Why women are so extremely emotional?

[hypervalent_iodine]

!

Moderator Note

Dekan, keep up the sexist attitude and this time we will ban you.

[Arete]

Well, it shows women can be good at statistics and sanitary reform, at least.

 

 

I will let a bunch of seventh grade students explain via the medium of rap why the opinion of female scientists you're displaying here is pure idiocy.

 

[Greg H.]

As it is trivially easy to debunk the notion that women are bad at science and/or math, why are we spending our valuable time trying to change the mind of a bigot?

Never try to reason the prejudice out of a man. It was not reasoned into him, and cannot be reasoned out.

[Acme]

As it is trivially easy to debunk the notion that women are bad at science and/or math, why are we spending our valuable time trying to change the mind of a bigot?

I can only speak for myself. I am not trying to change the bigots' minds; I am prosecuting the bigots' crimes. Let's not be lulled into the ease of looking the other way.

Edited May 10, 2014 by Acme

[Moontanman]

Every time I'm asking, why almost every woman have almost no mental srengths; they have big problems to be courageous, there are almost no women in military institutions, almost no female Heavy Metal bands, etc. Moreover, women compared with men are physically weak.

I have set my thoughts here: http://linkerdynamics.wordpress.com/2014/05/09/why-men-are-the-better-soldiers-and-women-are-the-better-nurturers/

 

But now I offer my question: What are the molecular, not evolutionary reasons for that women feel fear more intense or why there is a "Tend or be friend" syndrome in women when they are under stress?

I search for answers for example like this: "Women feel fear more intense because they have statistically more genes that are coding for enzymes that set the brain structure so that there is more activity in Amygdala. Furthermore because they have less testosterone and more estrogen the stress reaction is regulated in that way that there is released more oxytocin; Oxytocin regulate that genes that are required for social interactions, crying with tears, etc..."

 

 

 

I would suggest you find a large group of women, large to make sure you have enough to make it statistically valid, sit down with them and start making these assertions. I'm betting you would come away with knots on your ego if not your head...

[dimreepr]

I'd love to be a fly on the wall for that discussion and can somebody please remove the +1 from the OP; I clicked it by accident and to be honest it offends me seeing that green 1.

[Acme]

I'd love to be a fly on the wall for that discussion and can somebody please remove the +1 from the OP; I clicked it by accident and to be honest it offends me seeing that green 1.

I'm guessing it's not a discussion likely to take place. While the poster did ask for science I think his conclusion was forgone and the expectation was to get scientific support for it...from men of course. And it looks like your mistake has been corrected.

[Linker]

How testosterone or other sex hormones affects the stress reaction? Is there a molecular mechanism for testosterone on the Amygdala region?

[Acme]

How testosterone or other sex hormones affects the stress reaction? Is there a molecular mechanism for testosterone on the Amygdala region?

Have you done a web search?

 

Have you read the responses since your last post? If not, please do. If so, please respond to them.

[CharonY]

How testosterone or other sex hormones affects the stress reaction? Is there a molecular mechanism for testosterone on the Amygdala region?

Considering that the OP clearly demonstrates no interest in acknowledging false premises and alter the them accordingly I am not very optimistic that a fruitful discusion can be had. Bu in the vain hope do demonstrate the OP got it arse-backwards:

 

It is known that high stress levels increase cortisol levels, which in turn reduce testosterone levels. On the other hand it has been speculated that females may react better to chronic stress when it comes to health outcomes (e.g. less cardiovascular issues ) than males. Now, recently a mechanism has been described in rats by Wei et al. (Mol Psy 19; 2014) that indicates that estrogen appears to protect against glutamatergic transmission. As a result, they do not suffer from the same cognitive impairments due to stress as their male counterparts.

 

It is true that there appears to be differences between genders when it comes to stress responses, but it appears that for the most part when faced with a stressor, females deal with it better as they are not locked as long in flight-or-fight as males. This is partially attributed to the release of oxytocin in females that has been mentioned in the OP. This, for most intents and purposes, could be seen as a healthy way to cope with stress. Together with potential protective effects of estrogen it is hard to see it as mental weakness; quite the opposite really.

