Thoughts on the different male and female characters – “male culture” and “female culture”

The male and female are different people.  In fact, they are so different that I often jokingly say that they should be considered different species of animal.  Their traits and qualities are often like polar opposites and so unlike each other that is amazing, at times, that they can live together.  As a result of their different characters the worldview they create and how they live in the world are totally different.  This makes it so that they tend to do specific things and are prone to certain behaviour and interpretations of the world. 

Because of the different character it creates things such as:

  • Totally different interpretations of the world.  They will see the same thing and interpret it differently.  The male will see things the female doesn’t and the female will see things the male doesn’t.  Each will give meaning to things the other doesn’t.
  • Totally different customs .  By this I mean each sex has different ways of doing things and living.  They even develop their own ‘morality’ and perception of right and wrong.
  • Totally different roles and work that they do.  Because of the different strengths each sex has they are assigned specific roles and work to do in life.
  • Totally different social relations.  Because of their different character traits they will associate with people differently.  Generally, the male and female have to be treated differently socially.
  • Totally different activities.  Each sex will do different things in life and find certain activities appealing that they other sex does not find appealing.
  • Each sex is inclined to DO certain things.  Because of their character traits each sex has a predisposition for certain types of behaviour.  This means that males, for example, are more inclined to do certain things which the female may seldom or never do.
  • Each sex is inclined to NOT DO certain things.  The character traits also make it so that they do not do certain types of behaviour.  The male, for example, will not do things females do all the time.

What all this does is make the male and female character take a specific ‘position’ in life, a specific ‘spot’, that suits their character.  This happens quite naturally and almost automatically.  That is to say, our sexual character automatically puts us in a specific position in life. 

I’ve always said that if one wants to see where the strengths of the male or female is just look at the historic record.  What we find is that since recorded history (something like 3,000 years or so) the male and female were performing the same or similar functions all over the world Not only that, what the male and female are doing in many primitive tribes is similar to what they are doing in ‘advanced societies’.  This is not for no reason.   People were wise enough to know where to put the male and female to take advantage of their natural abilities and strengths.  The fact is that the different characters of the sexes give them strengths and weaknesses.  In any society that is practical and wise they will put the male where his strength is and the female where her strength is so that society will benefit from them.  One of the ways they do this is by making males and females do specific things that reflect their natural character traits.  Because of this, in every society in the world, since the beginning of time, males and females were given specific activities and roles to perform practically from the time they are old enough to do things.  In that way, they are “trained” to develop the strengths of their character traits.  This fact, in reality, is one of the things that has strengthened society as a whole.  This was true up until recently when the artificial mechanized world appeared, which has undermined humanities roles and use.


In actuality, the male and female are so different that each sex has its own “culture”.  By this I mean that they have their own unique way of doing things.  Its not uncommon that each “culture” develops a whole world view and interpretation that is distinctly different than the opposite sex.  This can be so different that there can actually be a ‘culture shock’ when the other sex confronts it.  It often leads to misunderstandings as well.  Not only that, it is often so pronounced that each “culture” deals with things the opposite sex will never know (or is not capable of knowing).  In that sense, each sex has its ‘secrets’ which the other sex will never know about.

This “culture” does a number of things:

  • It caters to naturally appearing character traits.
  • It excludes the character traits of the opposite sex which are not natural.

This makes it so that each “culture” is very focused on the character traits of its sex.  In many ways, each “culture” becomes ‘specialized’ to its specific functions.  This makes each “culture” both limited in its scope but, at the same time, it gives each “culture” its strength.  In many ways, it creates a ‘specialization’.  Because of this, every culture in the world, since the beginning of time, has had distinct male and female separation, so each can develop their own “culture”, allowing for the development of the strengths of their sex.

Life, with its many situations, give ample oppurtunity for the strengths of both “cultures” to be manifested and displayed.  There are times when the “male culture” is needed and useful and there are times when the “female culture” is needed and useful.  In other words, society is made up of a continual ‘trading off’, so to speak, of the two different “cultures”, each offering its strengths when its needed.  This continual alternation, it seems to me, has been one of the great strengths of human society.

Here are some aspects of the two “cultures”:

“Male Culture”

A common quality of “male culture” is that they are spatial-hierarchial oriented.  Through the spatial-hierarchial orientation the male develops a bond with the world.   In actuality, it becomes a basis in many males association with the world.

Typically, males tend to see themselves ‘in-the-world’ or in a spatial reality.  That is, they  see themselves in a “world-space”, with a sky, earth, a situation, and such.  This is the reality of their existence, the space they occupy.  The world becomes almost like a person to many males, someone they associate with.  Because of this, one of the great strengths of the male is that they perform well in-the-world.  Is it any wonder that males were the ones who ventured out into the world, sailed the sea’s, and wandered into unknown areas?

