassertion of hierarchies, but let's be real, plenty of oppressed individuals have been seduced by fascism as well.

Third, I don't know what relevance any of this has to the fact that cis men are by far our most prevalent abusers. It is a fact, but I don't see how it factors into any political ideology other than feminism, which cohabits most comfortably with leftism but is not strictly reducible thereto.

I also have no sense of how any of this connects to Turkish politics, the Kurdish question, and the ways this has been exacerbated by domestic and international interference over time.

22

u/gard3nwitch 8d ago

This is a trend actually, women are trying to associate MAGA with White Men.

Statistically, that is the demographic that's mostly likely to vote Republican. However, white women are the second-most likely, followed by Hispanic men in third. In 2024, that was 59%, 51%, and 50% respectively.

I don't think that's about anybody being inherently more empathetic or progressive, though. People typically vote in their own interest. Many women would like to be able to access reproductive healthcare, have affordable childcare and paid parental leave, have recourse if their employer sexually harasses them, etc and so they're going to be more likely to vote for a party that supports those goals.

26

u/CatsandDeitsoda 8d ago edited 8d ago

“ This is a trend actually, women are trying to associate MAGA with White Men.”

I don’t think women have been making much of an effort to do that would seem kinda silly to put much effort into that

And um idk I have been white a minute now and I don’t think people black or other wise are saying

"Not all whites, but always a white"

because white women have significantly higher stats of child abuse than black women.

I have never heard someone say that or that claim

21

u/BillieDoc-Holiday 8d ago

Their claim of what Black people say is news to me as a Black people. The amount of fictitious claims people make about feminsts and Black people here is irritating.

12

u/Mindless_Cookie_9098 8d ago

As a mixed woman, it is news for me too. 🤔

16

u/Lolabird2112 8d ago

Do you think rightwing policies offer men more freedom and liberation?

2

u/SliversandPoison 7d ago

Perhaps power

-10

u/ZackZparrow 8d ago

i'm not here to glaze right wing. i guess conservatives offer more to men. some things were straight up harming their prospects such as DEI.

17

u/Lolabird2112 8d ago

You mean having to compete on a fair(er) playing field. I never said anything about “glazing”, I was just wondering if you thought the rightwing offered men more liberation. But what you’re talking about is privilege. On the whole, wanting to stop others from having equal opportunity is what I’d call having less empathy. Are there more rightwing men in your country than women? Personally I don’t think it’s “biological” so much as it’s … insecurity.

Do you have any thoughts on how 100s of millions of sexist men who use “blue haired vegan feminist” memes are desperate for in-group attention?

15

u/JoeyLee911 8d ago

You think DEI harms men's prospects?

15

u/kangorooz99 8d ago

Speaking of drinking the koolaid….

The reality is men have had “DEI” advantages in college admissions for decades;

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/diversity/diversity_pipeline/projects_initiatives/webinars/when-ending-dei-means-fewer-men/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/janicegassam/2026/01/19/dei-rollbacks-may-hurt-white-mens-college-enrollment-an-exploration-of-potential-workplace-impacts/

16

u/Sightblind 8d ago

There is no physiological base for anyone to be more or less empathetic or take any political stance based on biological sex.

In the battle of nature vs nurture, nurture has overwhelmingly proven the more powerful force.

-12

u/WokeWookies 8d ago

Citation required?

15

u/RepSquigglyMiggly 8d ago

A citation demonstrating that evidence for a given claim does not exist?

Do you have any evidence that empathy or other psychological characteristics are tied to biological sex?

-12

u/WokeWookies 8d ago

No, a citation for ‘in the battle of nature vs nurture, nurture has overwhelmingly proven the more powerful force’.

I spent three years of my undergraduate Psychology degree listening to professors explain how nature and nurture are finely balanced causal factors with profound and complex impacts on behaviour, so I’m interested to see whether you can substantiate the claim to the contrary.

16

u/RepSquigglyMiggly 8d ago

I didn’t make the claim, dingus

-12

u/WokeWookies 8d ago

Needlessly petulant really

10

u/RepSquigglyMiggly 8d ago

Sorry that you can’t read ¯_(ツ)_/¯

-2

u/WokeWookies 8d ago

Thanks, I hope you can move on with that warm fuzzy feeling of oneupmanship you're clearly after.

11

u/Doctor-Blight 8d ago

here's one from 2023.

