> All of these groups in Western societies have been, and often still are, dominated by men.

But not by all men. If all of the top 1% are men, for instance, there are still 49% of men out there that are both make and not elite.

It's possible you are just observing different men now. Or observing men differently.

I agree. I'm not denying this. This is exactly why it should be called dominance and not privilege. And it does have real impacts on both groups.

Or maybe societies are dominated by overambitious sociopaths, regardless of their gender?

I feel we are long past the 'no true Scotsman' defense of woman in public office on average just exhibiting the same ruthless self-interest as the men they replaced.

True, the most sexist (in the sense that men were treated differently from women) boss I have seen was a woman. She seemed to prey on weaker personalities, an d treated men better than women.

That is a known pattern for people in discriminated group that they want to behave like the majority and take it to the extreme. So female bosses in environment when females are underrepresented may behave like that. It goes hand in hand with internalized sexism (and she tries to prove that she is not like 'other girls/women'). This and more interesting patterns like that are described in What works for women at work.

How do you accurately measure empathy though? I'm not sure I agree with the methods they used in this study.