you could be talking with a bot, sounds kind of like AI. but on the other hand what they say kind of makes sense, some women may be genuinely in to hobbies more associated with men, while others simply are involved with such hobbies to get the attention of men (lack genuine interest). Although also a lot of gender stereotypes have been broken down; for example, I think there are more women who play video games than men at this point actually (although maybe they tend to play different games; maybe there is a gender split on which games women prefer versus men).

The people who are most critical of women are other women. It makes sense from a market dynamics point of view – From one standpoint, many men can “have” a woman for the purpose of having sex or some arm candy for a party, but many women want to “have” a man for the purpose of monopolizing that man for various reasons. Since the asymmetry exists, you need something like an artificially enforced monopoly on something to keep bargaining power equal. That’s why women will judge other women so harshly for breaking rank.

It seems to me that the women who “break rank” can quickly give many men the thing they want while devaluing what other women have, making it more difficult for those women to leverage what they have into what they themselves want. I wouldn’t be surprised if in the last 300,000 years since pair bonding became a major survival mechanism that the GSR(Gossiping, Shaming, and Rallying) mechanism was somewhat codified in genetics.