Women and Emotional Thinking: Examining a Common Gender Stereotype

[D H]

Of course, that all flies out the window when men get married. Then it gets very hard to compare decision making between the sexes, because as we all know, men don't get to make the decisions once they are married.

Hey! I resent that remark -- I think. Just to make sure, let me double-check with my better half.

 

[DanP]

Hey! I resent that remark -- I think. Just to make sure, let me double-check with my better half.

Like she will ever tell you the truth, hahaha.

 

[barbara22203]

Live and learn, young man.

 

[rhody]

That New York Times review is hardly a strong recommendation for taking the time to read that book, Rhody.

GeorginaS,

Funny you say that, I never even saw the NY Times review before I bought the book. I never buy or read that paper. When posting I used the first review that came up. In any event, I don't need the Times to endorse or not endorse a book to make up my own opinion about what the author has to say. If you have read it and want to discuss, that is fine by me, if not, that's fine as well. I stand by my opinion though.

Rhody...

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

GeorginaS,

Funny you say that, I never even saw the NY Times review before I bought the book. I never buy or read that paper. When posting I used the first review that came up. In any event, I don't need the Times to endorse or not endorse a book to make up my own opinion about what the author has to say. If you have read it and want to discuss, that is fine by me, if not, that's fine as well. I stand by my opinion though.

Rhody...

I have to agree with Georgina, that article does not make the book sound very good at all. Something on par with a pop selfhelp/relationships book.

The author of the article quotes the author of the book...

Instead, she offers breezy generalizations. “The female brain,” she writes, “has tremendous unique aptitudes — outstanding verbal agility, the ability to connect deeply in friendship, a nearly psychic capacity to read faces and tone of voice for emotions and states of mind, and the ability to defuse conflict.” She says that “all of this is hard-wired into the brains of women” — a process she works to document, but whose broader implications she never quite makes clear.

Note my emphasis above; do you remember if she perhaps supported this by most women being possessed of extra red cones in the eye which are connected to the area of the visual cortex responsible for facial recognition? And whether or not she actually qualifies this interpretation of its utility in anyway?

 

[zoobyshoe]

Yesterday I got into a discussion with a girl from school about how women are generally more emotional thinkers than men. What mean is that they base their decisions more heavily on how they feel 'in their heart' rather than possibly looking at the big picture. It's more of a personal (dare I say selfish?) kind of thing. She agreed with me, until I put the example of how women vote.

I would like to know how many women here would agree that women make decisions 'with their heart', up to the point we mention voting. (For some reason that particular example was the bone of contention.) Here, in real life, it's not at all uncommon for women I know to assert they trust their heart over logic, and to criticize men for looking at certain issues too intellectually, systematically, logically, at the expense of their emotions.

 

[rhody]

I have to agree with Georgina, that article does not make the book sound very good at all. Something on par with a pop selfhelp/relationships book.

The author of the article quotes the author of the book...

Note my emphasis above; do you remember if she perhaps supported this by most women being possessed of extra red cones in the eye which are connected to the area of the visual cortex responsible for facial recognition? And whether or not she actually qualifies this interpretation of its utility in anyway?

Well, as far as being a pop/self help book, I beg to differ. A sample of what a woman (Sylvia in this case) experiences after menopause from page, 136, Brizendine states:

If we took our MRI scanner into Sylvia's brain, we'd see a landscape quite different from a few years before. A constancy in the flow of impulses through her brain circuits has replaced the surges and plunges of estrogen and progesterone caused by the menstrual cycle. Her brain is now a more certain and steady machine. We do not see the hair-trigger circuits in the amygdala that rapidly altered her reality right before her period, sometimes pushing her to see bleakness that wasn't there or to hear an insult that wasn't intended. We would see that the brain circuits between the amygdala (the emotional processor), and prefrontal cortex (the emotion assessment and judgement area) are fully functional and consistent.

If you haven't read the book you will just have to trust me, I would never have finished it in the first place because I like scientific detail when I read about subjects like this. I would have put the book down and never finished it.

I realize it was a total mistake to include to review from the NY Times, and for that I apologize.

