The Myth of Female Rationality (Part 1)

The Myth of Female Reason
“The heart has its reasons which reason knows not.” ― Blaise Pascal

1.) Introduction
2.) My Philosophical Position
3.) How Female Emotivity Manifests In Disagreement
4.) How Women Form Opinion
5.) In Closing / Relevant Reading

1.) Introduction:

The claim that woman’s capacity for reason matches man’s is humorous, and yet be it espoused by radical feminists or well-intentioned humanists, the “equality of reason” myth persists.

It was only the other week I observed two men debating woman’s logical capacity, one man insisted women were less reasonable, whilst the other disagreed whilst conceding “all women are like that. Yet in spite of this concession, said man went to the lengthy effort of recalling instances where he had observed women exercising reason. It was as if this particular man wasn’t quite willing to accept women are the less reasonable sex, which ironically is an unreasonable position in and of itself.

There is of course a discrepancy here, a gentle person can get angry and a frugal man can make a large purchase in the same way that an unreasonable person can demonstrate logic; a capacity for something does not equate to a propensity for it. The man who could not believe women are less reasonable is naive, the claim was not that women never make logical decisions, even a broken clock is right twice per day, the claim was that women are governed so strongly by emotion that their capacity and proclivity for reason is greatly vitiated, ergo, their reason is inferior to man’s.

Even in the comments section of this very publication, the notion women are just as logical as men is oft dispelled, for women are quick to offend and be offended by nature of their volatile reactivity. Now of course the same principle applies to man, an angry man cannot reason too well either, but here is my contention: the average woman becomes emotional far more easily than the average man, and thus whatever reason she does possess is quickly lost when even a modicum of pressure is applied.

I believe less intelligent women are simply incapable of reasoning to any elaborate degree, whilst smarter women can only do so whilst their emotions are in check, eg: they have managed to encounter something unsettling without taking offence to it. Nevertheless, I do not believe smarter women are any less emotional than their lower IQ counterparts, but only that they have better impulse control. This is why although smart women can exercise reason, they often do so with less frequency than even the average man.

2.) My Philosophical Position:

In my analysis of women’s behaviour I try to minimise my sexism as much as possible, for I do not wish my weaker expectations of women to sustain an untrue personal delusion, but rather, I wish for my view of man as the primary sex to be grounded in sound observation and empirical evidence. For example, I observe men making sounder judgements more often than women, debating better, skewing more to the right on the IQ bell curve, as well as making the majority of discoveries and inventions that elevated us out of the stone age.

In my inquiry into male and female differences I have discovered women’s sole biological reason for existing is to reproduce and nurture the young, whilst man’s is to reproduce, protect his mate (oft dying in wars in an attempt to do so) and contributing to the grand project known as civilization.

In case any wish to contest the point on civilization, do so bearing in mind you contend the point with a machine invented by a man, using a power source discovered and refined by a man, in a house designed and built by a man. As women are and have historically been preoccupied with child rearing and maintaining social ties, the elevation of the human condition can thus be credited almost solely to man.

Even since half a century of woman’s emancipation, women have done little but accrue more money, in terms of major intellectual and civilizational achievements, few have achieved anything of significance. Yes, women have entered highly prestigious professions such as medicine and law, but do the majority of women make major contributions to their fields, or do they just teach and practice the work of men who came before them, rather than endeavouring to truly excel in, innovate and push the boundaries of their chosen disciplines?

In case it is not clear, my intent is to make a philosophical inquiry into man and woman’s complementing nature as to allow for the refinement of my view, the goal is not to arbitrarily denounce one sex whilst heralding the other. If women are thereby described as being secondary or lesser in some form, it is because this is what reality is indicating to me, not because I want it to be so.

3.) How Female Emotivity Manifests In Disagreement:

As somebody who likes to be proven wrong by reason and empiricism (because I can learn from this) it is disappointing but nevertheless predictable the majority of comments women have made in my time writing have been subpar. If it is disjointed emotional babbling, I hastily remove it to prevent an explosion of vitriolic derailment from occurring in the comments section.