This “world-space” is generally viewed in an unemotional way, as something that is “just there”.  This helps create a great sense of self.  As a result, there is a strong sense of themselves-in-the-world, that is to say, of “me in the world-space”.  This makes the male very aware of himself in the world.  This can get so far as to cause the male to ‘glorify’ himself in his “world-space”, even to the point that he thinks he’s all-powerful.  But this same sense also makes it so that the male does things in the world and performs great achievements.  It makes him willing and unafraid to confront the world (I wrote an article that relates with this called “Thoughts on the male ego“).  In many ways, if it were not for this quality in the male, humanity would of remained in a cave or small village. 

In addition, males tend to look at themselves, society, and the world in a hierarchial way. By this I do not mean as a ‘one-up, one-down’ type of thing but in the context that everything has its place.  As a result, “male culture” tends to be a hiearchial culture, where every male knows his place and function in the group.  Because of this, “male culture” tends to expect everyone to stay in their place and perform the duty required of their place.  Sometimes, this can lead to problems as it can turn into a ‘pigeon-holing’ of people very easily. 

Contrary to common belief, most males do not want to be the leaders or the ‘man in charge’.  They don’t go around ‘bumping heads’ to be in control.  Most males primarily want to be part of a group and know where they are in that group and will willingly submit to a leader.  This is because the male is very group oriented.  This makes for a very strong sense of comradery in the “male culture”.  This is so strong that many males will willingly suffer for the group, often without even thinking about it.

The hierarchial tendency of the male is so strong that it greatly affects his perception of the world.  It makes it so that the male spends much time ‘putting things in its place’ in many other ways than socially.  Some of the ways this is done include:

  • The creation of knowledge.
  • The creation of science.
  • The creation of law.
  • The creation of theology.
  • The creation of tradition and customs.

As a result, much of “male culture” entails putting of things in their place, making males tend to be somewhat logical and organized in their behaviour.  In fact, civilization, with all its qualities, is a male invention reflecting the males  tendency to organization and ‘putting things in its place’ (I wrote an article involving this called “.Thoughts on the “male creation”“).  The need to put things ‘in its place’ is so strong that when a male does not feel things are ‘in its place’ it can cause great turmoil for the male and he can suffer things like alienation and meaninglessness.  This can get so bad that the male may even become self-destructive. 

“Female Culture”

A common quality in “female culture” is that they are emotional-other oriented.  It is through this orientation that much of the female ‘bond’ with the world is based.  For many, it becomes the basis of their life.

Females tend to look at the world very much based in an emotional context.  In fact, the female tends to hold a very strong emotion-centered interpretation of the world.  As a result, they develop an ’emotion-space’ view of the world where the space they occupy in the world is not spatially, as in the male, but emotionally.  Things, people, events, etc. tend to be looked at from its emotional context.  This emotional context becomes their reality, their existence. 

They remember and hold relevent things that are emotionally significant, often forgetting or disregarding everything else.  This makes it so that they tend to focus on things that have emotional value.  This quality is one of the great strengths of the “female culture” as their emphasis has great focus.  It tends to make the “female culture” directed toward a single or small number of things.  They will often become very devoted to these things, sometimes making it the focus of their life.  This quality makes it so that “female culture” is very good at maintaining things, of keeping things going.  If this quality had not been there in human society then there would of been problems all over the world as a result.  Societies would of had a hard time maintaining themselves.  But this quality often tends to make “female culture” somewhat ‘near-sighted’ as a result, often seeing a limited viewpoint of the world.  Because of this “female culture” never becomes a great source of knowing the greater scope of things in life.

The female also tends to need, or require in some way, an ‘other’.  By ‘other’ I mean other people.  They tend to develop a strong bond and association with the ‘other’.  These are often a very specific and limited group of people.  In many cultures, the female associates with an exclusively small number of people who are often family members, or close associates, and have minimal or no association with all other people.   As a result, females tend to have a specific group of people they primarily associate with openly, the ‘other group’.  With everyone else there often develops a strong (and sometimes severe) social injunctions, rules, and restrictions when they associate with this group, the ‘non-other group’.  Typically, there is a strong demarcation between these groups.  So far, I haven’t seen a society where it does not exist. 

The influence of the ‘other’ is often so strong that females tend to “blur” their self with the people of the ‘other group’ to the point that they cannot tell the difference between them and the other person.  This tendency is actually a source for much of the motherly love and the tendency to care and worry for other people that is seen in the female (it makes them see other people as themselves).  In fact, a lot of ‘female love’ is rooted in this “blurring”.  As a result, a lot of female love is, really, a form of self love and entails the identification of themselves with the one they love.  This makes it so that females develop very strong attachments to people and their bonds are often very deep . . . but its given to only a small number of people (the ‘other’ group). 

