Today's women freak some men out
On listening and pausing, instead of cancelling people we disagree with
The world today constantly asks us to pick sides. To believe in this or that. To choose one side of the spectrum or the other.
Our thoughts and opinions are rarely that simple. They’re shaped by many different factors: our life experiences, culture, identity, and education.
I recently wrote a piece called “What modern women really want,” sparking a lot of meaningful conversation, particularly around how modern femininity is perceived by more traditionally minded men.
A few men shared that they didn’t resonate with the idea of the “modern woman.” Their concerns centered around the belief that modern women are often overly feminist, dismissive of men, disconnected from their femininity, and treat men as if they’re simply “women with beards.” Other men mentioned that many modern women seem to want to change much about their partners, which ends up “stripping away men’s masculinity and sense of identity”.
For the record, most of these comments were expressed with kindness, and the conversations that followed were genuinely thoughtful. (If you’re interested, feel free to look at the comments section.)
Though we could discuss the assumptions made and the back-and-forth conversation from that article, something more important emerged in the discourse that I had with these men.
We fundamentally came to the table with different opinions. We see the world in different ways, because we’ve been uniquely shaped by our own lived experiences, families of origin, relationships, and gender-specific perspectives.
But we were able to have an open, honest dialogue about a topic that can sometimes get contentious. (It’s clear that we don’t all see eye-to-eye when it comes to gender roles, feminism, modern masculinity, and the changing nature of relationships.)
I chose to understand the perspective of many of these men, and not get offended by every comment shared with me. (Were some of my initial reactions a bit surprised? Yes. Especially when one man said that he’d rather learn Russian, than learn to tap into his emotions. But I didn’t let my initially off-put reaction simmer through the conversation, because that wouldn’t be doing anyone any good. Plus, it was interesting to understand his perspective.)
Just because we disagree with someone doesn’t mean that we don’t like them. We can have different opinions—whether politically or culturally—and those opinions don’t make us, or the other person, bad people.
We can agree to disagree; we don’t have to cancel everyone we disagree with.
There’s so much division these days, especially on social media. Though social media initially promised connection, it too often rewards outrage over understanding.
Content that sparks fear, anger, or disgust spreads faster than anything else – not because humans are cruel, but because our brains are wired to pay attention to threats. Algorithms learn from our clicks. They feed us more of what keeps us engaged, and often, that means more of what makes us mad. Over time, we’re nudged into echo chambers, where our beliefs are reinforced and opposing views feel not just different, but dangerous.
The result? We’re more polarized. Less curious. More likely to cancel than to converse.
There’s so much nuance and interesting discussion that can be had if we open our hearts to the conversation. If we come to the table with curiosity rather than judgment. If we seek to get answers to understand someone’s worldview, rather than try to prove someone wrong and ourselves right.
The challenge is that most of us are living in a constant state of reactivity. Our nervous systems are overstimulated, our attention is fragmented, and our ability to engage in curious, constructive conversation is wearing thin. This is partially due to the state of the world we’re living in, but it’s also because of how fast we’re being asked to move through it all. We take in so many stimuli and information, but don’t take the time to process and integrate it.
According to neuroplasticity expert Amina Zamani, our brains become hyper-vigilant when we haven’t processed challenging feelings or created space for stillness or integration. That’s when we scan for threats. We brace for impact. And we respond to disagreement not with openness, but with defensiveness or withdrawal.
On my friend Denise Love Hewett’s podcast, Amina shares a concept called Energy Management Theory that sheds light on this. Top performers (athletes, creatives, leaders) aren’t just exposed to high levels of stress or intensity. They run for three minutes, and then they rest for ten. They’re given ample space for rest and recovery. They go for the challenges, but they also balance them with repair.
Without rest and integration, we break down. We burn out. We lose access to the parts of ourselves that can be thoughtful, curious, and compassionate.
If we want to build a world where ideas can be exchanged without fear, if we want to be people who can listen without armor, we need to rest, feel, and slow down enough to remember that we’re not enemies just because we disagree.
Only then can genuine dialogue begin.
As I was responding to my readers’ comments, I took Amina’s advice to heart. I took a gap to process what was being said. I took time to understand my commenter’s world views. I spoke about the comments with my partner, getting curious about his own male perspective, and returned back to Substack with questions and acknowledgment.
When we create spaces where people feel safe—to speak, listen, exchange—we open the door to communication that’s rooted in curiosity and understanding.
So, what are some simple steps for getting there?
Pause before reacting. Ask: “What’s behind the other person’s words?”
Seek out diverse perspectives. Not to debate, but to understand.
Lead with empathy. Remember, every opinion has a story.
When we choose curiosity over judgment, we make room for growth. For connection. And ultimately, for more love.
I learned a lot from the conversations that took place after posting the article. I took the time to understand what alternate male perspectives might look like, the hurts some of these men had gone through in their relationships, and how to look at my own role (and that of other women) in modern partnership.
I started to look at the conversation from more of a 360 perspective, versus simply looking at the type of women (and men) that I’m surrounded by. Because of this, I’m grateful for the disagreeing comments on my post. They probed my thinking and took it to the next level.
We don’t have to let differences in opinion drive us apart. We can create space for each other to share, to be more human. We can pause, take a breath, and decide to stay open.
This is how we can shift culture. This is how we can build relationships rooted in curiosity instead of fear. This is how we make this world a little less divided, and a lot more kind.
P.S. I’m always open to feedback and acknowledge that I’m also a work in progress. If you have any recommendations on how I can handle future comments or do better, please feel free to dm me or comment below x.
Great read, as usual.
I love this! I love how you, with firm gentleness, guide all of us to collaboration rather than competition. Thank you for writing! 💗