Ought ohhh, she has a new book coming out in a week, you guessed it, http://www.louannbrizendine.com/"

Rhody...

P.S. Here is a link to what I would call a http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/23968.The_Female_Brain" had to say about it, seems to be all over the map, but a rated a bit above average overall.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Well, as far as being a pop/self help book, I beg to differ. A sample of what a woman (Sylvia in this case) experiences after menopause from page, 136, Brizendine states:

If you haven't read the book you will just have to trust me, I would never have finished it in the first place because I like scientific detail when I read about subjects like this. I would have put the book down and never finished it.

I realize it was a total mistake to include to review from the NY Times, and for that I apologize.

Ought ohhh, she has a new book coming out in a week, you guessed it, http://www.louannbrizendine.com/"

Rhody...

P.S. Here is a link to what I would call a http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/23968.The_Female_Brain" had to say about it, seems to be all over the map, but a rated a bit above average overall.

Sorry but even with the text you quote it still seems a gloss. If I were a woman, let alone an intelligent educated woman, I might well be incensed but such a generalized interpretation of womens behavior. As a less than well educated male I still do not find the scientific gloss very informative.

I have not read it, true, but at least I have peered at more than the cover. ;-)

 

[MotoH]

We all know Oprah is the only credible book reviewer.

 

[zoobyshoe]

If I were a woman, let alone an intelligent educated woman, I might well be incensed but such a generalized interpretation of womens behavior.

It's like you don't know any women.

“The female brain,” she writes, “has tremendous unique aptitudes — outstanding verbal agility, the ability to connect deeply in friendship, a nearly psychic capacity to read faces and tone of voice for emotions and states of mind, and the ability to defuse conflict.” She says that “all of this is hard-wired into the brains of women”

Women don't care how scientifically documented a string of compliments like that might be.

Not that a man would either, but the notion women would be outraged by positive generalizations is not borne out by my experience. People only balk at negative generalizations.

As you and I are both men, I know you will consider this post with an astute intellect, finely honed sense of fair play, an eye for the big picture, and deep concern for the underprivelidged.

 

[Evo]

Women don't care how scientifically documented a string of compliments like that might be.

Not that a man would either, but the notion women would be outraged by positive generalizations is not borne out by my experience. People only balk at negative generalizations.

I find the quote

The female brain,” she writes, “has tremendous unique aptitudes — outstanding verbal agility, the ability to connect deeply in friendship, a nearly psychic capacity to read faces and tone of voice for emotions and states of mind, and the ability to defuse conflict.” She says that “all of this is hard-wired into the brains of women”

An offensive and inaccurate generalization. This puts women clearly in the "mothering role". Where is the "ability to lead, to think quickly, to make clear unemotional (rational) decisions?

 

[rewebster]

I know women don't like being pigeonholed, or told that 'they' are a 'certain way'. I know they would rather think they are independent thinkers, even if they do agree with some things some times. I know most women would rather not argue, because it usually doesn't lead anywhere. And I think most like feeling that they are appreciated, and are in a 'secure' place.

I've been around some that take it nicely, and others that haven't.

 

[DanP]

I know women don't like being pigeonholes, or told that 'they' are a 'certain way'.

Man doesn't like to told they are a certain way as well. This is really sexless :P How would you feel if your gf tells you "this is the shortest one I've ever seen, and I've seen a lot of them", even if its true ?

 

[rewebster]

Man doesn't like to told they are a certain way as well. This is really sexless :P How would you feel if your gf tells you "this is the shortest one I've ever seen, and I've seen a lot of them", even if its true ?

some people live by their 'smallest' worry

 

[DanP]

some people live by their 'smallest' worry

True, but how would you feel ?

 

[rewebster]

True, but how would you feel ?

Sorry, I can't relate to the question----but, I'd say you were with the wrong woman.


"I know women don't like being pigeonholed, or told that 'they' are a 'certain way'."

Men tolerate it a little more than every woman I've known.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I find the quoteAn offensive and inaccurate generalization. This puts women clearly in the "mothering role". Where is the "ability to lead, to think quickly, to make clear unemotional (rational) decisions?

Yes, my having asserted people only balk at negative generalizations requires you to balk at this positive one, because the meta-generalization that contains the positive one is negative.

