In Defense Of Hillary Clinton Women Who Hate Other Women: The Psychological Root of Snarky [Psychology Dot Com]

 

As a Man I think it is fair to say that not all but many Men are Misogynists and  Chauvinistic towards women, despite having Mothers, Daughters, Sisters, Aunts and Nieces. Of course this is very damning but what is even worse is when Women hate other Women because they are either intimidated by Women that are highly successful and a force to be reckoned with.

 

I am supporting Hillary Clinton as I did in 2008 to be America’s First Female President and in comments from my Blog, Facebook Page, Twitter and other Social Media, I am unequivocally surprised at the statements made by other women towards the Former First Lady, US Senator, Secretary of State and the most viable Candidate for President in the upcoming 2016 Presidential Race.

[Psychology Dot Com] “As I overheard a group of women this past week in line at a store verbally tear apart a couple of women within their social circle who happened to be absent, I was taken aback by the vitriol. As I reflected on how women talk about other women, I thought about what I’ve heard so many women say over the years: 

 

“Girls are so much crueler to each other than men.” Based on fifteen years of clinical work with women who represent virtually every possible demographic variable (Come on, I trained in New York City), I can assuredly report that the women I’ve worked with report more critical views of other women than the men do with their own male peers.

 

Most women will tell you that they have survived at least one mean girl in their past: a girl who dismissed, put down, or even socially tormented them. What does the research say? It probably goes without saying that the research is complex, particularly because it is challenging (or impossible?) to measure a critical, negative or hostile attitude given the self-serving bias that makes people want to see themselves as good and upstanding. Fortunately, recent years have seen an uptick in attention when it comes to the research. 

 

Research shows that women during the college years may have negative attitudes about particular types of other women. Vrangalova and colleagues (2013) found that female college students were less likely to want to be friends with another female who was seen as sexually promiscuous, when compared to the rate for male college students who wanted to be friends with a promiscuous male peer. The study showed that the women clearly noticed the promiscuous woman and also had negative beliefs about her as a result.

 

In terms of women’s approach to competition, research from Benenson and colleagues (2011) is particularly interesting. According to the study, women may be more sensitive than men to social exclusion, and when they feel threatened by the prospect of being left out, a woman’s first response may be to socially exclude a third party. Again, for any woman who’s been on the receiving end of a female bully, this will come as no surprise.

 

In addition, Nicki Crick is a true rock star of gender research. Crick has devoted many years to investigating relational aggression, the type of aggression females appear to engage in more regularly than males (who tend to engage in more physical aggression). Crick would most likely argue that women’s negative attitudes are actually a manifestation of relational agression. In a study examining the attitudes and aggressive behavior of fourth and fifth grade boys and girls, Crick and Bigbee (1998) found that girls were significantly more relationally victimized, while boys were significantly more overtly victimized.

 

In talking about the influence a mother has on her daughter, we also have to talk about social learning theory. Social learning theory reminds us that modeling has much to do with how children learn. The real but graphic truth is that there are many mothers out there in the world who aren’t so sweet to their daughters, and readily say and do things that would make many of us cringe. It’s critical to note that much of what is said and done by mothers that is ultimately hurtful was engaged under the veiled intention of having ‘her best interests in mind.’  I have found that women who are mean-spirited about other women were often raised by a mother who probably didn’t like herself and didn’t feel warmly toward women, in general, either.

 

The other factor that I see at work in my practice is anxiety. I find that the majority of female criticism actually stems from feeling inadequate in an area of life they value highly. For example, I have a female client who is extremely critical of other’s parenting styles, but it’s simultaneously worth noting that she has had great difficulty becoming pregnant and is currently in the midst of fertility treatments. With my client, she feels inadequate and defensive, and she defends herself by criticizing other women’s parenting styles. In other words, she’s not critical of other women because she thinks less of them; she is covetous of what they have instead.

 

The women I have seen clinically over the years also have reported far greater anxiety in the appearance department than men, and I see that the pressure women feel from men and the media to fit a certain physical type of thinness and beauty gets transformed to the point that they turn it on each other. Interestingly, one 2012 study from Snapp and colleagues found that young women with high family support and low levels of perceived socio-cultural pressure from family, friends and the media regarding the importance of achieving a ‘thin and beautiful’ ideal had a more positive body image. It makes perfect sense, too, so let’s all agree to watch the amount of pressure we inflict on young girls.

