As a man, I get what women mean when they say that many men don’t see women as “fully human”
I am going to try explaining this phenomenon from a first-person vantage point as a guy. Please know this is not universal and is especially less relevant to men who have grown up with sisters/positive male role models in everyday life.
From youth us males are plied with media that frames women as prizes to be won whose attractiveness and chastity are an extension of our personal worth, be this in music videos or narrative stories. We are also rarely given stories told from the vantage point of women that we’d willingly consume, and therefore aren’t encouraged identify with women as having agency and unique viewpoints. Of course we can point to women getting unrealistic expectations themselves through princess stories, etc., but 1) A lot of those spotlight the romantic interest’s great character as part of the prize in addition to wealth, handsomeness and so on 2) Most media is still greenlit by men and at scale the male perspective is more absorbed by women than vice versa.
As men grow older, many of us become increasingly aware—whether consciously or not—that our social standing among other men is often evaluated through a narrow and performative lens. It’s not just about career success, humor, or competence, but very specifically about how we relate to women: who we attract, how easily we seem to attract them, and even how casually or dismissively we speak about them. There’s an unspoken signaling system at play. The more detached, callous, or objectifying a man sounds when discussing women, the more he implicitly communicates that he has access to them—that he is not “needy,” not struggling, not emotionally invested. In male social groups, this can function almost like a badge of status.
This creates a perverse incentive structure from a young age. Boys quickly learn that expressing genuine curiosity about girls, admiration for them as people, or emotional vulnerability in relation to them can be socially punished. Meanwhile, reducing girls to bodies, conquests, or punchlines is often rewarded with laughter, approval, or at least acceptance. Over time, this reinforcement shapes not just behavior but perception. What begins as performative objectification can gradually become internalized as a default lens through which women are viewed.
The widespread accessibility of pornography arguably intensifies this dynamic. For boys and men who lack meaningful, real-life interactions with women, porn can become a primary “educational” reference point. But it is a fundamentally one-dimensional medium: women are presented as consumable, interchangeable, and existing primarily for male gratification. Without counterbalancing experiences—friendships, collaborative environments, emotionally open conversations—this can distort one’s theory of mind regarding women. Instead of understanding women as agents with their own complex inner lives, desires, and constraints, they are subconsciously categorized as roles or functions.
At the same time, the emotional rules governing masculinity remain rigid. Expressing hurt after being rejected or treated poorly by a woman is often seen as weakness. Showing too much empathy toward women—publicly validating their perspectives, highlighting their achievements, or even just speaking about them with nuance—can risk being labeled as “soft,” “corny,” or subjected to homophobic ridicule. These pressures don’t just operate externally; they become internalized to the point where men may self-censor even in private thought. A man might catch himself empathizing with a woman’s experience and then feel an immediate, almost reflexive discomfort, as though he is betraying some internalized standard of masculinity.
This leads to a kind of psychological split. On one hand, there is the authentic self—capable of curiosity, empathy, attraction, insecurity, and reflection. On the other, there is the performed self: the version that speaks in rehearsed lines, maintains emotional distance, and adheres to the unwritten rules of male social signaling. Over years of repetition, this performed self becomes habitual, almost automatic, especially in interactions with women.
The result is that many interactions with women become strained and unnatural. Instead of engaging spontaneously, men may feel like they are running a script in real time—monitoring their tone, filtering their reactions, trying to align with what they believe is expected of them. This “masking” creates a kind of stiffness that is palpable. It can come across as condescending, overly cautious, or oddly impersonal. Women, in turn, often pick up on this lack of authenticity, even if they can’t immediately articulate why the interaction feels off.
Because this persona is mentally taxing to maintain, some men begin to avoid interacting with women altogether unless there is a clear perceived payoff. If the interaction doesn’t promise attraction, validation, or status, it may feel like it’s not worth the effort of putting on the mask. This further limits opportunities to develop normal, low-stakes, humanizing interactions with women—friendships, casual conversations, shared activities—that could otherwise help dismantle these distorted perceptions.
Ironically, even when men are “nice” to women they find attractive, that niceness can still be rooted in the same dehumanizing framework. It becomes another form of performance—politeness as a strategy, rather than as a genuine expression of regard. The woman is still not being engaged with as a full, autonomous individual; instead, she is being treated as a desirable object whose approval must be secured. This is why the so-called “nice guy” phenomenon often fails. The niceness is not grounded in authentic understanding or respect, but in an attempt to follow perceived rules without grasping the underlying human dynamics.
A deeper issue here is the underdevelopment of theory of mind when it comes to women. Many men grow up absorbing surface-level information—what women say they like, what behaviors are considered attractive or unattractive—but without developing an intuitive sense of why women feel or think the way they do. Without that deeper understanding, interactions become mechanical. Men may say the “right” things but miss the emotional context, leading to communication that feels hollow or misaligned.
Compounding this is the relationship many men have with their own sexual desire. When desire is paired with shame or confusion, it can become difficult to regulate. Instead of being acknowledged and appropriately compartmentalized, it seeps into all interactions, subtly shaping tone, body language, and conversational choices. This can make even neutral or friendly interactions feel charged or transactional, reinforcing the sense that women are being engaged with primarily as means to an end.
The long-term consequences extend beyond romantic relationships. Men who operate within this framework often struggle socially in general. If one’s worldview is filtered through status calculations—constantly assessing who adds value, who elevates one’s image, who is worth engaging with—it becomes difficult to form genuine friendships. This can lead to isolation, even as the individual may blame external factors for their loneliness.
What’s particularly ironic is that the very behaviors adopted to signal social competence—detachment, objectification, emotional suppression—are the same ones that undermine it. Authentic connection, whether with women or other men, requires vulnerability, curiosity, and the willingness to see others as fully human. Without those, interactions remain shallow and unsatisfying, reinforcing the original sense of disconnection.
Breaking out of this pattern is difficult precisely because it involves pushing against deeply ingrained social norms. It requires tolerating short-term social risk—potential judgment, misunderstanding, or rejection—in order to develop a more grounded and authentic way of relating to others. It also requires a deliberate effort to rebuild one’s internal framework: to actively practice seeing women not as categories or outcomes, but as individuals with their own perspectives, constraints, and complexities.
In the end, the issue isn’t just about how men treat women; it’s about how men are socialized to fragment themselves. The same system that discourages empathy toward women also discourages emotional honesty with other men and even with oneself. Addressing one side of that equation inevitably means confronting the whole structure.
Leave a Reply