 

Also note that flight-and-fight is a mix between fear and aggression, which is quite emotional. Again, that is hard to see that as mental strength, especially as it is well known that many mental abilities go down the drain when you are flooded with adrenaline and cortisol.

 

Women do tend to remember and recall stressful situations more than their male counterparts. However in high-stress situations (such as actual exposure to combat) there does not appear to be much of a differences as the extreme stress overwhelms the differences in stress coping responses between genders (see Vogt et al. J Abnorm Psy 120:4).

 

To put into a whimsical way: males, when stressed get stupid and have more health issues. On the other hand, women tend to stress themselves over more things. But normalized to similar stress levels they appear to have less cognitive issues. There are also studies that suggest that women may suffer more from stress, but these are often survey-based and not with controlled stress application. In that case the observation that women tend to recall and react to stressful situations than their male counterpart may increase the actual experienced levels of stress.

When facing extreme stress (as in combat) both cope roughly equally well (or bad).

Edited May 11, 2014 by CharonY

[ADVANCE]

Oh ya well what about me lol, I'm super totally ***straight, and possibly because I'm my own self and don't have that many friends and am all natural, I'm am totally like a girl, and have long hair, and also am attracted to myself and girls who look like me a somewhat, I think this goes for everybody too. Because the blueprints which make you your look, seem to be searching-attracted to similar opposite gender - ex. actual really-attracted couples look alike...and I totally want a relationship and can totally focus in a classroom*** and like to act girly, and want to play with all pink things and such,....and am emotanal only eather if something sad happens or worringing obv. or for fun maybe lol obv......girls should be the same I'd imagine ! they should be smart and could wear a black suit and jump in a jet like I could do if had to! It's the sterotypes on both girls & boys that's all.

Edited May 11, 2014 by ADVANCE

[Wolfhnd]

Sexual Dimorphism is certainly an interesting subject especially in non human animals. In humans it is relatively modest.

 

"Body mass dimorphism varies dramatically among primate species, both present and past. For most anthropoids, males are bigger than females (4–8). Humans today display relatively limited sexual dimorphism (≈15%), whereas some of the other hominoids (gorillas and orangutans) are highly dimorphic (>50%) (5, 9). Body mass is easily determined in living species. For past nonhuman primates and human ancestors, mostly represented by fragmentary fossil remains, body mass is far less accessible."

http://www.pnas.org/content/100/16/9103.full

 

Another explanation for gender differences is based on the hunter gather lifestyle presumed for humanoids. Again the traditional view that men were providers and woman babysitters is questionable. Modern hunter gather societies show a more balance nutritional contribution. It seems to range between hunted and gathered ratios of 60 40 and 50 50.

 

Here is an article on hunter gather nutritional distribution from meat etc.

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/71/3/682.full

At the moment I'm inclined to believe that human sexual dimorphism can at least partially be accounted for by nutritional demands. Reproductive success is enhanced if females have bodies with lower nutritional demands allowing for a higher percentage of nutrients to be available to a fetus. Of course this would not be the only factor and many are vaguely covered by other posts in this thread.

 

 

 

The following is off topic but addresses the issues raised concerning the appropriateness of the original post:

 

I wanted to focus for a minute on physical differences because behavioral differences are less accessible and more likely to be environmental than innate. That said we are not blank slates and some of the impetuosity of the original poster may be a reaction to the political nature of gender norming.

 

The goal of research should not be to demonstrate or justify sexual equality but to enhance our understanding of how to improve the health and well being of both sexes. It does seem clear that the original poster wanted to use research to promote views that would lead to sexual discrimination which is reprehensible. The way to counter that is too insist on equal opportunity not true equality. Considering the plasticity of the human mind biological differences between individuals is less important than desire and a positive attitude enhanced by the appropriate environment. That doesn't mean we should push individuals into positions they are likely to fail at based on misplaced ideas about equality.

 

That behavioral differences rooted in genetic differences between the sexes should be expected is self evident. Biological difference are important to explore but biology alone will not answer all the questions. No matter how much we may dislike it, anecdotal evidence will have to be considered by archaeologist, sociologist and other soft sciences. In the end satisfying philosophical answers to some of the questions can not be based on empirical data. The philosophical answers however must be restrained by relevant scientific observations.