Despite my desire for an open forum and strong ethical appreciation for freedom of speech, not all speech is equal in its reason or value and thus I do not permit the dregs of human thought to manifest and take root within my comments section, censorship be damned. Offending comments are not removed on the basis of whether they agree or disagree, but rather, whether they are well argued or not. If you disagree but make a compelling argument, I won’t remove a comment. But if the person knows no better than to try to play mind games with me on my own blog, I will vibrantly dispose of their trite.

The women who are offended and disagree with the content here oft do so on a profusely emotional basis, with typically little in the way of cogent reasoning in their attempts at refutation. I imagine due to the choice of topic and depth of language, my comments section attracts a higher IQ female than average, and even from this pool of women, 3 kinds of comment tend to be made:

– “I agree with what you’re saying because I’m a traditional woman (usually she is Christian or highly conservative) and my emotions/upbringing agree with your world view. I arrived at similar conclusions I couldn’t verbalise, reading what you’ve deduced has confirmed my intuitive beliefs and suspicions.”

– “I disagree with what you’re saying because I cling to the interpretations of reality indoctrinated into me by feminism, your criticism of women is misogynistic and what you say represents everything that is wrong with society.”

– “I disagree with what you’re saying because my solipsistic point of reference is more valid to me than your reason, I don’t fit neatly into your world view because I’m different from most women and thus your world view cannot possibly apply to most women, you must be wrong.”

A woman who makes a very well-reasoned comment is a rarity, but when it happens it is a welcomed delight regardless of whether there is consensus, nevertheless, such a thing is rare enough that one does not hold their breath waiting for it to occur.

If Illimitable Men was contingent on women making reasonable comments for sound discourse and new topic ideas, as a platform for unorthodox ideas it’d die with much haste. Now I am not going out of my way to be offensive here, but I am emphasising a point: women just aren’t all that reasonable, logic is not their primary mode of function and this shows emphatically in their contributions.

In case you think this site is read exclusively by men, you would be mistaken, I receive enough page views that if even a meagre percentage of my readers are female, that’s a good few thousand women.

4.) How Women Form Opinion:

Time and time again, be it a televised debate, a private argument or even in universities where the female IQ skews higher, I see little in the way of reason espoused by women. This does not mean women do not say correct or truthful things, but rather that they do not rationally deduce truth so much as they intuit it, intuition being the vague sensation that something feels or sounds right.

Likewise women will hold untrue and irrational beliefs because said irrational thing feels good to believe. You should begin to see a pattern emerging here, whether a woman holds an opinion based in truth or an opinion that isn’t, this opinion is almost always held because it feels good to believe, or her peer group believes it and thus she adopts their view. Scarcely does she hold a view because she has rigorously investigated a topic with reason and come to a conclusion she believes to be true; this is not impossible but I believe it improbable.

Often when the veracity of a woman’s viewpoint is being challenged, if she believes her opinion to be true out of no more than an intuitive emotional conviction, she feels the validity of her emotion is being disputed rather than the credibility of her reasoning.

When a woman’s reasoning is disputed, she oft perceives this as the invalidation of her emotion, the deprivation of her “right to feel” because her opinion and its hasty conclusion is oft founded upon an instinct or feeling rather than a deduction or investigation.

Women have a tendency to defensively double down on their position when they feel bad, employing Machiavellian fallacy such as shaming (eg: reductio ad absurdum) rather than opening themselves to greater scrutiny and taking the time to step back and re-evaluate their opinion.

Essentially, women trust their emotions far too much, they act on their emotions almost entirely without restraint, and often fail to question, analyse, check and hold their emotions to account. For a woman if it feels right then it is right, a woman does not consider that perhaps although some things feel good to hear or believe, they may be logically unsound, false, outright incorrect or otherwise verifiably false.

