Jump to content

Study shows women have inflated egos


While the thread author can add an update and reopen discussion, this thread was last posted in over a month ago. Want to continue the conversation? Feel free to start a new thread instead!

Recommended Posts

Posted

The very first word is grammatically incorrect (it should be "We women"). So I wouldn't put too much stock in this article.

 

There is a lot of woman-hating here today. Was there a fire over at askmen?

Posted

Weren't you just posting yesterday about how 90% of women have low self-esteem because we're just wired that way? :laugh::laugh: You need to slow your troll roll.

Posted
Weren't you just posting yesterday about how 90% of women have low self-esteem because we're just wired that way? :laugh::laugh: You need to slow your troll roll.

Congnitive dissonance... Low self esteem yet incredibly high standards/pickiness..

Posted
Congnitive dissonance... Low self esteem yet incredibly high standards/pickiness..

 

Nice try, beta, but perhaps you should read the 'article' before you start making new stuff up. :) Where have you been?

Posted

As quoted from the article: Once a traditionally male syndrome, narcissism

 

 

Imagine that... You mean that women can share in what was traditionally thought to be mostly male deficiencies? Tell me something that isn't obvious. Crappy human behavior is, often enough, a whole lot more universal than we'd like to imagine.

  • Author
Posted
Congnitive dissonance... Low self esteem yet incredibly high standards/pickiness..

 

Thank you for explaining it to the challenged for me

Posted

I'm sure there's a study on the correlation between low self-esteem and ego.

 

And women who use grammar and syntax incorrectly...

 

 

here, let me check .....

 

Abstract

 

The present study examined the relationship of women's sex-role identity to self-esteem and ego development. One hundred fifty-three female undergraduate students at the University of Maryland were the volunteer Ss for this study. During class time these persons completed the Index of Adjustment and Values, used to measure self-esteem, and the Sentence Completion Test, ussed to measure ego development. From this pool of Ss four sex-role identity groups were determined: androgynous women, feminine women, masculine women, and undifferentiated women. Twenty-five from each group were randomly selected to comprise a final sample of 100 women. Results of the self-esteem analyses supported previous findings that androgynous women possess a higher degree of self-esteem than stereotypically feminine women and undifferentiated women, but revealed no significant difference in self-esteem between androgynous and masculine women. In contrast, the level of ego development of androgynous women was not significantly different from that of feminine and undifferentiated women but was significantly higher than that of masculine women. Overall results support the theory that a combination of masculine and feminine characteristics is beneficial for women in terms of both self-esteem and ego development.

 

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/349148

 

Note the source and grammar... ;)

 

In fairness, the author of the article in the OP is apparently female.....

Posted

Weird article. The link in the OP cites a study where male and female students are tested for higher narcissism and than goes into anecdotal evidence that women today are more self-centered than before.

 

I'm not saying it isn't true that more women today are self-involved, but this is journalistic sensationalism at its best.

Posted

OP, I'm absolutely CERTAIN that the women you associate with are most definitely "inflated." :lmao:

Posted
Weren't you just posting yesterday about how 90% of women have low self-esteem because we're just wired that way? :laugh::laugh: You need to slow your troll roll.
Hmmmm.... Perhaps a touch of Dissociative Identity Disorder? :confused:
Posted
OP, I'm absolutely CERTAIN that the women you associate with are most definitely "inflated." :lmao:

 

OMG... :laugh::laugh::laugh: ROFL.

Posted

Yet another astonishing topic by sir SteveC.

Posted
OMG... :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: ROFL.
Hey! Quit inflating my ego!!! :mad::D
Posted

When I was a grad student, I used to give articles like this to psychology undergraduates to critique. Popular media likes to cite studies that support some sort of sensational claim. This article is particularly bad because it doesn't even make sense. Research based on a magazine article? What? That might fly in the 5th grade, but not for journalism.

 

Gotta give send some love to Carhill for doing a pubmed search. :love: I know that site well. Chock full of abstracts that are too inconclusive and boring for the popular media to cite.

 

Bad writing is a scourge :mad:

Posted

Oy vey. The Daily Mail? Was the National Enquirer website too slow loading for you?

 

Regardless, the actual study the Daily Mail cited deal with college age men and women expecting to get good grades just for showing up.

 

Then they go off about a magazine survey (not a scientific study) that said single women felt they hadn't met someone worth committing to. That doesn't necessarily mean they have a big ego. I don't think it is reasonable to have standards as high as they described, but since they don't seem to be hurting anyone, I don't care.

 

Next the article bizarrely veers into narcissism, which according to unnamed American researchers is on the rise among women. That doesn't actually mean anything since we don't know if the study was valid or what men's rates of narcissism are.

 

The article doesn't mean anything.

 

Then there is the article Cahill linked. It was published in 1978, before I was even born. The women studied would be in their 50s today. It is very iffy to take any study about gender roles from the 70s and apply it to today, but it really says nothing about low self-esteem. What it says is that women with so called masculine traits tended to have higher self-esteem.

