(FB 1544380948 Timestamp)
by Bill Joslin
As far as I can tell – testosterone in men increases in-group loyalty and bonding (ingroup preference) but not out-group hostility. Oxytocin in women increases out-group hostility.
This makes sense. Women in charge of young (reduced mobility and defense) by being outgroup sensitive would afford “proximity” sensing for a group (enemies are at the gates).
Men who must then defend, do so cooperatively and this ingroup loyalty would have men fight to protect each other (opposed to fighting to kill an enemy or flee and abandon brothers).
The two together: female-low resolution high sensitivity may not provide much detail in assessing the quality of a threat (those strangers might not be hostile, they might be, but might not be) – where as men, driven by loyalty will approach and assess the threat (they are not necessarily out-group hostile) and if it is a threat will not flee, but rather stand and defend.
So we have a binary, at a distance, early warning (female) coupled with a spectrum, approach and assess defense (male).
Our current migrant sentiment might be best seen as a female out-group hostility turned in on the ingroup (toward their own males due to feminist political power seeking) coupled with or playing off males low outgroup hostility and high loyalty (to their woman).
We might harp on the girls in Curt’s circles – but it is the gals through mate selection who drive changes in males (hypergamy creates male hierarchy and selects for robustness and agression or the inverse as laid-out above).
Girls maketh the man.
It’s then males that provide a counter-balance.
Women drive changes, men constrain the tails.