Do boycotts on certain issues have a biological basis?

[robert1986]

I posted on Cernovich page concernimg football players taking a knee.

I put a case that when women boycott stuff men rush to do the same because of sex. But when men boycott many women do not boycott. 

I was attacked on that page for disrespect to the flag . Mostly women attacked me.However I did not mention the flag at all. 

I simply made an observation that a boycott is meaningless . 

How many boycotted Cheaper Than Dirt for being anti gun(ish) but those same ppl rush to buy ammo at CTD when the price is right?

How many men support breast cancer awareness compared to how many women support prostate cancer awareness? 

I also pointed out on that FB page that men are boycotting because the wives and gf say so but when men have issues those wives don't boycott.

I also made an economics argument that people will forget a boycott if a product is useful. They will boycott now but in a year they will forget. 

I made the case that if Victoria secret made bad statements how many women would boycott? Not many . Why? Because VC has nice products. 

See the disconnect. It's seems sex and wallets override boycotts in the long run. 

And all the men that attacked me I'm willing to were White Knighting. 

I was called  ,""cocksucker", told to " grow up", and was accused of being " high or stupid"

 

They did not know I was a disabled veteran until I told them. 

They did not make any argument but instead attacked me as a person. 

Not one looked at what I was saying. So what did they do? Ad hominem attack and lies. 

Some even thought I was defending the kneeling. But I didn't mention the flag or kneeling . 

I simply stated married women have an incentive to boycott the NFL. Why you ask? Less money spent, more attention to her. And for single folks that means more social interactions without the NFL. 

 

[Jsbrads]

It may be social not biological. Yes both men and women treat men differently than women and visa versa.