JoM,

Empathy is a human trait.

End

Poirot, about 50% of those who comment on OLO are devoid of empathy but have large amounts of belief that 'might is right' and, to that end, blindly worship the Yanks.

Abbott's posturing is pathetic and he needs psychological help but it does attract the schoolyard bullies who instinctively value brawn over brains and group-think.

The most pathetic situation caused by the Australian brawn crowd are the handful of Australian war planes sitting in the Middle East. It seems they only let six of them be used because some of them might be shot down.

AIR COMMODORE ABBOTT with his six jets cuts a TERRIFYING WORLD FIGURE.

Just as well he didn't send our fleet of submarines! Australia would be even more laughable!

JOM:

That's an interesting theory but you would have a pretty hard time trying to prove it!

Phanto,
It's not my theory, I don't have any original ideas.
http://www.netplaces.com/raising-boys/boys-and-dads/fathers-and-empathy.htm
Who Is More Empathic;Men Or Women?
http://www.angryharry.com/Who-Is-More-Empathic-Men-Or-Women.htm
Women are more likely to respond emotionally to the psychological state of others especially when the other is distressed but that doesn't indicate empathy, it's more likely that a woman will be evaluating the chances of the same fate befalling her, her emotional response is fear, not empathy.
You can see men and women who are capable of empathy at work in any hospital casualty department, empathy allows people to correctly identify a person's state of mind and what they might be feeling and to take charge of a stressful situation, the person with no empathy is the one going to pieces, screaming at the triage nurse and demanding that their child be seen first.

JoM,

Empathy is a whole of species trait.

"Empathy is the capacity to share or recognize emotions experienced by another sentient or fictional being."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathy

You write:

"Women are more likely to respond emotionally to the psychological state of others especially when the other is distressed but that doesn't indicate empathy..."

Which, frankly, is bunkum.

If a human did not display empathy, then that human would be unable to participate in any meaningful way with the most basic of human interaction - see classic low-functioning autism as an example of impaired empathy.

phantom

'Would things be any less ‘toxic’ if women had all the power?'

Why is it always assumed that, in the absence of a patriarchy (men in power), our only other choice is a matriarchy (women in power)?

Apart from the fact that the chances of a matriarchy ruling the world are zero to none, even if such an impossibility ever occurred, it would be beset by the same gender imbalance that has dogged the patriarchy for 6000 years.

What has made the patriarchy so toxic for humanity is not because men were ‘in power’, but because it skewed society too far into the masculine sphere. While masculine energy is fine in moderation, patriarchies give it far too much dominance, which is why it's been a millennia-long breeding ground for what Rob Cover termed 'aggressive hypermasculinity'.