Women Attack Men When They are Happy:

Camus

@newstart_2024

Women attack men when they’re happy. Relationship expert Alison Armstrong says it’s because male happiness and power together feel threatening when a woman doesn’t feel deeply connected. If he’s pumped about his sports win, big fish, or guys’ trip, and she didn’t create that joy, it can trigger fear. So she diminishes it. “Why are you so happy without me?” It’s not conscious cruelty. It’s an unconscious reaction to power she doesn’t feel safe with. “The opposite of love is not hate, it’s indifference. The opposite of happiness is not sadness, it’s fear.” https://x.com/newstart_2024/status/2068291671725334928?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Robin Hanson

@robinhanson

If men did something this dysfunctional to women, the talk would mostly be about how to teach men to stop it.

The Average Man / Woman:

Alexander / @DatePsych:

The Average Man:

"The average man, statistically: overweight, does no sports or exercise, is in debt, plays video games daily, uses pornography regularly, believes in 3-4 conspiracy theories, has an education below a bachelor’s degree. About half of these average men will also have a mental illness. About half have no social hobbies or friends.

The Average Woman:

"The average woman: also overweight and sedentary, high emotional dysregulation, divergent political beliefs from men on average (feminist or left wing), not a virgin or “trad” in any sense, also in debt."

The Mutual Attraction Problem:

"I am not convinced that the average man is totally fine with settling for his “match.” I think what is more common is that these two types of people are just not attractive to each other, often even repulsive to each other. Both the average man and woman aspire for romantic partners who are better than them, but not just better - they aspire for romantic partners who are a different type of person. And that type of person is someone who generally is not attracted to the kind of person that they are. So you end up with a mutual attraction problem. Everyone in your dating pool who is your “match” comes with 3-4 deal breakers that not even the most hardcore incel would compromise on."

The psychological architecture of employee disengagement:

The psychological architecture of employee disengagement: A structural model of the antecedents and behavioural outcomes of quiet quitting

Anum Atiq, Mark Sullman, Menelaos Apostolou, Timo Lajunen

30 June 2026

Abstract

Background: Quiet quitting, defined as disengagement through the restriction of effort to formal job requirements, is a growing organisational concern. Prior research has examined its predictors in isolation. This study aimed to test an integrated structural model combining personality, affect, and work attitudes to explain quiet quitting and its behavioural outcomes. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey of 601 working adults from Pakistan and the United States assessed Big Five traits, negative affect, work engagement, job satisfaction, quiet quitting, work withdrawal, and presenteeism. Structural equation modelling with a robust maximum-likelihood estimator was used to test the hypothesised relationships. Results: The integrated model demonstrated good fit. Work engagement and job satisfaction were negatively associated with quiet quitting, whereas negative affect was positively associated. Personality traits, especially neuroticism, exerted indirect effects through negative affect. Quiet quitting strongly predicted work withdrawal and presenteeism and significantly mediated the associations of engagement, satisfaction, and negative affect with withdrawal-related behaviours. Conclusion: The findings identify quiet quitting as a central mechanism translating reduced motivation, dissatisfaction, and negative affect into withdrawal. The model highlights the importance of enhancing engagement, satisfaction, and emotional well-being to mitigate disengagement.

Happiness:

The feeling that life is going well.

Looking back, one can usually remember the times when this feeling was present. And when it is present, one often recognizes it.

-----

Wann und Wo und mit Wem hatte man denn das Gefühl, dass das Leben gut läuft?

--

When, where, and with whom did you feel that life was going well?

-----

Wann und Wo in seinem Leben hatte man das erste Mal das Gefühl, dass das Leben richtig gut läuft?

--

When and where in your life did you first have the feeling that life was going really well?

-----

Eines der größten Glücksmomente ist es wohl, wenn man das Herz einer Frau gewonnen hat oder hat, für die man sich richtig stark begeistert.

--

One of the greatest moments of happiness is when you have won the heart of a woman you are profoundly captivated by.

Prosocial Tendencies:

"Prosocial tendencies are essentially the mirror image of antisocial ones — patterns of behavior, attitude, and motivation oriented toward the well-being, inclusion, and benefit of others. Where antisocial tendencies involve a shrinking of others' reality in one's inner world, prosocial tendencies involve an expansion of it.

At their core, prosocial tendencies rest on a genuine responsiveness to other people as full subjects — beings with their own needs, vulnerabilities, and inner lives that matter independently of what they provide. This shows up not as an occasional generous act but as a stable orientation: a default toward cooperation, care, and consideration rather than exploitation or indifference.

Some of the central features include empathy — not just the cognitive ability to model what someone else is feeling, but the motivational pull to do something about it. Prosocial people are moved by others' distress in a way that translates into action rather than just observation. Alongside this sits a genuine capacity for reciprocity: giving without constant mental accounting of what is owed, trusting that relationships are more than transactions.

Prosocial tendencies also show up in how people handle conflict and disagreement. Rather than overriding others' boundaries or minimizing their concerns, someone with a prosocial orientation tends to treat those concerns as legitimate data — worth engaging with honestly rather than deflecting or dismissing. There is a kind of basic respect for other people's authority over their own experience.

It's worth noting that prosocial behavior isn't the same as selflessness in a naive or self-erasing sense. Healthy prosocial tendencies coexist with self-interest and personal limits — the difference is that others register as genuinely real in the moral calculus, not as obstacles or instruments. The person can pursue their own needs while still being capable of genuine solidarity, care, and restraint when others are at stake."

