Sociologists have a claim that men and women maintain friendships through different mechanisms. Women can maintain relationships through conversation, even over the phone whilst men are more responsive to maintaining friendship through an activity or common objective. Evidence sited includes the observation that men catch-up shoulder-to-shoulder or facing out in the same direction whereas women will catch-up face-to-face… They claim that this may have an evolutionary basis, that historically men have hunted together, shared adversity, gone to war; that these bonds were secured through a trust fall of necessity (as opposed to voluntary).
I’m not too sure of the evolutionary basis yet, I think I’d need to it back either through intentional or accidental experimentation (for example I see greater universality/observation for the sociological observation of Dunbar’s number). Another explanation is that, historically at least (and I would argue it continues to this day) that (perhaps mainly attractive) women are seen to have intrinsic value (women and children first) (and if it’s not intrinsic perhaps its maternal) whereas a man has to provide for his value (in some respects this could be interpreted as paternal value; but that defending that would result in an eternal conflict). To remove a political component we can typify a double parent household as requiring two functions; a carer (historically female) and a provider (historically male), carers can bond by sharing care (conversation) and providers can bond by sharing in provision (for example hunting or working).
The dead boys club; essentially feminism has deconstructed to social space for (historically male) providers to bond, they’ve done this on the basis that sex shouldn’t be the determinant of the carer/provider selection (and that this determination is wholly unfair on single carers (more than single providers)). And now we live in the shadow of feminism, not only did the (probably rightly) destroy the male social space, but then also blame men for the consequences dually through using shame and guilt on men to bond through conversation and bolting with an over-arching narrative of toxic masculinity.
The boys club is dead, long live the providers club! (Though we’ll need several crises before this new space feels safe and the harmful narratives recede; also households will be more complex as either people change roles (from provider to carer if child are had) or a double provider household rents carers (we still don’t have a social mechanism to support a double carer household outside of family and government support)).
— LostLetterbox