Posted

I tend to agree with this article. My ex I believe was the sameway. But what it means is Alot of women are becoming inconsiderate and think that they are all that. The word Bitch isn't even a insult anymore. Wow both sides are really screwing up each other. its time to get a blow up doll and a movie and call it quits. lol

Posted

You folks know what narcissistic really is dont you? its a person girl or guy. That isn't able to have any feelings. They are able to "EMULATE" feelings But mostly its to serve there own purposes. And actually I hate to say it But its largely a part of men that have it. More women are showing up with it. But apparently its very hard to diagnose because the person is able to act feelings out so well.

Posted

Breaking News:

 

Area Man Cites Research From Peer-Reviewed Journal "Daily Mail," Backs His Side Of Gender Argument

Posted

Interesting read.

 

This part really stuck out at me.

 

It's as if they want to be swept off their feet right from the first date, as if they're waiting for someone like Brad Pitt or George Clooney. They're not interested in a regular, normal, decent guy. That's not good enough for them.

 

 

'This has happened a few times. It makes me think that if you don't live up to their perfect fantasy, then that's it. It's game over before you've even had any chance to begin to get to know each other.

A lot of women seem to be this way, heck some even post on this forum.

Posted

lol I'm not backing any side. This one is both sides.

 

 

 

Breaking News:

 

Area Man Cites Research From Peer-Reviewed Journal "Daily Mail," Backs His Side Of Gender Argument

Posted

Whatever....true or false, the underlying point is there.

 

Men or women...if they carry unrealistic standards, they end up alone and have no one to blame but themselves.

 

This is why I tell people, especially men who get a lot of rejection, to simply back off the dating scene. If the women of the world think you're not "good enough" then don't be there for them when they get older and the desperation sets in.

 

I'm all for self-improvement, but when you have to go above and beyond all human understanding to attract the opposite sex, then you're better off alone.

 

These articles though only seem to touch on ambitious professionals who believe they are worth more in the dating world than other women...but yet don't understand or see why many "alpha males" they desire will reject them to chase young/hot/slutty or even play the "single and bangin for life" thing.

 

If these women or women like them want to be married and happy, and the above average men reject them, then they an choose to be alone or come back down to reality. It's the same with guys who seem to only meet hot women with baggage or plain janes with careers and a lot to offer in other departments.

 

"Total packages" are rare and most of the time swept up and married before most people even meet them.

Posted

Very true. Very well spoken

 

 

Whatever....true or false, the underlying point is there.

 

Men or women...if they carry unrealistic standards, they end up alone and have no one to blame but themselves.

 

This is why I tell people, especially men who get a lot of rejection, to simply back off the dating scene. If the women of the world think you're not "good enough" then don't be there for them when they get older and the desperation sets in.

 

I'm all for self-improvement, but when you have to go above and beyond all human understanding to attract the opposite sex, then you're better off alone.

 

These articles though only seem to touch on ambitious professionals who believe they are worth more in the dating world than other women...but yet don't understand or see why many "alpha males" they desire will reject them to chase young/hot/slutty or even play the "single and bangin for life" thing.

 

If these women or women like them want to be married and happy, and the above average men reject them, then they an choose to be alone or come back down to reality. It's the same with guys who seem to only meet hot women with baggage or plain janes with careers and a lot to offer in other departments.

 

"Total packages" are rare and most of the time swept up and married before most people even meet them.

Posted
Whatever....true or false, the underlying point is there.

 

Men or women...if they carry unrealistic standards, they end up alone and have no one to blame but themselves.

 

This is why I tell people, especially men who get a lot of rejection, to simply back off the dating scene. If the women of the world think you're not "good enough" then don't be there for them when they get older and the desperation sets in.

 

I'm all for self-improvement, but when you have to go above and beyond all human understanding to attract the opposite sex, then you're better off alone.

 

These articles though only seem to touch on ambitious professionals who believe they are worth more in the dating world than other women...but yet don't understand or see why many "alpha males" they desire will reject them to chase young/hot/slutty or even play the "single and bangin for life" thing.

 

If these women or women like them want to be married and happy, and the above average men reject them, then they an choose to be alone or come back down to reality. It's the same with guys who seem to only meet hot women with baggage or plain janes with careers and a lot to offer in other departments.

 

"Total packages" are rare and most of the time swept up and married before most people even meet them.

 

I have to disagree with the backing off the dating scene and self improvement. Everyone has a right....yes a right... to happiness with another person. If they aren't at the point yet where they can get that, then they should work on achieving it. None of this it's too painfull bs. Learn to deal with your ****. Learn to deal with rejection, you aren't going to frigging die because some girl doesn't like you. You'll even come out a better person. Crawling into your shell and waiting until everyone gets desperate isn't an answer.

×
×
  • Create New...