My theory of bad internet behavior

I lurk on several forums and post actively on a few. I have a theory that the dynamics of many internet communities are heavily influenced by their sex balance.

Men and women think differently, but not radically so. Most of this is social and some of it is chemical. I think of male and female style of thinking as two overlapping circles. It's not too hard to go back and forth between the two circles... if a woman starts taking testosterone shots, for example, she'll move way over on the male side. I really dislike the "Men are from Mars" stuff that uses evolutionary psychology to justify vast differences between men and women. I think the reason behind the difference is fairly simple: upbringing (social and cultural factors) plus a little bit of chemistry (hormones).

When people behave badly on the internet they behave badly in different ways, depending on whether the community is dominant male or female. Male communities love rank and hierarchy. There are a few alpha males that establish dominance. The community tries to develop a stable hierarchy in which everyone knows their place. But if the hierarchy doesn't come together or isn't stable, conflict develops over the alpha position. Men start to wave their penises around via their keyboard. A frustrated alpha contender finds out they're outclassed, and decides to be a lone wolf instead of accepting a follower role.

Female communities consolidate according to a group identity. Multiple groups form, and even though each group is actually clustered around a few strong personalities, they invoke the idea of equality to maintain cohesion. Within the group, consensus, lack of competition and a feeling of togetherness and support is upheld; the success of one (in outside competition) is the success of all. If one member of the group feels attacked, the rest of the group launches a counterattack. The community works toward integrating all the different groups and becoming one big group. However, conflict is inevitable as subgroups battle each other.

Let's say two people have a disagreement. In a male community, the man will be able to shrug off an attack, regard their feelings about the message as irrelevant to the message itself, and perceive it as a disagreement, not an insult. They won't personalize it... as long as they are secure in their position in the hierarchy. In a female community, the woman will tend to personalize it more. She will feel attacked, and her group will leap to her defense, sparking off a much wider conflict. However, when conflicts develop, men are usually the blinder followers. Women question the hierarchy more; they realize gradations in between blind obedience and outright rebellion.

Adoption forums are usually 95-100% female! I also post at an adoption-unrelated forum (the Fighting 44s) that's more like 70-85% male. While superficially scarier, and much more R-rated, I think the Fighting 44s actually has less serious conflict than the main adoption forum I post at.

I don't think people are doomed to fall into negative sex-related behavior. It's not something that rules us completely, it's more like a magnet pulling us in a certain direction.

A healthy community has a complex environment where both kinds of organization -- hierarchies and groups -- coexist in a flexible way. Hierarchies are the best way to satisfy a desire for competition and debate. Groups are the best way to satisfy a desire for mutual support and consensus.