 

[DanP]

Sorry, I can't relate to the question----but, I'd say you were with the wrong woman.

Why would she be the wrong one ? Because she told you the truth ? Or because she was inconsiderate and hurt something ? What makes her "wrong women" ? After all, maybe she tells the truth :P

Men tolerate it a little more than every woman I've known.

And how did you assessed this ? Through a scientific experiment, or through your own biased cognition ?

 

[zoobyshoe]

Man doesn't like to told they are a certain way as well. This is really sexless :P

People really only balk at negative generalizations. Walk up to a tall man and suggest that tall men make natural leaders, and he won't go searching for scientific papers to prove you wrong. But, if you point out that 57% of all serial killers are over 6 feet 2 inches in height, he'll certainly take offense.

 

[rewebster]

Why would she be the wrong one ? Because she told you the truth ? Or because she was inconsiderate and hurt something ? What makes her "wrong women" ? After all, maybe she tells the truth :P




And how did you assessed this ? Through a scientific experiment, or through your own biased cognition ?

yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes or yesX6

 

[DanP]

yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes or yesX6

So I take it you have no scientific proof of your generalization ?

 

[rewebster]

So I take it you have no scientific proof of your generalization ?

I didn't generalize anything, so no poof

poof!

 

[DanP]

I didn't generalize anything, so no poof

poof!

Really ?

Men tolerate it a little more than every woman I've known.

"Men" is a generalization. It means "a male human". Plural form. So the "male human" tolerates more than every female you know ?

 

[rewebster]

Men tolerate it a little more than every woman I've known.

 

[DanP]

Men tolerate it a little more than every woman I've known.

Sure thing. The generalization is MEN , not every women you have known :P

 

[rewebster]

Man doesn't like to told they are a certain way as well. This is really sexless :P How would you feel if your gf tells you "this is the shortest one I've ever seen, and I've seen a lot of them", even if its true ?

hmmm...

 

[DanP]

hmmm...

hmm what ? I did not pretend I didn't generalized. You did.

So again, want to present proof for your generalization ?

 

[rewebster]

Sure thing. The generalization is MEN , not every women you have known :P

"...I've known" applied to both

 

[rewebster]

have you actually had a woman say that to you?

 

[DanP]

have you actually had a woman say that to you?

Ive been told a lot of things. What are exactly are you interested in knowing ?

 

[rewebster]

nevermind---


should get back to thread topic

 

[GeorginaS]

It's like you don't know any women.



Women don't care how scientifically documented a string of compliments like that might be.

Not that a man would either, but the notion women would be outraged by positive generalizations is not borne out by my experience. People only balk at negative generalizations.

As you and I are both men, I know you will consider this post with an astute intellect, finely honed sense of fair play, an eye for the big picture, and deep concern for the underprivelidged.

I'm going to sit here before wandering out onto a limb and try to decide whether you're deliberately picking a fight with the women on this board or whether your tongue is firmly planted in your cheek.

 

[GeorginaS]

GeorginaS,

Funny you say that, I never even saw the NY Times review before I bought the book. I never buy or read that paper. When posting I used the first review that came up. In any event, I don't need the Times to endorse or not endorse a book to make up my own opinion about what the author has to say. If you have read it and want to discuss, that is fine by me, if not, that's fine as well. I stand by my opinion though.

Rhody...

I don't know why it's funny that I commented on the link you provided. Anyway, generally, when people provide links to outside sources of information the person has a) read the material they've linked and b) the material supports what they're saying. I thought it was odd that you'd link something that contradicted everything you said.

It's got nothing to do with whether or not you, personally, rely upon the Times to endorse books you read, it's got to do with how you communicate your ideas to other people.

 

[DanP]

I'm going to sit here before wandering out onto a limb and try to decide whether you're deliberately picking a fight with the women on this board or whether your tongue is firmly planted in your cheek.

God, I do enjoy this thread

 

[zoobyshoe]

I'm going to sit here before wandering out onto a limb and try to decide whether you're deliberately picking a fight with the women on this board or whether your tongue is firmly planted in your cheek.

Are you outraged by positive generalizations about women?