 

I know, I know: Things seem to look good for Hillary in 2016, and there are lots of other examples of the progress American culture has made in terms of gender equality. Yet women continue to earn less money today than men and occupy fewer positions in politics and at the heads of Fortune 500 companies. Independent of what the research shows, it’s understandable on a common-sense level if women feel that they must work hard to secure whatever social power they can, and this may sometimes take the form of exclusionary practices with other women. When it comes to our kids, I believe that there is much we can do and say to give our daughters the sense that their lives will be equally important to those of men, and I’ll teach my daughter that she’ll get there by supporting—and not criticizing—other girls. If I’m careful, one day she’ll be a woman who will speak positively about other women.”

 

 

Twitter @sheriffali

 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/insight-is-2020/201309/women-who-hate-other-women-the-psychological-root-snarky

References

Association for Psychological Science (2011, March 5). Mean girls and queen bees: Females threatened by social exclusion will reject others first. ScienceDaily. Retrieved September 17, 2013, from <a href=”http://www.sciencedaily.com (link is external)¬ ” target=”_blank”>http://www.sciencedaily.com (link is external)¬ </a>/releases/2011/02/110224121907.ht.

American Psychological Association (1998, March 26). Boys And Girls Are Cruel To Each Other In Different Ways — But The Effects Are Equally Harmful. ScienceDaily. Retrieved September 24, 2013, from http://www.sciencedaily.com (link is external)­/releases/1998/03/980326075743.htm

Shannon Snapp, Laura Hensley-Choate, Ehri Ryu. A Body Image Resilience Model for First-Year College Women. Sex Roles, 2012; DOI: 10.1007/s11199-012-0163-1 (link is external)

Springer Science+Business Media (2012, May 9). Self-worth needs to go beyond appearance, experts say. ScienceDaily. Retrieved September 17, 2013, from <a href=”http://www.sciencedaily.com (link is external)¬ ”

10. Vrangalova, R. E. Bukberg, G. Rieger. Birds of a feather? Not when it comes to sexual permissiveness. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 2013; DOI: 10.1177/0265407513487638

David Cameron You broke off your vacation and returned to your Office and on August 29, 2014 you raised Britain’s Threat-Level! Why? You haven’t lifted a finger to help, Why? You are a Wuss!

 

Prime Minister David Cameron I Respectfully Disrespect You By Calling You A Moran And A Wuss For Raising Britain’s Threat Level. Bush and Cheney used the same scheme every time the going got rough and the American people bought into the nonsense. So, please Tell The World How Many Times You Refused To Help President Obama And Why!

 

The four criminals in the photo with you, one of them is yours, so since your previous Prime Minister helped to create the chaos that are presently transpiring and you haven’t helped, so the question is, are you going to even try.

 

President Obama on the other hand he gets the blame for the relentless chaos all over the Middle-East, even though he is the only person that has done anything thus far. A crisis developed with the Iraqi’s Yazidis on the Mountain and Obama gave orders for the US Military to use Air Strikes, drop off rations and rather quickly we got the Yazidis off the Mountain.

 

ISIS had taken the largest and most important Dam in Iraq. As soon as the Criminal Bush and Cheney installed as Prime Minister, Nour al-Maliki was replaced, again, Obama ordered US Military Air Strikes and the Iraqis regain control of the Dam.

 

Amazing enough Mr. Cameron, President Obama has and is the only Leader that is doing anything about the situation in Iraq, but here in America, his countrymen, a small percentage of Whites and selective Media Outlets, they pounce on the President 24/7. On the other hand you came out and lifted the threat level and social media Trolls, or should I say the Obama Haters, thought of you as a “real leader,” while denouncing Obama as chopped-up, spoiled liver.

 

Mr. Obama held a News Conference on Thursday and in order not to show his cards in this game of life and death Poker, he said: “we do not have a plan as yet as to how we are going to deal with ISIS in Syria.” It is 04:57 AM Eastern Time in the United States and Obama is still being slashed and burned over that statement, even though, it was the right statement to make.

