[I]f the concept of Female Solipsism is an important one, further clarity is required. Some questions to consider:It's not my intention to address the follow-on questions at this point, but rather the primary one. Is the concept of Female Solipsism an important one? To which I answer yes, because mastery of the concept has the potential to be a tremendous aid in anticipating, understanding, and manipulating female behavior. Consider Ian Ironwood's tremendous adventure in female solipsism, which he explored by the simple device of writing in a notebook in the presence of a number of women.
1) What are the range of behaviors and concepts we are trying to explain and define? When one uses the term “Female Solipsism”, what specifically do they mean? What is the definition and operationalization of the term?
2) Can the behaviors/concept above be fully encompassed within a more commonly-used, already existing term? Having a full view of the behaviors involved, would a different term choice be more clear and informative to convey the set of ideas?
3) Is the desire to claim power and meaning internally for the group by coining a “unique” word, or to convey a set of ideas to those outside the group?
The lesson of the story is that every single aspect of the response from a group of 14 women (13 co-workers and a boss) was based on a) her solipsistic belief that I was writing about her based solely on the fact that she didn't know WHAT or WHOM I was writing about b) her belief in the absence of evidence that my stubborn silence was proof that I was writing about her and c) the belief that every other woman in the group was conspiring against her over the imaginary book for some reason.Read the entire thing. It may sound absurd, but speaking as a published author, I assure you that you could easily replicate his experience in very nearly any group of women today. And this is where the hypothesis becomes provable, as unlike Milton Friedman's ideal rate of money supply growth or anthropogenic climate change, it is easily put to the test by the individual. I'm still working on a Solipsism Quotient test, which is designed to distinguish between the solipsistic, the narcissistic, and the less self-absorbed, but in the meantime, here is a little pop quiz that can be easily applied to the women of your aquaintance in casual conversation.
- Bring up the evil consequences of the 19th Amendment, including the national debt, the economic crisis, and the housing bubble, to a woman. Does she a) challenge the legitimacy of the linkage of the 19th Amendment to one of the consequences, b) agree and express her opinion that women should not be permitted to vote, c) question the practicality of overturning the amendment, or d) immediately start talking about how the prospect of not being permitted to vote makes her feel?
- Make critical comments about a behavioral trait that you know the woman possesses without making any reference to her. E.g.: telling a fat woman that obesity costs the healthcare system more than $150 billion every year. Does she a) question your data source, b) point out a flaw in your reasoning, (for example, how the system also saves money due to the shorter lifespans of the obese), c) ask if you are indirectly criticizing her, or d) immediately start explaining why she possesses that trait?
But don't take my word for it. Test it out in casual conversation and report your results here. This isn't scientific methodology of the sort that will stand up to professional peer review, but it is a fundamentally scientific approach of testing the hypothesis and could prove the basis of a useful predictive model of female behavior applicable to a broad variety of intersexual scenarios.
