Womens feminine/masculine energy, health, hormonel cycle ect

Who is better at "reading" people, women or men?

Studies show that women are 5-7 times better at reading situations, moods and emotions.

Fortunately, it's something we can all get better at if we practice it.
social skills and being able to "read" people are extremely important - also in a company where we have to create results together.

We must be able to read and understand our colleagues, employees, customers, partners, children, family members ect. 

Many people are so much in their heads that they find it difficult to read their surroundings, empathize or have situational awareness.

Shame is rooted in your hips and in your womb as a woman

Pleasure is your birth right and your responsibility 

www.instagram.com/reel/CkDXsrAgQXB/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

www.juliasalchemy.com/

Females and fawning

D) Fawn responce

pete-walker.com/codependencyFawnResponse.htm

taylorlab.psych.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2014/10/2000_Biobehavioral-responses-to-stress-in-females_tend-and-befriend.pdf

What is Fawning?
Fawning it is a protective state in which our nervous system unconsciously and automatically prioritises our safety over the authenticity of our expressions. The term was first coined by Pete Walker, therapist and author, and has been picked up by many interested in Stephen Porges’ Polyvagal Theory.
Fawning is a stress response that allows us to imitate a “safe and social” ventral vagal state, when we are feeling threatened. It happens when it is either not possible, or it would increase danger to ourselves, to Fight or Flee (high sympathetic responses) from the perceived threat. It is also sometimes called appeasement or "people pleasing”.
In this state, we may say or do things that are incongruent with our true feelings, as a survival mechanism. We might act in a way that is friendly, agreeable, even funny, even though we are feeling angry or scared (threatened). We might surrender our own needs or preferences, due to fear that expressing them might make us more unsafe.
When it isn't safe to fight or flee, then pretending to agree with, and perhaps even flatter, the source of "threat" can be a way of achieving safety. The less threatening we appear to another (e.g. a predator), the less likely they are to attack us. They might even relax enough to allow us to escape from the situation unscathed (“Flight”).
An extreme example of Fawning can be seen when people are being held against their will, and attempting to Fight or Flee will not bring them more safety, but more likely lead to an increased risk of harm to them. This can become Stockholm Syndrome, where they begin to identify with their captor, and feel bonded with them.
In terms of the autonomic nervous system, fawning is thought to be a state that involves both high sympathetic activation (stress) and a degree of dorsal vagal (shutdown) engagement. That means that we have lots of sympathetic energy in our bodies, which by itself would make us act bigger, louder, and more threatening. But the dorsal vagal immobilisation tones down our expression, so we act smaller, quieter, and less threatening.

Females:

In trauma studies, we have tended to regard the nervous system as sex and gender neutral. However because women, on average, have far more estrogen than most men do, women are disproportionately impacted by the social nervous system, both its strengths and weaknesses. Estrogen is a bonding hormone that primes us to be perceptive and attuned toother people’s experiences. This awareness of and care for social bonds is crucial for the survival of our species and is an extraordinary gift. It evolved so that we would take exquisite care of our young.
That said, there are downsides to our bonding superpowers.

We are more susceptible to the social nervous system reactions under stress—both fitting in and fawning. Women are often more prone to social comparison, concerned about how our actions are or will be perceived, and hung up on friendship and relationship problems. We can minimize our perspectives, opinions, intelligence, and aspirations to keep the peace or maintain the status quo of our relationships, family, or work life.
These concerns about belonging can become deafening and keep us in unhealthy situations—whether they’re dates or jobs or marriages—way longer than we might like or might be good for us, because we are afraid to break connection, to not be liked, to be labeled a tease, demanding, selfish, or bitchy. We are hardwired to care more about connection and be more socially invested in our relationships than men are.

A better understanding of the impact of hormones could also help us understand some of these behaviors. In the meantime, we can also develop considerable agency when we examine our relationship to social norms, which may be operating to create some level of primal safety but may not be serving our best interests and our true, long-term safety and well-being. Women are confused as to why hey went along with their doctor’s recommendation when it dident feel right, or stayed with an abusive partner, or had sex again with someone who violated them. Yes, our conditioning to be “good,” “nice,” and not disruptive comes into play here, but so does our internal sense of survival, which tells us that we may not survive separation or conflict.
Many women have gone back to their abusers, back into situations where abuse was likely to continue, or simply remained in dangerous environments even though they knew it was unhealthy. It makes no logical sense; why would we do that to ourselves? But the social nervous system sometimes compels us to pull threats closer, and we feel “safer” with proximity to a known threat than with one that is lurking somewhere out in the world.