One can make such discernments by comparing how men and women back up their arguments, for example, an incorrect man is generally able to devise a chain of reasoning to explain his thinking, whilst a woman is scarcely capable of producing any such evidence of reasoning. Why? Because even when a man is wrong he’s thinking in a way that is logically congruent even should his conclusion prove to be false. A woman on the other hand merely felt the thing to be true, so has no cogent basis for communicating why she believes her opinion to be correct, “it just is!”.

5.) In Closing / Relevant Reading:

It appears to me that women just hold opinions, and that they have these opinions because they feel intuitively correct, and if anybody presents them with evidence counter to what they feel to be correct, rather than accept the evidence presented to them and adopt a world view more aligned with reality, they lash out and refuse to internalise the uncomfortable truth.

Women would appear prone to correcting emotional inconsistencies rather than logical ones, that is rather, women are better adapted to coping with things than understanding them. Of course woman can understand things, it would be idiotic to claim otherwise, but an underlying ability to understand does not always translate to a desire to understand. Generally, a woman won’t even make the attempt to understand something if she believes the truthfulness pertaining to it will upset her emotionally.

In accordance with AWALT theory, I believe this to be true of all women but to differing frequencies, that is to say, some women are like this most of the time, whilst others are only some of the time. I’m not saying men are infallible and do not do blunder or even indulge in the exact same ignorance either, I believe they do, just with less frequency, reckless abandon and fervour than do women.

I have a lot of thoughts on this topic, so in part 2 expect me to explain how conformity, shame and female evolutionary psychology almost compel women into Machiavellian/emotive responses rather than honest or logical ones. It should be noted this article has been designed as an introductory piece for a more substantive follow-up, which can be found here.


The Manipulated Man
The Rational Male
The Rational Male: Preventive Medicine


A Most Solipsistic Nature
How Women Argue

Solipsism, Emotion & Arguments
The Nature of Women
The AWALT Misconception


  1. Well the link was removed, but if you search “European Women Speak Out on Leftist Lies” youtube it’s quite impressive to see how great females can be with the right anchor to hold onto.


  2. I see your points, but I think what ends up triggering this backlash from females is the language/emotion you impart on your deductions. “The myth of female rationality” is a attention-grabbing, emotion-seeking headline, but with a reasonable / rational (yet still entirely anecdotal and without any sources whatsoever) post. It is as if you are almost enticing women to give into their emotional behavior and respond emotionally. What if you had instead came up with a headline which more accurately represents your thesis? You concede throughout your blog post of many counter arguments. So your point is not nearly as “ground breaking” or eye opening as the headline suggests but instead rather mundane and inconsequential.

    Now onto the body of your post, I think when you look at the numbers it supports what you’re saying but your one point about sopilism to me does not go with the rest of what your saying. What the “sopilistic” argument is basically saying is that a woman who doesn’t exibit these traits as often as the average means that it disproves your premise. Which is does, because your conclusion (AWALT) and your concessions (but some are more than others or experience them at different frequencies and amounts) are at odds with each other. So what is a rational woman supposed to take away from this? Well I can certainly say it compels me to utilize reason more than intuition in my own decision making and opinion making. Because I believe although ones intuition could be very good, it pales in comparison to reason as to which is more indicative of the truth. But what about the irrational woman ? She will see it as an insult to her character. The irrational man? He will use it to justify misogynist behavior towards woman. The rational man? He will use it to dismiss women before they have the opportunity to even speak

    So what is the truth? As you conceded, women are in fact capable of rationality. But they also get caught in emotions. I compel our more rational counterparts to not stand for irrational, emotional behavior. In the case where emotions are overtaking rational discussion, end it there (If its a rational problem being discussed). If they see a faltering in a (rational) woman’s reasoning, question it as they would a man. There is no reason to give women a pass in a discussion just because she is being emotional and is unable to logically string together an argument! If she is unable to take kindly to your own rational suggestions, its probably she does not trust or respect your expertise and will be prone to dismissing it anyway. So it boils down to does the woman respect the man? No , and that’s why she lets her emotion rule her, because she can get away with it.