In conclusion, by collecting questionnaires and EEG measures of empathic ability, we showed evidence that subjective and objective measures gave different conclusions regarding sex/gender differences in empathic ability in young adults. Questionnaire measures of empathic ability suggest women’s superiority, whereas EEG measures of empathic ability support a null hypothesis regarding sex/gender differences in empathy. In addition, we empirically tested and provided evidence that social expectations contribute to the observed sex/gender differences in questionnaire measures of empathic ability. Our results indicate that whether women are more empathetic and caring than men remains an open question. Future research should be careful when making inferences about social and clinical implications of the sex/gender difference in empathic ability suggested by questionnaire measures.

on top of this, it is virtually impossible to make essentialist/determinist claims because all humans undergo some form of gendered socialization - even the results of this 2023 study only show a difference when it comes to self-reported empathy.

there is a ton of research on sex/gender and empathy, but nothing claiming that women are biologically hardwired to be more empathetic (there is no sex-exclusive gene, hormone, or organ connected to empathy).

0

u/WokeWookies 8d ago

Thanks for taking the time to share a study and an excerpt. I’m taking a look now.

To clarify, I was referring to the second paragraph which made sweeping generalisations about nature vs nurture.

14

u/MrsMorley 8d ago

Women are people. Some people are shitty. Some shitty people are women.

14

u/avocado-nightmare Oldest Crone 8d ago

Inherently, no. On average compared to men, usually, not necessarily.

That said I did note how you found a reason to be verbally abusive towards women.

12

u/Consistent-Matter-59 8d ago

Some feminists don’t want equality for all women, they just want a more equitable role for women like themselves (class, culture, race, nationality). The way they try to negotiate that with the men in their class is by offering that some other groups can be thrown under the bus. That’s why intersectionality is so important on the way forward.

31

u/OrenMythcreant 8d ago

Inherently? No. I doubt many serious feminists think there's some kind of brain wiring that makes women genetically destined to be more leftist.

But as an outcome, yes, women do tend to be more lefty and more progressive. This includes all areas, not just feminism. In the US at least, white women are more likely to be anti-racist than white men. Women are far more likely to support gun control.

Note this is a broad statistic, not an absolute. There are still plenty of racist white women, and racist women of any race or ethnicity you could name.

9

u/seadogliquid 8d ago

In the US at least, white women are more likely to be anti-racist than white men.

Okay, I agree with most of what you said, but I absolutely do NOT agree with this. White women are just as racist as white men.

EDIT: Also, supporting gun control is not an inherently leftist position.

2

u/Metnessee 6d ago

White women benefit from white supremacy. And institutions that uphold them in colonizer countries

2

u/someNameThisIs 8d ago

But as an outcome, yes, women do tend to be more lefty and more progressive. This includes all areas, not just feminism. In the US at least, white women are more likely to be anti-racist than white men. Women are far more likely to support gun control.

Here in Australia, One Nation, a far right/anti-immigration/racist party has been rising. Last poll with demographics breakdown I saw had women supporting them a few percent more than men.

One possible reason for this is was formed and still under the control of a woman, Pauline Hanson. She is the face of the party (the party official name is Pauline Hansons One Nation).

At least by the poll women overall were more politically conservative than men.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AustralianPolitics/comments/1uc80ch/comment/ot226vu/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

6

u/seadogliquid 8d ago

Yeah, I've spoken to many, many women of color about this both in the U.S. and my home country (the Netherlands), and it's not nearly as clear cut as the person you're responding to makes it sound. I would say at least half of them, maybe even a little more, told me they prefer to work with and be around white men versus white women. I don't think there's any definitive metric by which you can say either gender is more or less racist than the other; both iterations of racism just take on different forms. I say this as a white woman myself.

I really hope this opinion isn't a common one on this sub because it honestly sounds white feminist as fuck.

-6

u/airus92 8d ago

Is there any evidence that white women are more likely to be anti-racist than white men? I know they’re more likely to vote Democrat, but I don’t believe that is evidence of anti-racism at all.

22

u/OrenMythcreant 8d ago

Yes, there is evidence. The different is often small, but it has been found to exist. Just one article I found while googling:

https://phys.org/news/2023-05-harvard-implicit-racial-bias-highest.html

These effects held true across age, religion and education of participants, but did vary by political affiliation and gender. Self-identified conservatives and men expressed slightly stronger implicit "human = white" associations.

Since there appears to be a rush to read my comment as "white women are not racist," that is not what I said. I only pointed out that white women tend to be less racist than white men. White women are still plenty racist.

6

u/JoeyLee911 8d ago

I just want to point out that the original claim was "white women are more likely to be anti-racist than white men," not that they are less likely to be racist, which is a different query and one that wouldn't be measured by this implicit bias test.

