I can't get over this sentence no matter how often I read it.

"Women showed no effects when told they were masculine; however, men given feedback suggesting they were feminine expressed more support for war, homophobic attitudes, and interest in purchasing an SUV."

Overdoing Gender: A Test of the Masculine Overcompensation Thesis
Author(s): Robb Willer, Christabel L. Rogalin, Bridget Conlon, and Michael T. Wojnowicz Source: American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 118, No. 4 (January 2013), pp. 980-1022
Men are just not good leaders because they're too emotional and WHAT I'LL HAVE YOU KNOW I HAVE FOUR SUVs SIR FOUR OF THEM
"In this way, men may inadvertently reveal feelings of threat by behaving in a more extremely masculine way than they otherwise would. If true, the thesis implies that extreme, caricatured demonstrations of masculinity among men may in fact serve as tell-tale signs of underlying insecurity, not self-assured confidence. Those men who exhibit the most masculine traits may actually be seeking cover for lurking insecurities, their outsized masculine displays in fact strategic claims at ...
masculine status, efforts to pass as something they fear they are not."

Applied practically in everyday life:

Car salesman:
Can I interest you in this much more expensive SUV?

Man:
Nah, I'm okay with this hatchback.

Car salesman:
Does perhaps your wife make the purchasing decisions in the family and I should be talking with her?

Man:
I'll take 7.

@jmcrookston Honestly, this just sounds like "hey attacking people's egos makes them do dumb things", which seems obvious to me?
@neal @jmcrookston except most women aren’t vulnerable to this tactic. When we go car shopping we are logically looking for something we have researched. We’re not out there just trying to buy the biggest baddest thing on the road to impress everyone else. The women I know who buy SUVs either have a whole bunch of kids they need to fit in there or they’re concerned about safety and think they are safer.
@maggiejk @jmcrookston That makes sense. Something I've wondered for a while is if there's some kind of societal conditioning that promotes these behaviors. I find it hard to believe that this is some kind of biological predisposition.
@neal @maggiejk @jmcrookston All human behaviors, including several biological ones, are socially conditioned.

@starluna @neal @maggiejk @jmcrookston Eons ago I read about which human behaviors aren't at all socially conditioned.

1) Suckling. Duh, right? Can you imagine the selective pressure (biologist-speak for "shortly being dead") against a newborn who couldn't do that?

2) Smiling. Early on, it's purely instinctive. Means nothing. But the selective pressure favoring newborns who do it is, obviously, immense. Eventually, what was originally just a meaningless thing has to be reinforced by seeing others smile. Otherwise the smiling behavior is lost. An early hint was that babies born blind didn't retain the tendency to smile at caregivers after a couple of months.

3)For the first few days (or was it hours? don't remember) after birth, there's a very strong reflex to grip fur. Disappears quite quickly.

And that, if memory serves me well, is it.

Falling all over yourself to maintain status as a member of the top caste is not remotely biological.

(Which is also why women look free of this particular nonsense. They don't have a high caste position to defend. Watch them when they do. I don't know if they perfectly match men's idiocy, but they can sure get close.)