    I’m going to be honest here. I consider myself to be rational but also can see that emotions get “in the way” of logic. I have had mentors who have refused to engage in discussions when I’m emotional, or behaving with anger (which I can be prone to). On matters which are important to me, I will disgard the emotional aspect and address the situation with logic. Because in any technical field, logic dominates the progress. Even if a woman’s nature is to perceive through emotion, if she values logic, she will utilize it to the best of her ability and remove herself from situations involving emotions so they do not control her decision making process. I know this as this is how I operate, and how many rational females operate as well, but I agree this is not as common as you would see in males, though males are not immune to irrationality. You concede that too.

    I think that when it comes to logic, its not if its more suited for women or men, but it comes down to the self awareness of the person exhibiting the reasoning, and their ability to identify when their emotions are interfering. If they are able to master it, even the most emotional women can exhibit logic and rationality in excess.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Great job, as usual. You really have perfected the goldilocks approach to intellectual writing, deep yet concise.

    A little feedback on the 3rd paragraph: Did you mean to say “a capacity for something does not equate to a propensity for it.”?

    Keep up the good work.


  4. While I don’t disagree that the average woman is irrational due to emotions, in my experience the average man is equally irrational. To be blunt, the average man is retarded and ridiculously easy to manipulate. Men seem to exist in a constant state of heightened hormones that cause them to consistently, almost infallibly, make terrible decisions in the pursuit of sexual fulfillment.

    That alone could just be chalked up to a bit of biological weakness, no real harm in the creature rutting around in the mud, but the innate irrationality in the male mind is its stubborn persistence to cling to the “way things should be.” I’m sure you’ve seen it plenty of times, especially in older men. A man, when faced with a discrepancy between the way things are and “the way things should be,” will almost inevitably choose to dig his heels in and have a fit that things aren’t the way they should be.

    The example you gave where women double down when their feelings are challenged is equally true when applied to men doubling down when their sensibilities are challenged. Basic social conventions, while having value on their own at times, often lodge themselves so deeply into the male psyche that they are unable to be overturned. An older man, when faced with a younger, more intelligent, more capable colleague who is in a position to overtake him, will rarely look to the young man for leadership. Instead, he will insist the younger man treat him with the respect due to an elder. Why? Because That’s The Way Things Should Be.

    My hope here is to encourage the average man to be less stupid, as I would also hope as the average woman grows up and learns more about life she will make decisions more through rational calculation and less through emotional reaction. Though the average woman might not like that very much, as it will make it harder to push the easiest button available to manipulate a man…contrary to popular opinion, the easiest way to manipulate a man is not through sex, but simply through his ideals. Present him a vision of The Way Things Should Be and he will crawl through hell itself to reach it.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. “While I don’t disagree that the average woman is irrational due to emotions, in my experience the average man is equally irrational. To be blunt, the average man is retarded and ridiculously easy to manipulate.”

      That is stupidity, not irrationality.

      “Men seem to exist in a constant state of heightened hormones that cause them to consistently, almost infallibly, make terrible decisions in the pursuit of sexual fulfillment.”

      The male sex drive is strong, but you are exaggerating.

      Re: ‘the way things should be’ – You’re telling me men are as bad as women when it comes to this? He is talking about general differences. Your average human being is certainly like this, but women, on the whole, are worse.

      “Present him a vision of The Way Things Should Be and he will crawl through hell itself to reach it.”

      On average, do you think it is easier for men to realize and admit ‘red pill truths’, or women? Most men I know know the score, they just don’t want to talk about it because they see no clear way out of the fog.