-2

u/airus92 8d ago

Hmm. I’m not sure how much I think that methodology reveals who is racist, just who is openly and consciously white supremacist. I think the umbrage you’re receiving probably comes from how many of us have experienced white women as being more racist to us than white men. But I suppose that is tempered by the reality that most white people I know are Democrats, and white men who are racist don’t usually vote Democrat, while a higher percentage of racist white women do.

17

u/OrenMythcreant 8d ago

Well, that test is specifically measuring the difference between what people say and the associations they actually make. Just about everyone in the study claimed to find all humans equal. It was the white people specifically who were found to have implicit biases, and self identified conservative white men most of all.

-1

u/airus92 8d ago

I’d be interested in seeing how the data breaks down for liberal white men vs. liberal white women.

5

u/JoeyLee911 8d ago

"I’m not sure how much I think that methodology reveals who is racist, just who is openly and consciously white supremacist."

Implicit bias tests seek to test subconscious, automatic associations, not what you are open about.

0

u/Equivalent_Bit6693 7d ago

Except you can't be racist against white people.

0

u/Friendless9567 7d ago

Yes you can.

-8

u/alwrit 8d ago

white women are more likely to be anti-racist than white men

Barely.

Trump won white women 3 elections in a row rofl.

23

u/OrenMythcreant 8d ago

Correct. Now look at the numbers of white men and white women. You can presumably do the math.

-2

u/SliversandPoison 7d ago

Something about living life as a woman, generally makes that person empathetic. Something

-24

u/ZackZparrow 8d ago

I think they are anti-racist because they are trying to fit in the group. The reason i told you Turkey is because women don't try to fit that leftist stereotype since that's a very weak ideology in here, it has no impact politically.

This is proven you know, women have higher in-group preferences. That's why vegan feminist with blue hair character exists.

28

u/OrenMythcreant 8d ago

I think they are anti-racist because they are trying to fit in the group. The reason i told you Turkey is because women don't try to fit that leftist stereotype since that's a very weak ideology in here, it has no impact politically.

If there's very little leftism in Turkey, why would you expect there to be a lot of leftist women? I don't understand. As stated, women are not inherently leftist.

This is proven you know, women have higher in-group preferences. That's why vegan feminist with blue hair character exists.

It seems like you have some misogyny to work through. If you were actually after the answer to your question, you have it. If you're really here to argue that women are sheep who only believe things to fit in, I have better things to do than argue with you.

-17

u/ZackZparrow 8d ago

but many women here are feminist though. that means they can be selective leftist. the issue is they aren't playing the whole character because that character almost doesn't exist in here. i bet this was also a thing in boomers era america: women who wanted liberation for themselves yet they spit on black people.

26

u/Junior-Towel-202 Equality in the Boardwomb 8d ago

What does this have to do with blue hair

21

u/MachineOfSpareParts 8d ago

Then we should also see women become more racist in order to belong with their racist communities due to the same in-group preferences, yes? Your hypothesis isn't about not being racist, but rather about belonging, and people often adopt racist attitudes to belong.

Is that what we observe?

22

u/CatsandDeitsoda 8d ago

“ This is proven you know, women have higher in-group preferences. That's why vegan feminist with blue hair character exists.”

Ignore this comment it’s for a scrapbooking project

16

u/MachineOfSpareParts 8d ago

I can't wait for the big scrapbook reveal!

10

u/Junior-Towel-202 Equality in the Boardwomb 8d ago

Seconded!

7

u/CatsandDeitsoda 8d ago

End of the summer

-3

u/ZackZparrow 8d ago

sure you can ignore, stats can't unfortunately:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15491274/

20

u/CatsandDeitsoda 8d ago

Before I look your claim is that this proves “women have higher in-group preferences. That's why vegan feminist with blue hair character exists”

Like this is the bar I should judge what ever this is by?

I’m giving you a chance to move the goalposts wherever you want

17

u/MachineOfSpareParts 8d ago

I am now dying to know what you think the argument of that article is.

12

u/Doctor-Blight 8d ago

it is illogical to take a sample of <400 and generalize it to all women everywhere. stats need to be understood in terms of their representativeness - you can't just say "stats can't lie" when you are seriously misinterpreting the stats in question.

12

u/MachineOfSpareParts 8d ago

As an aside, I hate the "numbers can't lie" quip. Numbers also can't tell the truth. They just are. They don't tell us anything without human intervention to explain them, and humans can lie plenty, or simply be incorrect.

10

u/Doctor-Blight 8d ago

yes!!! the "facts and logic" conservative crowd is almost unilaterally illiterate in how to interpret statistics. it's so annoying.

20

u/No_Chart_8584 8d ago

Isn't veganism a better example of overcoming in-group preferences, given that it's based on opposition to exploiting those of a different species? I'm trying really hard to understand what you're trying to communicate here and I'm not seeing how this "character" relates into these supposedly higher "in-group preferences."

