[bkirkbri]

I have a pet theory that the reason that women (as well as non-traditionally-masculine men) are considered bossy, while other men are considered "go-getters" is due to a lack of the threat of violence. Not that a type-A guy is going to assault you if you don't capitulate to their authority. More that there is a perceived or possible threat.

In contrast to women who would be considered bossy or abrasive because they don't "back up" their claims to authority. I suppose that there is often a feeling of resentment that society/culture/custom is taking the place of that threat.

Again, all supposition and musing on my part. Probably much better articulated by someone writing on the subject 50 years ago!

[fenomas]

I've never heard this but the idea seems compelling!

Another way to describe it might be as a mismatch between the pecking order according to our simian brains and what's on the org chart. I.e. we don't resent bossy behavior by someone we perceive as a dominant alpha, but bristle when it's someone we see as below us in the "pack".

[kngspook]

It also seems to tangentially make sense with the bias against "smaller" men in leadership positions.

[hackinthebochs]

This is an interesting point. We often observe a backlash against those who claim authority but don't deserve it (whether from being new, smaller, weaker, less skilled--lower on whatever status criteria is established in the group). In the case with masculine men, there might be a subconscious acceptance of their claim to authority, whereas with a woman there is a subconscious resentment towards their claim.

[bkirkbri]

Right, but to be clear: I don't believe that only masculine men deserve authority. I think our species' slow evolution from violence as the single source of authority is possibly the most hopeful development in our history.