      Liked by 2 people

  5. It’s fine to acknowledge the fact that men are far and away the driving force of invention, innovation and cultural development — as long as it’s at the same time acknowledged that one of, if not THE most important predictor of a man’s success is his secure attachment to his mother at a young age.

    A logical, rationally driven woman is not a woman who is going to form secure attachments with her children during the crucial years of 0-3. You need ooey, gooey emotion for that.

    Women’s deficiency in logic in favor of emotion IS one of the driving forces of society, it’s just behind the scenes. Without great mothers, you can’t have great men.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Makes a lot of sense, I like your angle. Some of the most psychopathic men I’ve met had very detached mothers, eg: self-absorbed narcissistic women who use their kids as props and don’t really give a shit about them. I agree female emotion is necessary for forming the initial mother-child pair bond attachment which is all but essential for the functioning of a high trust and healthy society, unfortunately though it gets in the way of everything that isn’t childrearing!

      As many men have told me, they were closer to their mothers when very young (lower T, lower IQ, more emotional, just like their mothers) but after puberty when the T shoots up and they’re smarter because they’re older, they feel closer to their dads (and oft “above”) their mothers. Not that they don’t love their mothers anymore, but rather that, their mothers cannot teach them anything they don’t know, or cope with stress and reason to the degree that they can.

      Boys have a propensity to outgrow their mothers psychologically upon maturation and, as men, often feel like their mother has become the child they now have to take care of.

      The role reversal is quite fascinating.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Right, and to me that doesn’t diminish motherhood or women at all. The mother does grow the boy within her own body and feed him from her own breast and with her warm nurturing from 0-3 set up the landscape of his mind.

        Her role doesn’t become less important, it just becomes more concentrated time-wise if it’s true that the father’s role is the one that will quickly come to take up the greater significance and remain that way for the rest of his life.


        1. Well honey, the founder of psychoanalysis disagrees with your unqualified opinion.

          “I cannot think of any need in childhood as strong as the need for a father’s protection.” – Sigmund Freud

          Liked by 1 person

    2. “It’s fine to acknowledge the fact that men are far and away the driving force of invention, innovation and cultural development — as long as it’s at the same time acknowledged that one of, if not THE most important predictor of a man’s success is his secure attachment to his mother at a young age.”

      Being a good mother is very important, but… source?

      Liked by 1 person

  6. Exquisite!!!
    One of the times Machiavellian fallacy tends to rear its ugly head is when you tell a woman that your not into “relationships” or “commitment”….the shaming encountered is just interesting to witness!!


  7. I think the difference is not necessarily that men are more logical or rational than women, rather in the importance given to the objective reality of a given situation. Men tend to give overarching importance to the facts of the situation while women are inclined to place other people’s opinions and feelings on the same level, or even higher, then the objective facts of the situation. I think this is the major difference in how men and women reason and why propaganda works better on women, why women tend more toward conformity, etc. etc.


    1. I am impressed by the tenor of the commenting here. Very balanced, ….. with appreciation for nuance….. precisely what this scope of inquiry calls for at this juncture IMO.

      Unknown – it seems to me that you are pointing to a very powerful and nuanced concept with respect to the man/woman-differences inquiry. You are pointing to the subjective/objective dichotomy and how that plays out differently wrt the motivations, and therefore differently within the psyches, of men vs. women. This concept has potential for accounting for the differences that IM outlined in this post, as well as for the differences that Maya suggested in her comment above. To be blunt and uncouth about it (for brevity-sake):

      women’s worldview tends towards Hivemind
      men’s worldview tends towards Übermensch

      Imagine what is in store for humanity if we can get these two powers energizing each other via more intricate feedback loops (which I believe is the go-forward task for humanity), thus supercharging the human endeavor. Humans already possess the second stirrings of a trait born as strong emergence – “agency” – the belief we have the power to make meaningful non-deterministic decisions. It is not inconceivable that this new challenge I am pointing to might bear another mysterious aptitude characterized as an emergent property! That would be mindblowing.