Have you ever felt like you just couldn’t have a difficult conversation, even with someone you loved and trusted? You waited and waited, because that interpersonal conflict seemed like such a big deal you could barely handle it? Beneath the fear of confrontation or conflict might also be a fear of losing that connection, and depending on your past history of belonging and attachment, it can feel incredibly scary and difficult to end a relationship. Similarly, consider a more extreme situation in which a woman finds herself afraid for her physical safety, where someone has power over her. Her desire to please and remain socially connected can override her deeper impulses and instincts, and ultimately that can lead to a lot of shame and blame. She will ask herself questions like “Why didn’t I speak up? Protect myself? Get away? Fight?”

Once again, it is essential that we women remember this is not a moral issue; we need to learn about, respect, and have compassion for the survival mechanisms of this complex social nervous system of ours. The more we understand, the more power, more choices, and more true safety is available to us. Being attuned to our social environment is important. Can youimagine if no one paid attention to how their actions impacted others? We’d all be terrible neighbors. That’s not a world we want live in. However, many women err on the side of taking upless space, remaining quiet, becoming invisible, swallowing their needs so as not to create waves or conflict. We unconsciously choose these behaviors, which become habits, and personality styles, because conflict can threaten the intactness of our social nervous system that is critical to our survival.

www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2023/07/01/1184749528/men-are-hunters-women-are-gatherers-that-was-the-assumption-a-new-study-upends-i

“79% of the societies for which there is data, women were hunting.

Moreover, says Wall-Scheffler, this wasn't just opportunistic killing of animals that the women happened upon. The vast majority of the time, she says, "the hunting was purposeful. Women had their own toolkit. They had favorite weapons. Grandmas were the best hunters of the village."

In other words, "the majority of cultures for whom hunting is important train their girls and their women to make their tools and go hunting," she says.

“The new study found that in a third of societies for which there is data, the women hunt large game. In other words, they do go after the kind of big mammals associated with the stereotype of male hunters.”

www.amazon.com/Different-Voice-Psychological-Theory-Development/dp/0674970969

This is the little book that started a revolution. Published over thirty years ago, in twenty-one languages, In a Different Voice made women s voices heard for the first time in social scientific theorizing. Carol Gilligan s work and words inspired new research and stirred political debate that continues, unstifled, in our own time.This is the little book that started a revolution. Published over thirty years ago, in twenty-one languages, In a Different Voice made women s voices heard for the first time in social scientific theorizing. Carol Gilligan s work and words inspired new research and stirred political debate that continues, unstifled, in our own time.

What is Carol Gilligan theory?
In that work, Gilligan argued that girls exhibit distinct patterns of moral development based on relationships and on feelings of care and responsibility for others. Her work soon inspired and informed a feminist-oriented movement in philosophical ethics known as the ethics of care

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10108041/

Carol Gilligan's awareness of voice began at a young age with a self‐defining memory in which she learned to hold on to her own voice and experience. She never set out to be a social change agent, but she became one. Other scholars relied on her work, particularly the lyrical trope of “in a different voice” to change social (and psychological) attitudes toward women in many ways. This psychobiographical analysis traces Carol's personal struggles to sustain her own voice and knowledge, and these struggles met a culture that became able to hear something about how the patriarchal culture suppresses relational sensibilities. Rooted in a close and intense relationship with her mother, who expressed and imposed on her a duality between the voice of personal experience and the voice of meeting social expectations. Carol's understanding of the differing levels of what it means “to know” grounded a new conception of girls' development as well as of moral development.

Conclusion

Carol Gilligan became an agent of social change because her inner world and life path coincided with sociocultural readiness to embrace her work as giving voice to an emerging awareness of the suppression and denigration of women's sensibilities in psychology as well as in the larger culture. Her lifelong conflicts about speaking her own truth versus conforming to a society in which she was well able to be successful attuned her to the ways in which others, particularly women, similarly discounted their own experience.