Antisocial Tendencies II:

"Chronic Selfishness Not the normal self-interest everyone shows, but a default setting where one’s own desires function as the reference point. Example: In a shared living situation or relationship, the person routinely makes plans, spends shared resources, or adjusts schedules around their own preferences with minimal consultation or compromise. When confronted, they may genuinely feel puzzled (“Why is this a big deal?”) because the other person’s needs never carried equal weight in their internal calculus. Generosity, when it occurs, often feels strategic or transactional rather than freely given.

Subtle Boundary Violations These erode trust gradually rather than through overt aggression. Examples: Repeatedly “forgetting” or testing stated limits (emotional, physical, temporal, or informational); sharing private information about someone else because “it wasn’t that serious”; physical or emotional intrusiveness followed by minimization (“You’re too sensitive,” “I was just being friendly,” “Lighten up”). Over months or years this teaches others that their “no” is not reliably respected, leading to withdrawal, resentment, or self-doubt.

Exploitative / Transactional Relating People are experienced primarily through the lens of what they can provide (emotional support, status, practical help, admiration, sex, money, connections). The person may be highly engaging and attentive when they need something or when the interaction is low-cost and rewarding, then become distant, unresponsive, or irritable when the other person needs sustained support or when there is no clear payoff. This isn’t always conscious manipulation — it can simply be the automatic way relationships are parsed. Charm and warmth can be genuine in the moment but have limited depth or durability when personal cost rises."

-----

"Mild patterns often damage relationships through accumulated erosion of trust rather than single dramatic events. Partners or friends may describe feeling “used,” “invisible,” chronically disappointed, or subtly gaslit. The person themselves may experience repeated relational failures, workplace conflicts, or legal/financial problems without fully connecting the dots to their own behavior.

Severe forms carry higher risks of criminality, incarceration, substance use, and harm to others — though many people with ASPD are not violent criminals; some function in society (sometimes very successfully) while leaving a trail of damaged relationships." -----

Full ASPD is challenging to treat because the behaviors are often ego-syntonic (they feel normal and justified to the person) and there is typically little internal distress motivating change.

Antisocial Tendencies:

"Antisocial tendencies refer to patterns of behavior, attitudes, or traits that involve disregard for — and often violation of — the rights, feelings, and well-being of others. The term is used both in everyday language and in clinical psychology, though with somewhat different meanings.

In everyday language, antisocial simply means avoiding social interaction, preferring solitude, or being withdrawn. This is more accurately called asocial behavior and isn't inherently problematic.

In the clinical/psychological sense, antisocial tendencies are more serious and include:

Core features:

• Lack of empathy or disregard for others' feelings
• Deceitfulness, manipulation, or dishonesty for personal gain
• Impulsivity and failure to plan ahead
• Irritability and aggressiveness
• Reckless disregard for the safety of oneself or others
• Consistent irresponsibility (work, finances, obligations)
• Lack of remorse after harming others

On a spectrum: These tendencies exist on a continuum. Mild forms might show up as chronic selfishness, boundary violations, or exploitative behavior. At the more severe end, they characterize Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD) — a clinical diagnosis requiring a persistent pattern across multiple life domains, with onset traceable to adolescence (often via conduct disorder).

Related concepts:

• Psychopathy and sociopathy are informal or research-based terms that overlap with ASPD but emphasize different things — psychopathy especially highlights emotional shallowness, callousness, and predatory charm
• Dark Triad traits (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy) share conceptual territory with antisocial tendencies
• Conduct Disorder in childhood/adolescence is often a precursor"
  
  
  
  -----
  
  

  "Mild antisocial tendencies don't look dramatic — they rarely involve obvious cruelty or lawbreaking. Instead, they tend to show up as a consistent pattern of putting one's own interests so far above others' that the needs, feelings, and limits of people nearby are routinely overlooked or overridden.

  Chronic selfishness at this level isn't just the ordinary self-interest everyone has. It's a habitual orientation where the person's own comfort, desires, or convenience function as the default priority — not occasionally, but as a stable pattern. Others' needs register only weakly, if at all, and generosity or reciprocity tends to be strategic rather than genuine. The person may not experience this as selfishness at all; it simply feels like the natural order of things.

  Boundary violations in mild antisocial tendencies are usually subtle rather than aggressive. They might involve persistently ignoring stated limits — emotional, physical, or practical — not out of malice but out of a kind of low-grade indifference to the fact that those limits belong to a real person with legitimate authority over them. The pattern often includes testing where the line is, pushing past it, and then minimizing the other person's reaction ("You're too sensitive," "I was just joking"). Over time this erodes trust and leaves others feeling unseen or unsafe.

  Exploitative behavior at the mild end looks less like predatory manipulation and more like a habitual tendency to relate to people in terms of what they can provide — emotionally, practically, socially. Relationships have a transactional undertone. The person may be charming and engaging when something is needed, and notably less present when it isn't. They don't necessarily plan this consciously; it can simply be the lens through which relationships are experienced.

  What ties these three together is a diminished capacity — or motivation — to take the inner life of others seriously as something with real weight. It's not always cold or calculated. Sometimes it coexists with warmth, humor, even genuine affection. But the affection tends to have limits that correlate suspiciously with personal cost."