In a separate comment I've attempted to explain that I do not think this is a gendered issue; I do stand that women are more likely to resort to social strategies to survive - and acquire - because of the difference in physical capability.

The man may knuckle his proposal in a group setting; the comparable woman may work exclusively in the shadows to influence the actions of others.

I can't tell if this is your interpretation of my ideas or an idea you are proposing. If it is an interpretation of my work, it is inaccurate (however, that may as well be my responsibility to write better). My general proposal may be summed up as:

People use social strategies that amount to evading responsibility in order to ensure survival. In this example of a man and a woman negotiating about what to eat, the woman is more likely to resort to defer responsibility as a means to compensate for a lack of physical negotiating power.

This is a deeply subconscious process and may still have far more layers of reasoning than I can perceive; i.e., deferring authority while maintaining influence of the end result is a great way to wield power. The answer as to why the party is evading responsibility may reveal more information about ourselves. However, I argue that parties evade responsibility as a strategy to ensure survival.

To address your statement more directly, in my opinion, no, women do not end their plans or ideas at whether or not they are accepted by others. Women are capable of individual ambitions, plans, and ideas that do not agree with others. For all people, there is a certain "math" that goes into how much rejection they can face as individuals before they give in to the authority or ideas of others.