Video summary
In a provocative discussion regarding sexism, Freya and Tanya explore how modern psychological scales often misinterpret male attitudes toward women. They present two sets of statements to gauge whether beliefs like women having superior moral sensibility or needing protection are sexist toward men or simply reflect traditional views. While the first set—suggesting women possess purity or refined taste—is identified as clearly sexist toward men, a second set describing benevolent sexism receives widespread agreement from both genders. Statements such as "a good woman should be on a pedestal," "men ought to sacrifice for women," and "women need rescue in disasters" are viewed by the speakers not as harmful but as positive or neutral sentiments. This leads Freya to label herself a "massive benevolent sexist," highlighting how current metrics fail to distinguish between genuine care and problematic limitations of female autonomy. The core issue identified is what they term the "mismeasurement of men," drawing a parallel to Stephen J. Gould's famous critique in *The Mismeasure of Men*. Freya argues that scales measuring toxic masculinity, benevolent sexism, and male sexual entitlement often conflate factual knowledge with negative character judgments without adding necessary context. For instance, acknowledging that women are sometimes attracted to muscularity or dominance is treated as evidence of toxicity rather than a simple observation of reality. Similarly, believing women deserve protection is interpreted by these scales as an intent to strip away their rights for their "own good," ignoring the fact that many men genuinely wish to provide safety without infringing on autonomy. This lack of nuance pathologizes natural human preferences and creates flawed data regarding male psychology. The conversation shifts to address why women might appear attracted to benevolent sexism, a finding often cited as problematic in literature. Freya clarifies that while women may prefer men who believe they should be protected, this does not mean they desire the loss of their autonomy; rather, it reflects an unmet need for safety and stability within relationships. This preference is further illustrated by a viral CCTV incident where a woman fought off a knife-wielding thief in Thailand, yet bystanders reacted with shock that she was fighting alone while another man hid behind a pillar. The speakers note that women prioritize protection over other traits like fidelity; polls suggest the idea of an unwillingness to protect has a stronger negative effect on attractiveness than infidelity in casual encounters. This underscores how deeply ingrained is the desire for male formidability and defense capabilities, which modern dating dynamics often fail to display due to men not engaging in traditional roles like hunting or defending groups. Freya also touches upon the complex trade-offs women face when selecting partners who possess formidable strength versus those with controlled aggression. She references Andrew Tate's claims about the ability to turn on and off aggression as a rare skill, noting that while many men struggle to suppress their aggressive impulses in intimate settings, some martial artists like Tim Kennedy exemplify this control. However, she acknowledges the danger of selecting partners from high-aggression fields like MMA due to domestic abuse risks, presenting it as an ecological adaptation where smaller women in dangerous environments might prefer a strong partner despite the inherent risk. The discussion concludes by emphasizing that these preferences are not signs of misogyny but rather rational responses to evolutionary pressures and current social realities, challenging the simplistic narratives often found in psychological research.
Read the full video transcript
On the topic of sexism, Freya, I'd like
to put you on the spot a bit at the
moment.
>> in this.
>> include you.
>> [laughter]
>> But we'll we'll see. I want to ask you a
few questions. You've been described as
the voice of Gen Z women. So this will
be very interesting to get your opinion
on these questions. So I'm going to read
them out to you. So Tanya, I already
know what you think cuz we're [laughter]
we're working on this together. So is it
closer to sexist towards men or women to
believe the following things? One, women
have a superior moral sensibility.
>> Uh sexist toward men, I would say.
>> Okay. Women have a quality of purity few
men possess.
>> Sexist toward men.
>> Women have a more refined sense of
culture and taste.
>> Sexist toward men.
>> Okay, full house. Sexist toward men.
[laughter]
Next set of questions. We're almost
done. Do you think it would be a good or
bad thing if men mostly agreed with the
sentiment of the following statements? A
good woman should be set on a pedestal.
>> Uh
good.
>> Okay. Women should be cherished and
protected by men.
>> Good.
>> Men should sacrifice to provide for
women.
>> Good.
>> In a disaster, women need to be rescued
first.
>> Good.
>> Every man ought to have a woman he
adores.
>> Good.
>> Men are complete without women.
Or men are incomplete without women.
>> Yeah, good.
>> Despite accomplishment, men are
incomplete without women. So it's the
same.
>> Yeah, good.
>> And people are often happy without
romance.
>> Bad.
>> Okay. You are a massive benevolent
sexist.
>> [laughter]
>> Those are the items on the benevolent
sexism scale. And
I pulled all my followers on this and
they, like you, believe that the
statements were either sexist to men or
a good thing, right? So it it kind of
begs this question of what is the scale
measuring? So this is an idea that Tanya
and I and some other colleagues are
working on
that we call the mismeasurement of men.
