Every time I open social media, the same stereotypes stare back at me.

7 min read

1 hour ago

Listen

Introduction: AFAB and Non-Binary Perspectives

As someone who identifies as non-binary but was assigned female at birth (AFAB), these sweeping generalizations leave me frustrated.

Is this really true? Or are our respective standards of “normal” just misaligned?

But this frustration isn’t mine alone. Looking at social media lately, the gender divide keeps intensifying. Young women lean liberal, young men lean conservative — a gender gap spreading worldwide.

Calls for equality trigger backlash: “That’s female privilege!” Yet most online controversies are just a tiny minority of voices amplified in endless loops.

So what’s really going on? Do women actually never apologize? Are men truly more logical?

When you look at psychology and cognitive science data, it turns out it’s not really about “gender” — it’s about misaligned perspectives and psychological defense mechanisms.

Three Stereotypes Dismantled by Data

1. The Truth About “Women Never Apologize”

Actually, women apologize more often overall.

A 2010 study by Schumann & Ross (published in Psychological Science) found that women are more likely to perceive the same behavior as “I might have caused inconvenience,” making them more inclined to say “sorry” even for minor things. Men, on the other hand, are more likely to interpret the same behavior as “that’s not really a problem,” so their timing and standards for when an apology is necessary differ.

Result: From a man’s perspective, it looks like “Why won’t she apologize?” From a woman’s perspective, it’s “Is that really something worth apologizing for?”

This isn’t about different tolerance levels — it’s about misaligned perception standards.

Men’s “don’t sweat it, let it go” perspective is a strength that smooths over small troubles and maintains relationships.
Women’s attentiveness to details is a strength for maintaining harmony and repairing relationships.

Both become assets depending on the situation.

2. The Myth of “Men Are Logical, Women Are Emotional”

Actually, there’s no gender difference in internal emotional intensity.

Recent experience sampling method studies (large-scale research circa 2025) show no significant difference in everyday emotional intensity or suppression. Men are more likely to self-identify as “suppressing emotions,” but in terms of moment-to-moment emotional experience, there’s almost no difference.

In other words, internally they’re similar, but men are conditioned by social norms like “don’t show weakness” and “be strong” to suppress emotions. They may appear cool on the surface, but often they’re bottling things up inside.

Women prioritize relationship repair and harmony, so they’re more likely to verbalize emotions. Men prioritize information transmission, so they tend to seal away emotions as “weakness.”

The image of “men are logical” is a product of social conditioning plus emotional suppression.

3. The Hardest Part: Men’s Emotional Suppression

Honestly, from a woman’s perspective, it’s easy to think “men don’t show emotion, so they’re cold.”

But from the male side, “not being able to show emotion” is an enormous burden. Higher male suicide rates in many countries are strongly linked to the persistent norm of “not being allowed to show weakness” (WHO and CDC statistics).

Continuous emotional suppression leads to stress hormone (cortisol) accumulation, while research shows that crying or sharing with others reduces stress.

Women get penalized for being “too emotional” when expressing themselves, while men get misunderstood as “cold” for not expressing enough. Both have human emotions, yet they’re distorted by social filters.

When I empathize with this male suppression, I’m reminded of how heavy the pressure to “be a strong man” really is.

Why High-IQ Women Become “Invisible”

The image that “there are fewer high-IQ women” is common, but recent research shows no gender difference in average IQ, and even the ratio at extreme high ranges isn’t a biological inevitability — it’s heavily influenced by social filters.

The Wall of Backlash

When women become assertive or competent, society quickly punishes them with labels like “unfeminine,” “arrogant,” or “cold” (backlash effect).

In the famous

Heidi/Howard experiment — also known as the Success and Likability trade-off — the same achievement presentation was rated as “aggressive” and “selfish” when attributed to a woman (Heidi), while the male version (Howard) was praised as “likeable” and “a good colleague.”

This creates a double bind:

“Too competent gets you punished,” yet
“Trying to maintain likability makes you appear incompetent.”

Additionally, women are five times less likely to self-promote than men (recent research). Without actively sharing on LinkedIn or at seminars, it’s hard to be recognized as a genius.

Get Karashi’s stories in your inbox

Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.

Result: High-IQ women are more likely to contribute quietly behind the scenes or choose to stay less visible.

Invisibility as a Survival Strategy

“Where are the genius-minded women? The answer is: ‘Right in front of us, choosing to become invisible.’”

They know the cost of having their intelligence relabeled as “arrogant” or “unlikeable.” So they choose “safe concealment” to protect their intelligence — posting in gender-neutral, impersonal writing styles, or staying in advisory roles within organizations.

They don’t appear on center stage not because they lack ability, but because the “design” of that stage poses too high a risk for intelligent women.

