The feminist movement has conditioned them to believe that they shouldn't be feminine. Their depression is due to the fact that they've been steered away from living in tune with their natural biological inclinations.

The details of these studies and their theories, I leave to the educated, who like these discussions. I thank you for explaining the reason (only one perhaps) for so many young women in these attacks on Themselves and their History. Their willingness to throw dangerous objects at their hated foes. And the absolute looniness of the spectacle, among those who like, everyone " to just get along"!

Not true. Current data (2017-) say less than 20% have been diagnosed with Any Mental Illness. The scary bit is the rest have yet to be diagnosed.

There are a few things I disagree with Dutton on. The most important being the relative strength of recently evolved predispositions. You could assume that domesticated animals are an example of how fast selection can alter an animal but for the most part instincts or predisposition remain intact being only slightly alter such as reduced aggression and other aspect of neotony. That humans are self domesticated is clear but as with other domesticated animals the ancient instincts remain their expression slightly altered. Dutton emphasizes recently evolved expression and ignores their original nature. That is largely because slight differences in preferences can have dramatic effects. This can be seen in Sweden, the first feminist nation, where despite pushing girls into traditional male occupations they remain voluntarily dominated by males. Women in Sweden still choose traditional female occupations by and large. The problem is that despite the effect of small differences that have recently evolved such as those he mentioned in the article the ancient instincts still dominate.

Behaviorally humans are more like their cousins the chimpanzees than the domesticated think strategists Dutton imagines. That means in a pluralistic society the ancient instincts will continue to have an outsized influence. In this regards Dutton is misunderstanding empathy. Empathy is largely the result of mirror neurons. It is highly unlikely that females have significantly higher ability to read the emotional state of others than males. More likely they are, being more neurotic, more sensitive to the output of mirror neurons. This is an important distinction because empathy is often negatively expressed as hostility to anything that is threatening. It also explains the damage done by treating those that are perceived to be vulnerable (infants) as if they were not moral agents by females. Instincts by definition are not rational and a low level form of intelligence.

Young females are born with social status. Young males are expendable. Females sexually and mentally mature faster than males. Both however need to be separated from the extended family group to prevent inbreeding. Superficially it may appear that females are socialized earlier but that is misleading. The adoption of superficial self control by females is simply advantageous in a dimorphic species. Moodiness is cryptic female aggression a form of rebellion that aids in group separation. Young males full of sex hormones are openly aggressive and pushed to the margins of society encouraging group separation. I'm other primates this cryptic aggression has been observed as improper grooming of subordinate offspring such as deceptive hair plucking. It is simply not a good idea for females in a dimorphic species to be openly aggressive. The same process explains mean girls. It is biologically important that females group together for protection from males. That does not mean they are more prosocial, explaining why female groups are quitely vicious internally and sociability does not translate into complex cooperation. Complex cooperation remains a characteristic of properly socialied males.

Female empathy will never result in complex cooperation because it is the infantilzation of those perceived as vulnerable. This denial of moral agency to the recipients of empathy is highly destructive. Combined with the misguided incompatibilist views of our public intellectuals it has proven to be a disaster. No freewill no individual responsibility. No individual responsibility no moral agency.

BLM and AntiFa resemble a pack of Chimpanzees fruitlessly looking for "Nazis" because behaviorally that is what they are. The ideological along wit that of neo Marxism is a rejection of the harsh but stable environment civilization requires. Dutton is spot on in this regards. What he down plays is that we are all primarily driven by primitive instincts appropriate for an easy but unstable environment. Differences in temperament may have dramatic effects but are secondary to the effects of primary instincts. There has to be social mechanisms to prevent people from adopting a fast lifestyle. Religion was not the strongest player in this regards but the negative consequences of a lack of self discipline in a free society of competency hierarchies was. The lack of appreciation by females of competency hierarchies and gratitude for their contributions a bigger problem than misguided empathy. It's a question of a preference of for form over function.

In the natural world sensuality is everything. In a world where nature handles production life is easy and networking the primary social skill. The ability to recognize form critical. Civilization turn this paradigm on it's head and made the ability to be productive the primary social attribute determining placement in a functional hierarchy. The natural instinct for females to gravitate to art, to prefer strong, networking and functionless males destructive.

That is extremely sexes and races