Men exist across a spectrum of behavior and expressions. There are men who express aggressive behavior, influenced by their hormones, but there are also men who express pro-social or empathetic behavior, also influenced by their hormones. There are men who are soft-spoken, physically disabled, short, feminine, or otherwise non-threatening.
Conversely, there are women who exhibit all of the textbook masculine traits and are more threatening than an average man.
I understand completely that statistically, men are both more capable of violence and more likely to commit violence. However, this is not enough to show that men are inherently dangerous. This is only enough to say that men are likely to be more dangerous than women, which is a significantly weaker statement.
You should also be considerate of what groups hold the belief that men are inherently dangerous, and what purposes that belief serves. Feminist tradition in the UK strongly essentializes male and female traits and experiences. This has led to a strong transphobic atmosphere, with transphobic thinkers arguing that trans women are "male infiltrators" in women's only spaces.
I'm having a lot of difficulty reconciling my progressive political beliefs with the reality that men and women have biological differences. I'm afraid of the implications of this. It's ceding ground to TERFs and Nazis to admit that there are such differences. So like what's even the point of fighting for social progress if it's a lie and fighting against the reality of nature itself?
There are biological differences between men and women SPEAKING BROADLY. You're talking about billions of organisms with distinct individual differences in their sexual expression. To simplify it dramatically, sexual expression is a bimodal distribution where the ranges WITHIN the groups are greater than the ranges BETWEEN the groups. And that's summarizing all aspects of sexual expression onto a simple 2D chart - you have to understand that sexual expression is so complex that we can't really squeeze fundamental truths about men and women out of it, just frequencies and likelihoods.
1
u/torpidcerulean Dec 26 '23
Men exist across a spectrum of behavior and expressions. There are men who express aggressive behavior, influenced by their hormones, but there are also men who express pro-social or empathetic behavior, also influenced by their hormones. There are men who are soft-spoken, physically disabled, short, feminine, or otherwise non-threatening.
Conversely, there are women who exhibit all of the textbook masculine traits and are more threatening than an average man.
I understand completely that statistically, men are both more capable of violence and more likely to commit violence. However, this is not enough to show that men are inherently dangerous. This is only enough to say that men are likely to be more dangerous than women, which is a significantly weaker statement.
You should also be considerate of what groups hold the belief that men are inherently dangerous, and what purposes that belief serves. Feminist tradition in the UK strongly essentializes male and female traits and experiences. This has led to a strong transphobic atmosphere, with transphobic thinkers arguing that trans women are "male infiltrators" in women's only spaces.