Now, that title is strategic because
there was a famous book called the
mismeasure of men by Stephen J. Gould
who was very critical of evolutionary
psychology and evolutionary approaches
to human behavior and we think it's the
precise opposite that's happening in
scale development in psychology now that
a a lack of insight into evolutionary
psychology and just science in general
is creating these crazy problematic
scales. So, you've got scales that are
measuring toxic masculinity, benevolent
sexism, and male sexual entitlement that
are actually problematic in so many
ways, but one of the ways is they're
measuring
awareness of facts about the world. So,
one of the items is women are often
attracted to muscularity and dominance.
And that's taken as evidence of toxic
masculinity. And
there's no attitude added onto that
inference. It's just do you know that
that's sometimes the case? And it is
sometimes the case.
And these scales
they're like the what I call the Cathy
Newman of scales. They require an extra
inference about the implication of
agreeing with the statement. So, you
believe that women deserve to be
protected. Oh, so what you're really
saying is they have should have their
autonomy limited to keep them safe for
their own good. And it's like that's not
measured. So, it's a total
mismeasurement of men and it also
pathologizes women's own preferences.
So, women have strong preferences for
protection and provisioning, yet and men
care about being seen as attractive to
women, so they're going to prioritize
that over being seen as sexist. So, it's
a huge problem we see, but yeah, sorry
to tell you if you're a man.
>> So, is that the same as internal
internalized misogyny? Same concept? Not
quite the same. So, benevolent sexism
is one end of the scale of what's called
ambivalent sexism. On one end of the
scale, they have hostile sexism, which
is like direct antipathy towards, uh,
women to be like, "Oh, women are trash."
Basically, like really direct and
obvious. Whereas, benevolent sexism is
this more subtle putting, uh, kind of
infantilizing of women and, um,
which I believe could be a real concept,
but when I looked under the hood at
these items that were used to measure
it, I couldn't believe it. I just
thought that they're absurd.
>> Well, that reminds me of the New
Statesman piece because
the New Statesman piece basically
concluded that liberal women are
unhappy.
And then
everybody was basically, we spoke about
this, they were saying that this is, "No
one's spoken about what's going on with
liberal women. This is new." Like the
New Statesman are the first to have the
balls to say it.
>> [laughter]
>> No, but the interesting thing is is that
I sort of get viewed with the internal
misogyny thing because I will say the
same thing, which is liberal women are
unhappy. But I'll also say it's because
they have these unmet needs. It's
because they want to belong and it's
it's like a compassionate worldview that
I think women want to be protected. They
want to feel like they're safe and
stable and all of these things. But then
I get the that's a sexist point of view.
But the New Statesman can present it and
say
>> [snorts]
>> young women are unhappy and draw
different conclusions and then it's not
a sexist point
>> female privilege has been revoked.
>> [laughter]
>> You don't have the female privilege that
you once thought you did.
>> Cuz I'm white
>> Because you because you're white,
because you're right of center.
>> Yeah.
Yeah, I'm
I then don't get treated as a woman at
all.
>> No. You're an honorary man.
Congratulations, it's three on one.
>> [laughter]
>> So in the literature, there's this kind
of, uh, confusion about, "Oh, women are
perplexingly attracted to benevolent
sexism." And this is like a problem.
It's an inconvenient finding. But when
you look at the way the items are
written, it's needless, uh, cuz I think
women are attracted to men who believe
women should be protected. But I don't
think they're attracted to men who would
add on the extra inference and would
say, "Oh, because women need to be
protected, they need to have their right
to autonomy stripped away for their own
good." So, if you had the item written
in a proper way and the scale designed
in a proper way, you would actually have
no problematic attraction to benevolent
sexism.
>> Do you remember that video of the
two travelers in Thailand and a guy
pulls out a knife? It's CCTV footage.
>> I think I've seen it, yeah.
>> Yeah, it went super, super viral. And
all of the replies and all of the quote
tweets of it were, "Girl, he's trash."
So, this guy pulls out a knife and he's
trying to steal the woman's bag and she
fights him off. And the guy hides behind
a [ __ ] pillar. The dude hides behind
a pillar. So, there's two things that
are sort of, yeah, icky, right? And we
all have this sense that you should
protect. Dude, what was that [ __ ]
thing that I said? I put this in the
group chat 6 months ago and I [ __ ]
called it and I was right about the fact
that women would be less There would be
more Oh, here it is. Look at this.
>> Oh, no.
>> So, that guy's got a knife
>> Oh, yeah.
Oh, my god.
>> Homeboy hides. Homeboy hides behind the
pillar while she is fighting him. And
there's another dude that just comes
over and like maybe he's with the guy.
And then this guy with the [ __ ]
>> man
>> Yeah.
>> comes over
and thinks the woman cannot defend
herself. And what a sexist son of a
[ __ ]
>> I know. What a pig.
>> Yeah.
>> An absolute pig. Is it the dude on the
bike? I think it's a
>> He comes in with a helmet. Yeah.