      I think that now is a time where humans are being forced out of the comfort zone wrt less nuanced descriptions/beliefs around the man/woman dynamic, that no longer apply to current conditions, and this is occurring now for various reasons (which I can outline if you like), and so we are in a period of growing discomfort around this issue. This discomfort could be taken as a good sign, if you buy my above-noted argument.

      So let’s keep going and continue to get on this stuff!

      My current line of thinking is that “agency”, and how it tends to be used differently inter-gender-wise, will be a fruitful line of inquiry wrt to better understanding the powers and weaknesses inherent in each of the above mentioned worldviews.

      Presented overly obtusely (i.e – just as starting point for further discussion), perhaps it could be said that men are prone to hyper-agency (taking more than is rationally warranted) and women are prone to hypo-agency (taking less than is rationally warranted). Since I have defined agency as the belief in our personal power to make meaningful non-deterministic decisions, this does imply personal responsibility for these decisions, and it is wrt to the “responsibility” aspect that we find so much discomfort right now, all round.



  8. I am female, and I have not experienced negative emotional conversations or experiences with many women; maybe it’s because my approach to life is off the grid, but is also no nonsense, or maybe it’s because most of my closest friends are male. Worked for the military for the past 30 + years, and from my experience, emotions get in the way of getting shit done! Listen, my husband lost body parts over in Iraq, and it was a woman who (put me in my place), told me that the government was not going to spend 100k to buy him a new leg just for cosmetic purposes! Emotionally, at that moment, I literally wanted kill her, but I decided that my objective would serve a higher purpose if I spoke to someone who might understand that I wanted my husband to be as mobile and active as possible. If I had been an emotional mess, my family would have suffered a great deal. I wish that I could say that I had family support with all of the Hollywood trimmings. I did not. I was the motherfucking man, social worker, and long distant parent because the emergency called for me to leave my children. In other words, I was a woman who assumed whichever role necessary to achieve what I needed to do for my family! Emotion was necessary for the calming effect, nourishment and nurturing of my family, but aside from this, it was necessary to put aside any emotion that might prevent me from getting a job to support my family!

    I might be out of line for saying this, but I believe that some women, especially those in power are worse than men! It has been my experience that some women in power lose compassion for humanity and subconsciously taunt and belittle their subordinates just because they can, try proving it, and you just might lose your job because the rules are subjective, and also emotional! ! Some are able to get away with this type of treatment because we are a culture of people who do not tattle! Even if maltreatment were brought to the forefront, the gender card would rear its ugly head!

    I may be biased, because my experience has not been positive. My energy is masculine although I look inherently female; but this should have nothing to do with how anyone is treated as a person!

    Sometimes, I feel sad that I reared my children as if they were in boot camp; in that I taught them to rely on self, never turn against the other, and exceed the standard regardless of occupation ! I believe that I gave them the necessary tools to succeed according to their abilities without having to depend on the government for assistance, and to become self reliant creative, and good and decent people. Emotion was part of my process because they needed to know that they have loving, caring sharing; and open parents who would do anything to see them become the best people that they are capable of becoming!

    in my opinion, I do not believe that men or women are better in either gender. I believe that we are just different. Those differences, in my opinion create balance. This is different in how a person chooses to utilize their humanity. It has been my experience that a few women do not necessarily empower other women, some may emotionally talk the talk, but unless you “stand in favor” or are a part of a particular circle; empowerment and sisterhood is an emotional slogan that appeals to those who are asleep.

    Lastly, after all of your love and care and training as a parent, the probability exist that at least one of your children will marry an emotional manipulator. This personality serves to insulate, isolate, oscillated, and emasculate!


  9. Funny to me that you should write this while I’m halfway through a book by a very logical woman who deconstructs the faulty logic of a well known man (Christopher Ryan). Not to refute anything you say but just to give an example of the exceptional logical capacity of some women, albeit rare, does exist.