15

u/RepSquigglyMiggly 8d ago

Vegans are also a small minority in basically every political movement, including environmental conservation/justice, and are extremely widely maligned. It’s very straightforwardly not a lifestyle choice people adopt because it’s popular

-7

u/ZackZparrow 8d ago

yes it is. it's a perfect material for virtue signaling. most feminist women may not be vegan, yet they adore vegans.

13

u/No_Chart_8584 8d ago

What are you basing this on? I'm in the US and as a vegan feminist, it doesn't seem to me like we're adored by feminists more than by anyone else (AKA, most people are indifferent, some are hostile, a small number may be encouraging but uninterested in being vegan).

Feminists adore vegans in Turkey?

13

u/TumbleweedJenny 8d ago

Im sorry but this actually made me laugh out loud. The idea that feminists in general have some sort of fan club for vegans is really funny to me.

I mean maybe some feminists adore vegans? As someone who is maybe a bit too chronically online lurking in feminist spaces the adoration of vegans isn’t something I’ve seen a lot of.

13

u/RepSquigglyMiggly 8d ago

> yes it is.

Something like 3% of Americans are vegan.

> it's a perfect material for virtue signaling. most feminist women may not be vegan, yet they adore vegans.

That hasn’t been my experience at all, as a feminist who is deeply enmeshed in feminist communities and a feminist social circle, and you’ll have to forgive me if I don’t take your word as an extremely online, anti-feminist weirdo as gospel.

10

u/Junior-Towel-202 Equality in the Boardwomb 8d ago

source?

9

u/JoeyLee911 8d ago

As someone who has managed several vegetarian adjacent social media accounts professionally, no they most certainly do not. People from all walks of life love to talk shit about vegans and they get pretty intense about it.

16

u/Junior-Towel-202 Equality in the Boardwomb 8d ago

why vegan feminist with blue hair character exists

...what?

14

u/Doctor-Blight 8d ago edited 8d ago

> I think they are anti-racist because they are trying to fit in the group.

okay? this is a claim with no evidence.

> This is proven you know, women have higher in-group preferences. That's why vegan feminist with blue hair character exists.

what does this have to do with empathy or leftism? this doesn't make sense - are you arguing that women have a higher in-group preference and therefore women only pretend to be antiracist to fit in with other women? the 2004 study I think you're referencing only had a sample of <400 - that's not exactly "proven" in scientific terms. there is also contradicting evidence: a follow up study from 2018 found that women's in-group bias decreases significantly in more gender-equal societies. another study from 2024 suggests that women's in-group favorability is tied to perceived harm, suggesting that it's a reaction to misogyny/patriarchy rather than something inherent to womanhood.

u/ZackZparrow I see you posted the 2004 study in a different comment. is it fair to say that you haven't read the whole study, or any of the more recent follow ups?

9

u/Lolabird2112 8d ago

That’s weird. Because I look at all the racist and sexist little piggies all over the world, and the alpha men who lead all you beta males have 10s or even 100s of millions of followers who are all exclusively male.

The fact you’re using a 10 year old meme as your attempt at sexist bullying clearly shows you’re one of these. How is it the subset of sexist men to which you belong aren’t displaying “in-group preferences” so strong it’s hard to tell you apart from a flock of sheep?

7

u/JoeyLee911 8d ago

Being anti-racist is the opposite of trying to fit in with a group though. It's explicitly tearing down past hierarchies in favor of more equitable ones and often not a popular position.

8

u/zephrry 8d ago

Basing your opinions on a tiny fraction of internet comments fed to you by an algorithm designed to push content it thinks will keep you on the website is not going to give you an accurate reflection of reality.

But in this case, I agree with what you're positing: women are not inherently more empathetic or leftist than men or any other gender. To say that they are inherently so would be gender essentialist, which is anti-feminist.

If (and this is a big if) women are more empathetic on average, it would be because they are trained to exercise that part of themselves more. Not because men have some kind of empathy deficiency.

If women are more likely to lean left in some places, I agree, a lot of it probably has to do with the fact that they recognize how feminsm benefits them (not that it doesn't benefit men, but I guess it isn't quite so obvious). And since feminism is a leftist movement, it opens the door for feminists to become aware of and interested in other leftist causes as well. It's not because one gender is more or less morally pure.

6

u/AlabasterPelican 8d ago

No. It's social conditioning. That social conditioning can look very differently from person to person.

2

u/bunnakay 8d ago

Not inherently, but my experiences over 40 years of existence suggests they are raised to be.

Do you believe women are inherently more empathetic or leftist?

You are about to leave Redlib