>> Dude, helmet to the head.
>> Yeah.
>> Commute to the head.
Yeah. Um so, almost everybody was
universal in this.
That guy that's hiding behind the pillar
is
What What are you doing, dude? Come on.
Like, yeah, it's a knife and we got
[ __ ] scary or whatever, but like do
something.
>> Women's preference for protection is
seriously strong. So, I ran a poll
asking which would have a stronger
effect
>> idea. Don't [ __ ] say I I would run a
poll. This is my idea, dude.
>> Okay.
I would even be surprised by the
results. Uh
women said it would have a stronger
effect on their attractiveness to a man
if he if they found out he was unwilling
to protect them than it would be if he
cheated on her in a one-night stand.
Yeah.
>> That is really strong.
>> I kind of wonder if like maybe that's
one factor in like why women aren't
interested in men nowadays is like men
don't get to display those abilities.
>> Exactly right. Like if we're not coming
back from war
>> Yeah, if we're not seeing men defending
our groups or hunting, like you don't
get to see the value of male
formidability or the display of it. I
what I've starting to wonder is like if
women even realize how much stronger men
are. When I ask my students like I
present the sex difference in upper body
strength and they're surprised and I'm
like, "What?"
>> Yeah.
>> There's this viral trend on Tik Tok
apparently now where
uh it's like asking couples to ask the
guy to go into the challenge of putting
her in handcuffs and turn the seconds
and they're like, "It's the greatest
foreplay ever." It's like
>> [laughter]
>> Women get so turned on by it. It's like,
"Wow, realizing the strength difference
is crazy."
>> Yeah, well I mean that's the the thing
that Andrew Tate Thomas was talking
about. Does Andrew do Krav Maga or some
[ __ ] He does some kind of some uh
martial artsy thing, right? And he's
saying that uh
the ability to turn on and turn off
aggression is really rare. Like most
guys, the aggression sort of bleeds out
in the same way as your level of
obsession and how much you pay attention
to patterns is great when you're trying
to write new piece, but is not so great
when you're dealing with your intimate
relationship or whatever.
Guys that are aggressive uh
good if if homeboy comes along with a
knife, forget running away. He's licking
his lips. The guy's like, "Oh, waited my
entire life for this." He just pulls out
an armory of things to kill him with.
You're like, "Okay." He's like
everyone's like Tim Kennedy, but very
few people have learned very few men
have learned to turn that off. And I
think what women what's got crossed over
a little bit here is that women love the
idea of a man who is able to be
aggressive
but never to them.
>> Mhm.
>> And unfortunately, the guys I mean, how
many you MMA fighters have had like
awful
abuse domestic abuse situations that
you've you've selected for a guy who is
he is going to really really stand up
for me. Well, yeah, but maybe that's
also the not to say that all [ __ ] MMA
fighters are going to be you know home
abusers, but this has happened a bunch
of times. You go, it's hard to turn that
aggression off. And the protector thing
is great, but the just raw aggression
thing carries on.
>> It's a trade-off women have to make and
it's you predictable the ecologies in
which they'll actually select a really
formidable mate. And it's a predictable
based on the individual differences in
that woman's size. Smaller women in
those dangerous ecologies tend to have a
stronger preference for a really strong
aggressive partner.
>> What would a dangerous ecology in the
modern world be like?
>> So, I mean, there's rough areas of I
used to live in Birmingham. There was
rough areas of it.
>> Is this rough as it gets?
>> A quick aside, look, you know sleep
matters, but let's be real. Most nights
you're probably not getting the sort of
sleep that's actually restorative. Eight
Sleep's Pod 5 fixes that. It's a smart
cover that you throw over the top of
your mattress that actively cools or
heats each side of the bed up to 20°.
They've even added a temperature
regulating duvet and pillow case so you
and your partner can sleep at your
preferred temperatures covered head to
toe like some temperature controlled
mummy. Plus, it's got upgraded sensors
that run health checks when you're sleep
tracking things like abnormal heartbeats
and breathing issues and sudden HRV
changes. There's a built-in speaker for
white noise. Autopilot feature learns
your sleep patterns, makes real-time
adjustments to improve your sleep. It
even detects when you're snoring and
lifts your head a few inches to help you
breathe better. That is why Eight Sleep
is clinically proven to add up to an
hour of quality sleep per night. And
best of all, they have a 30-day sleep
trial, so you can buy it and sleep on it
for 29 nights, and if you don't like it,
they will just give you your money back,
plus they ship internationally. Right
now, you can get up to $350 off the Pod
5 by going to the link in the
description below or heading to
eightsleep.com/modernwisdom
and using the code modernwisdom at
checkout. That's
eightsleep.com/modernwisdom
and modernwisdom at checkout.
Congratulations, you made it to the end
of the clip, and the full-length episode
is available
right here.
Done.