    This book is actually one of the best I’ve read on human sexuality and I highly recommend it to anyone interested in evolutionary psychology/biology and the truth about human monogamous pair-bonding, jealousy, marriage, violence, social structure, etc..

    Sex at Dusk: Lifting the Shiny Wrapping from Sex at Dawn by Lynn Saxon (endorsed by Steven Pinker)

    As a side note, I found this quote in the book that I thought y’all might find interesting. Saxon uses it to dispel an assertion made based upon Rousseau. I find the last part about unleashed female libido to be prophetic:

    Rousseau wrote of women and sex in Emile: “…The man should be strong and active; the woman should be weak and passive…” “If woman is made to please and be in subjection to man, she ought to make herself pleasing in his eyes and not provoke him to anger…she should compel him to discover and use his strength. The surest way of arousing this strength is to make it necessary by resistance… This is the origin of…the boldness of one sex and the timidity of the other, and even of the shame and modesty with which nature has armed the weak for the conquest of the strong…” “… How can anyone fail to see that when the share of each is so unequal, if the one were not controlled by modesty as the other is controlled by nature, the result would be the destruction of both, and the human race would perish through the very means ordained for its continuance?” “Women so easily stir a man’s senses and fan the ashes of a dying passion, that if philosophy ever succeeded in introducing this custom [of an unleashed female libido] to any unlucky country…the men, tyrannised over by the women, would at last become their victims, and would be dragged to their death without the least chance of escape.” (Rousseau 1993 edition)

    Saxon, Lynn (2012-07-30). Sex at Dusk: Lifting the Shiny Wrapping from Sex at Dawn (p. 85). CreateSpace. Kindle Edition.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Ever read book reviews where a woman will literally rave about the book as if it was her own heaven sent Bible while making valid and reasonable arguments about it’s merits, but in the end mention how it contains a chapter that contains research about Animals that goes against her ethical beliefs, so she’s forced to give a “1 star”. That’s classical woman-think: letting emotions overwhelmingly override logic. Now extrapolate this to voting – candidate A is educated, smart, practical, but candidate B is a bit of goof-off but has a nice smile and makes her feel warm, so she’d rather go with candidate B.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. “Whilst smarter women can only do so whilst their emotions are in check” This is true I experienced it first hand. I had several discussion and talks with a fairly smart woman and one time I started to talk about eating meat (I didn’t know that she was a vegetarian at that point) immediately her emotions took over and she went full retard so to speak. I couldn’t take her serious after that.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. I suspect that part of this could come down to the “men suck at expressing emotion” argument that often surfaces. Men are trained to be in control of their emotions at a much younger age, while women are encouraged to “let it all out”.

    After reading The Rational Male, The Manipulated male, and a lot of evolutionary psychology and biology, it seems quite unreasonable to assume that a sexually dismorphic species, would be different in most ways except in mentally/cognitively. The differences in the prevalence of mental disorders between the genders, the difference in how mental disorders manifest, I could go on but a lot of things point to the brain being different as well.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. I think that the classic feminist argument goes something along the lines that this entire framework is set in terms of masculine ideology and that the only reason women have not been culture producers is because they have not had the opportunity to (being that they are the oppressed group), and this could be changing what with the female graduation rate/watch Hillary win.

    I do not believe that anyone acts irrationally and this article leaves me wondering how you define rationality- a coherent set of beliefs and actions??? In which case women simply have the rational to act on their emotions(a rational thing to do depending on if the emotions are a better premis that correlates with reality better than whatever else you have to go on(ever try dancing rationally?)).

    I would suggest this author adapt a different vocabulary when it comes to describing the differences between people because even the greatest troll is still a troll.


    1. I am curious where you obtained your definition of rationality because I cannot find “a coherent set of beliefs and actions” in any dictionary. Rather I find rationality to be defined as “the quality of being based on or in accordance with reason or logic.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s