This is my hypothesis, but looking at research on backlash effects and Queen Bee syndrome (where women in leadership find it harder to support other women), this adaptive behavior is clearly documented. Queen Bee isn’t about “women being bad” — it’s a survival strategy born in environments where gender bias persists.

Just like the burden of male emotional suppression, this female “concealment” is a challenge that society as a whole needs to address.

Men Are Victims Too: Misunderstandings About “Men as Perpetrators”

Women’s victim consciousness and stereotypes also result in attacks on men as a whole, like assumptions that “men are prone to perpetration” or “could commit sexual assault at any time.”

It’s true that arrested sex offenders are overwhelmingly male (78–90%+ in Japan). But men who commit crimes are an extremely small fraction of the population (arrest rates below 0.001% in Japan). Yet the generalization that “all men are potential perpetrators” spreads fear of false accusations and stigma across all men.

Other examples:

The image of “men as DV perpetrators” makes male DV victims (22.9–29.5%) less likely to seek help.
The misconception that “men suppress emotions, so they’re cold” causes male mental health issues to be taken less seriously.
The stereotype that “men can’t get custody” easily justifies unfairness in divorce.

These attacks on all men stem from women’s victim consciousness, causing men to experience identity threat and cognitive dissonance, leading them to react defensively.

Result: Both sides assume “the other is the enemy,” deepening division in a vicious cycle.

Social Media’s Division Mechanisms and a Message for Those Who React

This division is now being amplified even further on social media. Algorithms (especially X/Twitter, YouTube, TikTok) have a strong echo chamber effect. By prioritizing similar opinions, young women gravitate toward liberal/progressive content, while young men are drawn toward conservative or male-rights-leaning communities.

Posts that provoke emotions get prioritized for spread, so extreme assumptions like “women are like this” or “men are like this” go viral instantly.

But Actually, It’s Just a Minority Making Noise

Important fact: Most controversies and extreme assumptions are just a tiny minority of voices amplified in loops.

Japan’s Ministry of Internal Affairs analysis shows:

Participants per controversy: 0.0015% of internet users (about 1 in 70,000)
Heavy users (posting 51+ times): just 3% of that group
People who posted in a controversy within the past year: 0.5% overall (1 in 200)

In other words, the vast majority quietly scroll past. A loud minority posts repeatedly, creating the illusion that “everyone thinks this way.”

To Those Who React: You’re Not Wrong

But I don’t think we should dismiss people who react to this minority’s provocations and become extreme as just “malicious” or “foolish.”

People who strongly react to these topics generally have high sensitivity and empathy. Precisely because they have strong senses of justice and are sensitive to social injustices, they get stimulated by provocations and become more heated than necessary.

This isn’t about blame — rather, their capacity for action deserves praise. When real incidents or problems occur, the people who can move quickly and raise their voices are those who’ve been observing society all along.

So if you’re reading this thinking, “I might be the type who reacts on social media,” please don’t be negative about yourself. Take pride in your sense of justice and capacity for action. Just don’t get the direction wrong — keep thinking so you can be an important factor in building a better society.

Final Chapter: Beyond Division — Toward Cooperation Leveraging Each Other’s Strengths

As we’ve seen, stereotypes like “women never apologize” and “men are logical” aren’t about gender itself — they’re created by misaligned perspectives, social filters, and psychological mechanisms that protect the mind.

Both women’s backlash and men’s stigma are burdens created by society’s outdated filters. Both have human emotions, yet they hurt each other through assumptions.

Social media division is just a small minority of voices standing out — the vast majority of us are quietly living normal lives.

If that majority can realize “the other side’s standards are just different” and keep thinking “I can take pride in my capacity for action, but I need to get the direction right,” division will naturally dissolve.

Celebrating Each Other’s Strengths Again

Women’s strengths: Attention to detail and relationship-building. Incredibly strong at team harmony and long-term thinking.
Men’s strengths: Directness and decisiveness. Dependable in crises and for innovation speed.

Even in high-IQ scenarios, men’s visuospatial advantages generate new ideas more easily, while women’s verbal memory and empathy bring teams together to achieve goals. Both are essential.

If we gradually remove social filters and compensate for each other’s weaknesses, more geniuses will emerge, enriching humanity’s collective values.

What I wanted to convey through this article isn’t something that creates division, but rather a desire to deepen mutual understanding and enrich humanity’s values for a new era.

Toward a cooperative relationship where we celebrate each other’s strengths and compensate for each other’s weaknesses. Let’s change things together, little by little.

This article was conceived and directed by the author, then developed through a collaborative workflow with AI — synthesizing insights from ChatGPT, Grok, and Gemini, and refined for English readers by Claude.