Not only that, much of “female culture” is based in a deliberate blurring of every female in the group.  This often makes groups of females almost ‘mindless’ in their behaviour as no one is thinking or in control.  They are all just blurring themselves with everyone else as they develop their emotion-other bond.  Much of the ‘chatter’ and giggling among girls is for no other reason that to establish this bond.  What they say or do generally means nothing.  Only the bond it creates is what matters.  This is why, for many males, it appears as meaningless.  This tendency also makes it so that females will blindly follow things.  Whatever the ‘other’ does they will do.  This often creates a slavish-like mentality in the female character.  Because of this groups of females seldom develop organization.  In fact, a group of females is often a ‘group’ only in the fact that there are many of them together. 


A significant part of what constitute society is the merging of the two “cultures”, at least, as best as possible.  In actuality, the blending of the two “cultures” tends to create:

  1. Conditions where the two “cultures” blend easily without problems.  In this conditon, the two “cultures” blend so well that there is absolute freedom, meaning no injunctions, rules, etc. to prevent problems.
  2. Conditions where they blend but create tension or problems.  In general, the occasional misalignment of the two “cultures” often require measures to be taken to try to prevent problems.  Much of this consists of social customs, manners, traditions, and such – namely, restrictions.  In other words, a small amount of any society is partly made up of various ‘mechanisms’ to prevent conflict between the two “cultures”. 
  3. Conditions where they do not blend at all, nor can they be made to blend.  The fact of the matter is that there are aspects of the male character that is best not associated with the female character, and vice-versa.  Its best if these aspects are kept apart.  In many older wiser societies this fact was known creating many injunctions, prohibitions, etc. to prevent this association.

It appears to me that much of society is nothing but the association of the two “cultures” which entail the mixture of these three elements above.  So we see that the qualities that the three conditions above create end up making associations between the two “cultures” that reflect these traits:

  1. Freedom – nothing hindering association.
  2. Restriction – a controlled and ‘monitored’ association.
  3. Prohibition – no association.

In this way, the two “cultures” both benefit from the opposite sex and protect themselves from any conflict as well. 


The coming of machines, consumerism, media, and such, as a result of the modern world, has caused damage and destruction to the two different “cultures” that is unprecedented in history.  In many ways, humanity is literally falling down, slipping further from its humanity.  The fall of the two “cultures” is creating conditions such as:

  • People are not benefitting as people from the growth of their “culture”.
  • Society is not benefiting from the two “cultures”.
  • Natural sexual traits are not developed or grown.
  • Natural strengths are not used or developed.
  • People are becoming confused as to what sex they are and what it means, in some cases, thinking that they are the opposite sex.

In other words, the modern world has caused a deteriation in the two “cultures” with the result that people are losing the growth that each “culture” offers and society is losing the great strengths each “culture” displays (I wrote an article that involves this subject called “Thoughts on the importance of defined sexual roles“).  This is often overlooked, though, because the modern world appears to make these strengths redundant by replacing them by machines or something else. 


Since the two “cultures” were so much a part of human society all over the world for thousands of years I see them as having great need and importance in society and in human life.  I think that, as I look even closer at our great and wonderful modern “advanced” society, this fact becomes even more and more apparent.  The modern world, frankly, offers nothing in its place nor anything that will come close to its benefits.  Humanity needs the different qualities that each sex offers, and it needs us to develop them.  When we don’t develop them, we become less and less a people and less and less human beings.


Check out this criticism that was attached to this article:

“I thought there was something worth reading here, but you sir – are a dumbass trying to disguise himself as an intellectual. I read 2 articles and every few paragraphs made me cringe. There are so many things wrong about what you write, I’m not going to dignify this garbage with much else other than this response.”

What does it mean?  My guess:  a female with sexual identity problems (which is becoming more and more prevalent nowadays).  Its not uncommon for females with sexual identity problems to be ‘bothered’ when you make mention of female traits, particularly as a definate fact . . . that’s probably what made her ‘cringe’.  I’ve seen some girls almost explode if you make mention of any ‘commonplace’ qualities associated with the female (such as that girls like to put on makeup).  Many girls, particularly older ones, will disguise this behind political/legal jargon, saying its ‘sexist’, or ‘discriminatory’, and so on.  The article above did not, in any way, criticize, condemn, or put the female down in any way . . . but, yet, just mentioning female qualities was enough to have her call me a name, make her cringe, and and say it was all garbage.  I’ve seen many examples of this type of stuff these past 30 or so years.  Its one of the things that has made me realize that females were suffering a crisis nowadays.

This entry was posted in Dehumanization and alienation, Male and female, Psychology and psychoanalysis, Society and sociology and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s