 

If you have ever engaged in Ware-Fare you would know that you do not fight the enemy on their terms; you do not divulge anything that would given a hint as to what your plans are; you allow the enemy to come to believe that they are invincible by not being egotistical and bearing the brunt of criticism from the people you took an oath to protect.

 

In the final analysis what I am really permeating is that this 50% White 50% Black Man has done so much for America, but, so many refuse to say a good word about him, much less give him any credit for preventing us from becoming a Banana Republic, subsequent to George W Bush and Dick Cheney, reaping havoc on us and leaving us for dead. Did you know that Dick Cheney profited 39.5 Billion Dollars from the Death and Destruction they and your guy, Tony Blair, invasion of Iraq caused?

 

Hence, I ask you this one simple question and that is Britain has always been a friend and ally with America, so, naturally, I want to know why haven’t you done anything to support Mr. Obama? Is it the 50/50 business of Black and White? Please tell us….

 

Twitter @sheriffali

 

 

 

 

Wake up America! George W Bush and his Administration damage to America will take two decades plus to repair; Obama is doing his best, but he is not GOD! Bush and Cheney Blood Oil Money!

Cheney’s Company Halliburton benefitted 39.5 Billion from the Iraq War and many others in the Bush Administration are benefactors of the death and destruction we created in 2003 to this present day. All of the money made by the parasitic plagues that eats away at society is BLOOD MONEY.  They should all remember; Karma works both ways; it can be a blessing or a curse. You reap what you sow!

 

In the photograph attached with this blog you would see the Provinces of Iraq; ExxonMobil, Shell, Chevron, British Petroleum and Total. Yes, deny it to your heart’s content, but Bush and Cheney invaded Iraq for OIL!

 

4,500 American Soldiers lost their lives; over 50,000 severely injured; tens of thousands suffer with mental problems; we have spent 1.7 trillion dollars thus far; we killed 100,000 plus Iraqis and yes, George W Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, John Bolton, Condoleezza Rice and others in the Bush Administration committed War Crimes against Americans and against Iraqis.

 

But, when America or Israel commits crimes, there is an automatic exemption for the Criminals. I am no defender of Vladimir Putin and what he did in Crimea is wrong, but so are we. I am also no defender of any terrorists or terror group, but the Palestinians are fighting to break a 47 year siege by Israel of their Air, Land and Sea Border. And yes, America has the power to force Israel to lift the siege and allow the Palestinians to live out their God given dreams and aspirations, but, 47 years later, Israel is still killing the people, committing genocide and there isn’t any outburst in America, rather, not all, but many Americans applaud what Israel has done and is doing.

 

President Obama inherited the worst situation than any other American President in the past 70 years; he managed to stop the hemorrhaging of Unemployment, Housing, Our Financial System; More than doubled the Stock Market; kept us out of Wars and where is the gratitude? By a margin of 60%, if the Polls are correct, Americans are dissatisfied with the Job Obama is doing.  

 

All of the Media, Television, Radio, News Papers, Magazines and Publishers are owned by six [6] Corporations and yes, the Media is complicit in all of this debauchery. Look at CNN or FOX, both continually have the War Criminals as guests, lambasting Obama for the disaster they created and they are treated by the Hosts of these two Television Stations with the utmost respect. However, every opportunity natural or forced, the Media in general, tramples over President Obama.

 

More often than not, I wonder just how Mr. Obama feels about how he is treated and the words of Frederick Douglass is a stalk reminder, as how accurately Mr. Douglass articulated the Republican Legislators behavior towards the African American. Mr. Douglass said;

 

“Though the colored man is no longer subject to barter and sale, he is surrounded by an adverse settlement which fetters all his movements. In his downward course he meets with no resistance, but his course upward is resented and resisted at every step of his progress.

 

If he comes in ignorance, rags and wretchedness he conforms to the popular belief of his character, and in that character he is welcome; but if he shall come as a gentleman, a scholar and a statesman, he is hailed as a contradiction to the national faith concerning his race, and his coming is resented as impudence.” [Republican Frederick Douglass, September 25 1883]

 

Twitter @sheriffali