 

Edited January 15, 2015 by Wolfhnd

[MonDie]

 

Your personal experiences are anecdotes, influenced by your personal biases. Do you have any actual evidence - as in a quantifiable measure of differential emotional response to stimuli?

 

Searching for a molecular mechanism for a trait is; a) intrinsically linked to the evolutionary processes by which the trait came about, and b) reliant on the trait being objectively quantifiable.

 

Neglecting evolution and simply assuming the trait is there due to anecdotal experience is unlikely to yield a sensible explanation.

 

Women are moe likely to be diagnosed with an anxiety disorder or borderline personality disorder.

[Prometheus]

If true (citation?), does it support the premise? The difficulty would be in defining 'emotional', and then quantifying it. Are certain mental health conditions sufficient proxy for the nebulous question 'why are women so emotional?'

 

On a side note, the question itself demonstrates a degree of sexism. Given women constitute half the human population the question, 'Why are men so unemotional?' is just as valid?

 

I believe this sort of sexism is the more dangerous compared to Dekan's overt misogyny, for the latter is easy to recognise while the former is what helps forms low ceilings to the aspirations of women.

[Wolfhnd]

Interesting discussion but it certainly no longer belongs in this sub forum?

[MonDie]

I retract the borderline personality claim.

 

Gender patterns in borderline personality disorder. (Sansone & Sansone, 2011)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21686143

Edited January 17, 2015 by MonDie

[MonDie]

Although it could vary between samples if it's due to environmental factors.

[mothythewso]

You people must have a death wish

[overtone]

When somebody points out to some guy that he's being emotional, how come it's so often news to that guy?

 

Why do men think they are unemotional? What's actually going on in that occasionally bizarre inability of men to recognize when they are being emotional?

 

Kind of reminds me of the famous discovery of the sex researchers that Western women's self-reported lack of sexual arousal, however sincere and honest, often does not match the physical measurements of blood flow patterns, metabolic changes, posture, etc. They're self-blind, in what to a man is a very odd and inexplicable way.

 

Or the should be famous discovery of the neuroscientists: emotion is requisite for decision in all matters lacking complete information. . A human being cannot be both unemotional and decisive - their brain doesn't work like that.

 

Or for an example from art - always useful, because we can rerun it, examine the circumstances, etc: John Goodman's walking bomb character in the movie "The Big Lebowski". Sample quote, from one of the least calm people in Los Angeles: "I'm calmer than you are - -{comment} - - - "calmer than you are". You know he believes it. And you know guys like him, don't you - he's a type.

[MonDie]

I for one enjoy being emotional.

[Wolfhnd]

If you think of emotions as feelings then it is easy to see them as the physical and psychological manifestation of instincts. Love, anger, fear etc. are primary emotions which in turn are moderated by consciousness to produce secondary emotions. See Shaver for a detailed list > http://changingminds.org/explanations/emotions/basic%20emotions.htm The more primal an emotion is the less likely your are to be conscious of it. I would suggest that this hierarchical system evolved in response to the concentric rings of increasing complexity within the brain structure itself. In other words old structures are not discarded as new structures are added. More importantly there is an advantage in keeping a degree of isolation in function. Compare it to a computer, there is the mother board bios that regulates basic function and maintains the hardware, next you have the operation system that allows other programs to run, final you have the programs that we consciously interact with. The user is unaware most of the time that any of the underlying systems even exist. What is easy to miss in this analogy is that the efficiency of the conscious interface is dependant on the "intelligence" of the underlying systems. Maintaining a healthy, active emotional, base is equally important to our ability to think clearly and efficiently. If any part fails the system will not function properly. Since emotions are actively engaged in imagination they increase our "creativity"

 

"A human being is a part of the whole, called by us ‘Universe,’ a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest - a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty. Nobody is able to achieve this completely, but the striving for such achievement is in itself a part of the liberation and a foundation for inner security."

 

Albert Einstein

[Wolfhnd]

I forgot to add Einstein must have been a silly, emotional, effeminate male.